New York's new credit card surcharge mandate takes effect: What to know(nbcnewyork.com)
nbcnewyork.com
New York's new credit card surcharge mandate takes effect: What to know
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/new-yorks-new-credit-card-surcharge-mandate-takes-effect-what-to-know/5126087/
29 comments
I confess, living outside the US, laws around hidden costs simplify my life a lot.
In short, with very few exceptions [1], the advertised price is what I pay. In the grocery store taxes are included, online the advertised price has to include-everything- and so on.
[1] exceptions are usually some sort of limit. For example in a restaurant there may be a mandated service charge for large parties, that sort of thing. But 99% of the time if I see a price, I pay that number, to the penny.
[1] exceptions are usually some sort of limit. For example in a restaurant there may be a mandated service charge for large parties, that sort of thing. But 99% of the time if I see a price, I pay that number, to the penny.
I wholeheartedly agree on this. In Finland we also have laws that the price has to include unit pricing in addition to the regular price. For example: Per liter for liquids, per kg for foodstuffs, per item for diapers, toilet paper rolls ect.
I freaking love how trivial comparing prices comes when the unit price is shown on the price label. This also really gets through the bullshit of misleading packaging design. (Making products look like they have more product than they really contain)
I freaking love how trivial comparing prices comes when the unit price is shown on the price label. This also really gets through the bullshit of misleading packaging design. (Making products look like they have more product than they really contain)
What baffles me is that even Brazil has the same rules: prices need to be displayed in standard units (per kg/g, or per roll of toilet paper, per unit inside a multi-unit package, etc.).
If a large developing country (almost on par in population and area size to the USA), with extremely messy bureaucracy and taxation system can do that, why can't the USA? I have to believe it's by design and choice, not from a lack of need or capability.
If a large developing country (almost on par in population and area size to the USA), with extremely messy bureaucracy and taxation system can do that, why can't the USA? I have to believe it's by design and choice, not from a lack of need or capability.
The US does have unit pricing, but this is mandated at the state level by our Constitution. Interstate commerce is regulated by the federal government, not labels on store shelves.
I'm sure they could find a way to use the commerce clause for this if they wanted. They can use it for nearly anything already.
I love arguments like this.
How did the federal government end up nationally banning all fun drugs aside from nicotine and alcohol? (it just did it, and even when states legalise e.g. weed, weed vendors are locked out of the proper banking system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Drug_Abuse_Preve...).
How did the federal government make ~every state have the same (mad) drinking age of 21? (federal highway funding blackmail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_...).
the constitution is not an actual barrier to the federal government doing things over the heads of states.
How did the federal government end up nationally banning all fun drugs aside from nicotine and alcohol? (it just did it, and even when states legalise e.g. weed, weed vendors are locked out of the proper banking system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Drug_Abuse_Preve...).
How did the federal government make ~every state have the same (mad) drinking age of 21? (federal highway funding blackmail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_...).
the constitution is not an actual barrier to the federal government doing things over the heads of states.
I never got this TBH.
In Germany and Europe it's simple: the price on the item is what you pay at the cashier, at least of you pick the cheapest payment option (cash).
Most don't bother to charge for other payment methods, a surprise price basically never happens.
Credit card payments are capped at 0.3% of the transaction value.
Large credit card cashbacks don't exist for that particular reason. But it's dead simple to know the price.
In Germany and Europe it's simple: the price on the item is what you pay at the cashier, at least of you pick the cheapest payment option (cash).
Most don't bother to charge for other payment methods, a surprise price basically never happens.
Credit card payments are capped at 0.3% of the transaction value.
Large credit card cashbacks don't exist for that particular reason. But it's dead simple to know the price.
>> The new law also requires the surcharge passed on to customers using credit cards to the exact amount charged by credit card companies.
Yikes! I'm not in NY, but this seems tricky to implement. I process credit cards and frankly I'm never sure of the "exact amount" they charge. Firstly, different cards have different rates, the issuing bank can play a part, and foreign cards come with another set of rules. (Fortunately the use of foreign cards in NY is, um, very rare...? )
Yikes! I'm not in NY, but this seems tricky to implement. I process credit cards and frankly I'm never sure of the "exact amount" they charge. Firstly, different cards have different rates, the issuing bank can play a part, and foreign cards come with another set of rules. (Fortunately the use of foreign cards in NY is, um, very rare...? )
They don’t have to show what they pay their merchant acquiring bank, but what (if any) surcharge they charge you as a customer paying by card (some stores do that, often disclosed only by a sneaky sign far away from the checkout register).
How would you be able to charge an additional amount but not be able to show it beforehand?
I get how calculating the fees can be challenging. But I assumed that shops could calculate if they were adding it as a surcharge.
I get how calculating the fees can be challenging. But I assumed that shops could calculate if they were adding it as a surcharge.
I think it’s the _average_ (3-4%) fee.
Yeah, that's what I mean. Typically they pick a number that averages out. But the law says they must show the exact amount. And that varies from one card to another
Maybe I'm misreading the connotation of your comment as concern and not as observation. I didn't read the actual letter of the law. I'm not trained in legal compliance (not a CPA), but I do some bookkeeping. In practice average cost should work given the complicated structure of fees. If I was concerned about enforcement/compliance, then I'd round down. (no?)
I’d like to see a national law, or addition to state Uniform Commercial Code laws or something, that the price shown is the price charged, inclusive of everything.
This is actually two “common sense” laws that I feel are unambiguous enough that I’d probably vote for a candidate if they supported this. The other being no daylight savings.
This is actually two “common sense” laws that I feel are unambiguous enough that I’d probably vote for a candidate if they supported this. The other being no daylight savings.
No way you’ll get business owners to “label things as more expensive”, even though that’s literally how much of the rest of the world does it.
Other than that, one big practical problem is that e.g. when shopping online, there is no way of knowing your tax rate before providing your ZIP code. Sure, retailers could eat the tax rate differences themselves like they do in the EU, but they won’t be happy about it.
What I do hope should be possible is a “no bullshit fee” law, though. What is a service charge anyway? I thought that’s what I’m paying a service provider for!
You can probably get a majority of people to agree on “no DST shifts anymore”, but you’ll lose a half of them again on the decision on whether that should mean “always standard time” or “always DST”.
Other than that, one big practical problem is that e.g. when shopping online, there is no way of knowing your tax rate before providing your ZIP code. Sure, retailers could eat the tax rate differences themselves like they do in the EU, but they won’t be happy about it.
What I do hope should be possible is a “no bullshit fee” law, though. What is a service charge anyway? I thought that’s what I’m paying a service provider for!
You can probably get a majority of people to agree on “no DST shifts anymore”, but you’ll lose a half of them again on the decision on whether that should mean “always standard time” or “always DST”.
If only there was a fully public system of secure transactional payments where everything was open source and viewable by anyone.
Update: classic HN to downvote something like this
Update: classic HN to downvote something like this
Because it’s impossible to tell if it’s in earnest or satire.
If earnest: why anyone would want a public record of everyone’s transactions is beyond me. The opposite of privacy
If in satire: people really do post comments like yours in earnest!
If earnest: why anyone would want a public record of everyone’s transactions is beyond me. The opposite of privacy
If in satire: people really do post comments like yours in earnest!
Why anyone would want a public record? I think you mean why would anyone want to share their purchase history?
If the record existed it would obviously be a gold mine, many people, [foreign] governments and faceless corporations would be all over it, they would be uncovering all kinds of things we couldn't have imagined and most likely didn't want to share and/or have terrible implications.
If the record existed it would obviously be a gold mine, many people, [foreign] governments and faceless corporations would be all over it, they would be uncovering all kinds of things we couldn't have imagined and most likely didn't want to share and/or have terrible implications.
How does that address the issue in the article?
why do activists act like credit cards don't provide value for which the fee pays?
Having the ability to have customers pay the fee encourages them to use lower cost options when available (debit cards and cash today, FedNow instant payment rails soon).
Why should we pay 3% of the economy to middlemen because they were lucky to position themselves appropriately? If someone wants to use credit card rails, certainly offer them, just have the customer pay instead of all of us. I don’t want to pay for someone else’s reward points, ~21-30 day float, or chargeback capability.
(“The new rule does not apply to debit cards.”)
Why should we pay 3% of the economy to middlemen because they were lucky to position themselves appropriately? If someone wants to use credit card rails, certainly offer them, just have the customer pay instead of all of us. I don’t want to pay for someone else’s reward points, ~21-30 day float, or chargeback capability.
(“The new rule does not apply to debit cards.”)
They don't provide value equal to a 3% tax on every transaction in everyone's entire life. Holy stunning gobsmack fuck.
They do indeed provide value, but given that banks can afford to pay cardholders back the majority of the interchange as cashback, maybe the price is too high due to inefficient market dynamics?
Credit card companies are parasites that take their cut but offer no real value. They are cancer to the economy so should be destroyed.
As a consumer, I use credit cards almost exclusively. I pay the balance every month.
I do this because:
1) don’t like carrying cash
2) like the security of never giving merchants direct access to my bank
3) chargeback in rare times I need it
4) don’t like having to worry about overdrawing checking
5) benefits like insurance, warranty
Basically it’s a useful buffer. I don’t think I’d pay 3% extra everywhere for the privilege, but since it’s usually baked in, I like it.
So I don’t think they are “parasites” but I think there’s a discussion around whether their fees are worth it for merchants.
I do this because:
1) don’t like carrying cash
2) like the security of never giving merchants direct access to my bank
3) chargeback in rare times I need it
4) don’t like having to worry about overdrawing checking
5) benefits like insurance, warranty
Basically it’s a useful buffer. I don’t think I’d pay 3% extra everywhere for the privilege, but since it’s usually baked in, I like it.
So I don’t think they are “parasites” but I think there’s a discussion around whether their fees are worth it for merchants.
There is no reason you can’t have all of these on a debit card, other than maybe 4. The fact that only credit and not debit cards provide them is an artifact of how the market has grown, not economic necessity.
And for 4, why should overdraft fees/interest actually be socialized to literally everybody buying things (since interchange, which pays for them, gets baked into prices in the end)?
And for 4, why should overdraft fees/interest actually be socialized to literally everybody buying things (since interchange, which pays for them, gets baked into prices in the end)?
If someone steals my debit card and spends all my money, it’s a pain in my rear end and disrupts stuff.
They can steal my credit card all day long and I don’t care.
I’m not talking about what should and shouldn’t be in a better world. I’m just using tools available to me.
They can steal my credit card all day long and I don’t care.
I’m not talking about what should and shouldn’t be in a better world. I’m just using tools available to me.
> There is no reason you can’t have all of these on a debit card
I can think of a big reason; you'd have to charge a ~3% fee per transaction to pay for it. Likely more since interest payments aren't helping to offset it.
I can think of a big reason; you'd have to charge a ~3% fee per transaction to pay for it. Likely more since interest payments aren't helping to offset it.
Laws like this make great talking points on the campaign trail, but I doubt anyone thinks there’s a path to enforcement…especially since almost no Americans care enough to change their behavior on these fees.