351–360 of 364 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are a 1 man show, how about not collecting data you most likely don't need anyway? And the 4% global revenue fine the GDPR is famous for does exactly what you want -- scales with the means of the business.
Last I saw there was a minimum fine of x million Euros. Edit: had to verify. It seems a bit more reasonable: """Article 83 of the General Data Protection Regulation provides details of the administrative fines. There are two tiers of fines. The first is up to €10 million or 2% of annual global turnover of the previous year, whichever is higher. The second is up to €20 million or 4% of annual turnover of the previous…
Also the GP post, there is more than 'avoiding collecting data'. If you have text field comments form and a 3rd party puts 'personal data' in that, then that is GDPR liable! You also need audit logs and and list of other requirements that needs multi engineer teams to implement properly.
As a result, most small businesses with email are probably not going to be properly compliant on some level and you can prosecute anyone. Just like the new-ish VAT laws, large stores are going to be compliant because they can afford it, while some petty bureaucrat will prosecute the small online shops instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why the EU is an afterthought when you need to spend millions on compliance for every new feature
From a tax point of view, EU is a lot easier to deal with than the US if you have to collect sales tax in the US. There are two big differences. Let's say I'm selling some digital good online. Consider three purchasers, one in the US in the state of Washington, one in Germany, and one in France. First, how much tax do I have to collect from each? For the German customer, that is easy. It is 19% VAT. I don't have to c…
Fortunately, there’s almost no enforcement at all with respect to small- to medium-sized businesses collecting and reporting interstate sales tax. Do the best you can with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU support is coming! The market is quite different, as you obviously know, and we want to take the time to test Billing properly with European users. But enabling support for Europe is a high priority for us.
Does "EU support" mean you will eventually want my money? (I'm in Poland) Until now your EU support has been rather disappointing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU support is coming! The market is quite different, as you obviously know, and we want to take the time to test Billing properly with European users. But enabling support for Europe is a high priority for us.
We're definitely waiting for you in Poland.
We use Stripe to receive card payments there in AED and then need to pay this money out again in AED. As Stripe don’t settle in AED the funds get converted to USD and then we have to convert them to AED again to pay out.
Stripe charge 2% conversion fee over market rates to convert the funds. What’s most annoying is AED is pegged to USD and there’s no conversion risk, yet Stripe charge the conversion fee anyway. So we pay 2.9% or 3.4% (can’t remember which it is off the top of my head) international card fee, 2% Fx to USD and another few % back to AED :-€
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on volume and risk profile. There are many very sharp Authorize.Net resellers out there that will work with you to get a great rate for your situation. I've seen 2.2% rates on 50k/mo of processing for low risk customers. Of course, with that you get some additional fees to factor in -- monthly statement fee, international, Amex, etc... but it pencils out to way lower than 3% at a decent volume. For example, t…
How about for new startups (with low or no volume)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I saw there was a minimum fine of x million Euros. Edit: had to verify. It seems a bit more reasonable: """Article 83 of the General Data Protection Regulation provides details of the administrative fines. There are two tiers of fines. The first is up to €10 million or 2% of annual global turnover of the previous year, whichever is higher. The second is up to €20 million or 4% of annual turnover of the previous…
Yes, because a minimum fine of $10 million for a 1 person business is totally reasonable, unless by the grace of the bureaucracy, they decide to give you a warning instead. /s Also the GP post, there is more than 'avoiding collecting data'. If you have text field comments form and a 3rd party puts 'personal data' in that, then that is GDPR liable! You also need audit logs and and list of other requirements that needs…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the feedback. To your risk point -- there is often risk involved, as businesses that have worked with large ACH payments know. More broadly, we believe in revenue-based business models because it's the clearest way to align our incentives with those of our customers. We want to be forced to find ways to generate more revenue, via smart recovery, better invoice payment methods, more payment method support,…
Maybe you can provide clarity on ACH risk. Seems like businesses have most of the risk there.. and not the billing system (keeping the gateway out of this). Secondly, transaction/user based models are also aligned with customer incentives. With growth, customers will execute more transactions on the system. Frankly, Smart recovery is an area where I can see you can ask for % share. Other features like payment methods…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because a minimum fine of $10 million for a 1 person business is totally reasonable, unless by the grace of the bureaucracy, they decide to give you a warning instead. /s Also the GP post, there is more than 'avoiding collecting data'. If you have text field comments form and a 3rd party puts 'personal data' in that, then that is GDPR liable! You also need audit logs and and list of other requirements that needs…
The ten million is a maximum, not a minimum.
(counter-intuitively)