SiriusXM faces multiple class action lawsuits alleging the satellite radio company charged customers improperly through hidden fees and aggressive billing practices. The company announced a $28 million settlement in January 2026 to resolve allegations that it made repeated telemarketing calls in violation of federal “Do Not Call” rules between April 2019 and October 2025. Separately, a federal court allowed a lawsuit to proceed in April 2025 challenging SiriusXM’s practice of advertising one subscription price but tacking on a “U.S. Music Royalty Fee” at checkout that customers cannot avoid. For example, a customer signing up for a $12.99 monthly plan would see an additional $2.77 added to their bill in royalty charges alone—a hidden cost that was never part of the advertised price.
These lawsuits represent a significant challenge to SiriusXM’s billing model and customer acquisition practices. The Do-Not-Call settlement covers anyone who received repeated unwanted sales calls and either wasn’t a paying subscriber at the time or had asked to be placed on no-call lists. The royalty fee lawsuit raises even broader concerns: in 2023 alone, SiriusXM collected approximately $1.36 billion in U.S. Music Royalty Fees—money that exceeded the company’s total annual profits of $1.26 billion. This suggests that a substantial portion of SiriusXM’s reported earnings came not from subscriptions themselves, but from fees customers didn’t know they were paying upfront.
Table of Contents
- How Did SiriusXM Charge Customers for Calls They Didn’t Want?
- The Hidden Royalty Fee Lawsuit and Its Larger Implications
- The Financial Scale of SiriusXM’s Revenue from Hidden Fees
- What Customers Can Do About Hidden and Improper Charges
- Cancellation Obstacles and Customer Retention Through Friction
- Settlement Details and Expected Payouts
- The Future of SiriusXM Litigation and Consumer Billing Practices
- Conclusion
How Did SiriusXM Charge Customers for Calls They Didn’t Want?
The telemarketing settlement centers on a straightforward violation: SiriusXM contacted people repeatedly by phone to sell subscriptions, despite those customers having registered with the National Do Not Call Registry or having previously asked SiriusXM to stop calling. Federal regulations prohibit such calls, yet the company’s practices continued for years. The $28 million settlement covers the period from April 27, 2019 through October 31, 2025—a span of more than six years during which the company allegedly ignored do-not-call regulations. Eligibility for this settlement is limited to U.S.
residents who received repeated telemarketing calls from SiriusXM and either were not paying subscribers at the time of the calls or had requested placement on SiriusXM’s internal no-call list. class members are expected to receive roughly $1,500 per eligible person, though the final amount depends on how many valid claims are submitted and how much is consumed by legal fees. However, the settlement faces a significant hurdle: class counsel requested $9.6 million in attorney fees—approximately 36 percent of the net settlement fund. If approved at that level, individual consumer payouts could shrink considerably. The claim deadline for submitting proofs of receipt was March 21, 2026, meaning customers needed to provide evidence they received the unwanted calls to qualify.
The Hidden Royalty Fee Lawsuit and Its Larger Implications
A more contentious battle involves what SiriusXM calls the “U.S. Music Royalty Fee”—a charge that appears on bills but is not prominently disclosed during the sign-up process. Four Oregon residents filed a class action in June 2024 accusing SiriusXM of a “deceptive pricing scheme.” When customers see an advertised plan price of $12.99 per month, they expect that is what they will pay. Instead, at checkout, a separate royalty fee is added: originally 21.4 percent of the advertised plan price, and most recently 19.98 percent as of February 24, 2026. This hidden surcharge means a customer paying for what SiriusXM advertises as a $12.99 plan actually pays approximately $15.58 monthly—a roughly 20 percent increase buried in the fine print.
The lawsuit advances because a federal judge denied SiriusXM’s motion to dismiss in April 2025, allowing the claims to proceed toward discovery and potential trial. The company’s argument that royalty fees are transparent and necessary is undermined by a critical fact: no other major music streaming service charges customers a separate royalty fee on top of advertised subscription prices. Spotify, apple Music, YouTube Music, and Amazon Music all include music royalties within their advertised price. SiriusXM stands alone in separating what it calls royalties as a discrete line item, creating the appearance that customers are paying for something distinct from the subscription itself. The lawsuit’s survival in federal court suggests the judge found sufficient evidence that this practice may constitute unlawful deception under state consumer protection laws.
The Financial Scale of SiriusXM’s Revenue from Hidden Fees
The magnitude of SiriusXM’s royalty fee collection underscores the stakes in this litigation. In 2023, SiriusXM collected approximately $1.36 billion in U.S. Music Royalty Fees—a figure that deserves context. The company’s total net profit that same year was $1.26 billion. This means SiriusXM’s royalty fee revenue alone exceeded its entire annual profit.
Such a disparity raises uncomfortable questions about whether customers fully understood what they were agreeing to pay, especially given that the royalty fee language is typically buried in terms and conditions or presented only at the final checkout stage. This financial context is critical to understanding why the lawsuit has gained traction in federal court. If the judge finds that SiriusXM’s advertising practices were deceptive—by prominently displaying a subscription price while relegating royalty fees to secondary disclosures—the company could face liability for charging millions of customers for something they did not knowingly consent to pay. The 20-percent-plus surcharge is also a warning to consumers evaluating SiriusXM: the price you see advertised is not the price you will actually pay each month. Anyone comparing SiriusXM to competitors should add at least 20 percent to the advertised rate to calculate their true out-of-pocket cost.
What Customers Can Do About Hidden and Improper Charges
For customers affected by the Do-Not-Call telemarketing settlement, the first step was submitting a claim by the March 21, 2026 deadline, providing evidence of the unwanted calls. Those who missed that deadline may have limited options, though class members are sometimes given extended claim periods if courts extend settlement administration windows. For anyone currently paying SiriusXM and concerned about the royalty fee charges, the path forward is less clear. The royalty fee lawsuit is still in early stages, and it could take years to resolve. In the interim, customers unhappy with the hidden fees have a direct option: cancellation.
However—and this is critical—SiriusXM’s cancellation process itself has been a subject of complaint. The company makes cancellation deliberately difficult by refusing to allow online cancellation and limiting phone support hours, forcing many customers to spend time navigating hold queues to exit their subscriptions. This practice, while not yet resolved through a major settlement, exemplifies SiriusXM’s broader approach to customer friction. For customers bothered by the royalty fees or the company’s billing transparency, canceling before the next billing cycle is the most immediate form of leverage. Comparison shopping with terrestrial radio alternatives, podcasting services, or other satellite radio providers (though SiriusXM dominates the market) can help identify whether the service is worth the true cost.
Cancellation Obstacles and Customer Retention Through Friction
One of the lesser-known complaints against SiriusXM involves how the company resists cancellations. Unlike most modern subscription services, SiriusXM does not provide a simple online cancellation option. Instead, customers must call customer service during limited hours, often encountering long wait times and representatives trained to offer retention discounts. This deliberate friction is designed to reduce cancellations and capture customers who might otherwise leave.
The limitation here is important: while frustrating, this practice has not yet resulted in a major class action settlement, unlike the telemarketing and hidden fee issues. The combination of aggressive telemarketing, hidden fees, and cancellation friction creates a customer experience that courts have begun to scrutinize. If the royalty fee lawsuit succeeds, it could prompt regulators to examine other aspects of SiriusXM’s billing practices more closely. Customers considering signing up should be aware that exiting the service requires a phone call—a deliberate hurdle that makes month-to-month subscriptions feel stickier than they appear. This is not necessarily illegal, but it is part of SiriusXM’s overall business model that incentivizes customer retention through barriers rather than service quality improvements.
Settlement Details and Expected Payouts
The $28 million Do-Not-Call settlement is administered through a court-approved claims process. Class members who successfully submit claims and prove they received unwanted calls are expected to receive approximately $1,500 each before deductions for legal fees and administration costs. However, the settlement’s value to individual customers depends heavily on how many valid claims are submitted. If few people file claims, the per-person payout could theoretically be higher; if many file, it could be lower due to the larger pool.
Additionally, class counsel’s request for $9.6 million in attorney fees—nearly 36 percent of the net settlement fund—means that a significant portion of the settlement money goes to lawyers rather than consumers. This fee arrangement is not unusual in class action settlements, but it does illustrate a fundamental limitation of class action litigation: by the time fees, administration costs, and payouts are calculated, the amount each individual receives is often modest relative to the total settlement. In SiriusXM’s case, customers harassed with unwanted telemarketing calls for years will receive what amounts to a few thousand dollars in compensation—hardly an apology for years of intrusive calls. The settlement is nonetheless significant as a signal to other companies that persistent do-not-call violations carry legal risk and financial consequences.
The Future of SiriusXM Litigation and Consumer Billing Practices
The trajectory of SiriusXM litigation suggests that the company’s billing model will face continued scrutiny. The royalty fee lawsuit, if it succeeds, could reshape how the satellite radio industry communicates pricing to customers. Even if SiriusXM ultimately prevails in defending its royalty fee practice, the company will likely face pressure to make those charges more transparent in advertising and signup flows.
Industry-wide, the cases against SiriusXM may prompt other subscription services to audit their own hidden fees and disclosure practices, recognizing that courts are increasingly skeptical of surcharges that surprise customers at checkout. For consumers, these lawsuits serve as a reminder to read the fine print on subscription services and to calculate the true monthly cost before committing. The SiriusXM cases also illustrate that regulatory bodies and courts are willing to take action against companies that aggressively push unwanted contact or obscure pricing. As the royalty fee lawsuit advances through discovery and potential trial, customers will learn whether federal law effectively prohibits the kind of “bait and switch” pricing SiriusXM allegedly employed—a ruling that could influence how dozens of other companies handle fees and surcharges.
Conclusion
SiriusXM customers have been subject to improper charges through multiple mechanisms: aggressive telemarketing calls in violation of do-not-call regulations, and hidden “U.S. Music Royalty Fees” that increase advertised plan prices by approximately 20 percent at checkout. The company has settled the telemarketing allegations for $28 million, with eligible customers expected to receive around $1,500, though that amount is subject to legal fee deductions and may be reduced if many claims are submitted.
The hidden royalty fee lawsuit is still advancing through federal court after a judge rejected SiriusXM’s attempt to dismiss the case in April 2025, signaling that courts view the pricing practice as potentially deceptive. If you are a SiriusXM customer bothered by these charges, you can cancel at any time, though the company makes the process deliberately inconvenient by limiting online options and phone support availability. If you received unwanted telemarketing calls from SiriusXM and missed the March 21, 2026 claims deadline for the $28 million settlement, consult with a consumer law attorney to explore whether you have other legal options. Going forward, the SiriusXM cases underscore the importance of scrutinizing subscription pricing before signing up—what companies advertise as the cost of service often differs substantially from what you will actually pay, and the gap between advertised and true price is widening across the subscription economy.