How about banning the most deceptive practice that is advertising prices without taxes?
New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
201–210 of 363 posts
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's unfortunately somewhat common these days and personally I actively avoid any place which does this. At least it's only somewhat common rather than the standard so it's still possible. Couple of examples: https://sushiconfidential.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/sc_... "3.5% Living Wage Surcharge added to each bill which allows us to provide the service you have always enjoyed!" https://www.pacificcatch.com/menu/…
Because increasing prices by that percentage is too hard?
Restaurant owners interviewed in the media here in SF are directly quoted saying they can’t do that because “customers would notice”, or think “oh that’s expensive, I can’t eat out twice a week”.
These are arguments for including the fees that make the customer __still pay the same higher price__, implying that the whole point is that they won’t notice. And reporters don’t seem to even register the absurdity of those remarks or question them in any way.
https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/sf-restaurants-junk-fees...
https://www.kqed.org/news/11992412/californias-junk-fee-ban-...
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#203How about banning the most deceptive practice that is advertising prices without taxes?
If taxes were uniform across geography (political boundaries) you could argue that, but as it is, taxes are not uniform.
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#204Should ban the tips if it’s not included in “hidden fees”, and force restaurants to pay proper wages like other workers.
The "and" is very important here. Places like Seattle now mandate servers get a real wage. It inexplicably hasn't changed tip culture at all, so now they get regular wages and still complain when someone doesn't tip 20%+ for a takeout order.
I hate tip culture too, but I don’t blame the employees for it. I never tip for takeout, counter service, retail, etc, and I’ve never actually had anyone complain or so much as make a face.
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because increasing prices by that percentage is too hard?
Restaurant owners interviewed in the media here in SF are directly quoted saying they can’t do that because “customers would notice”, or think “oh that’s expensive, I can’t eat out twice a week”. These are arguments for including the fees that make the customer __still pay the same higher price__, implying that the whole point is that they won’t notice. And reporters don’t seem to even register the absurdity of those…
[dead]
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
> proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front” This is going to be tough to enact, anywhere in the USA, even New York. There is nothing quite as American as "not knowing what you're going to pay for something until you have to pay." Whether it's your doctor bill, restaurant bill with tips and service fees, you…
I mean culturally we're used to it, but it seems really easy to test for and therefore fine businesses doing it in NYC? Just go ring up some purchase and see if they add a tax onto the listed price, and if they do report it.
Agreed, this is totally solvable. You could even set up an email address for people to send pictures of their receipts to so they know who to investigate. Imagine if you could just screenshot a bill and send it to "junkfees@nyc.gov" and then they'd assign someone to look into it!
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#207It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…
The fact that Scott Wiener made that carve out for restaurants via emergency legislation (SB 1524) made my blood boil and I vowed to vote against him in any election is runs in.
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#208How about banning the most deceptive practice that is advertising prices without taxes?
If taxes were uniform across geography (political boundaries) you could argue that, but as it is, taxes are not uniform.
The store is uniform across geography, in the sense that it doesn't move and a system within the store is capable of calculating the taxes. If there was a simple flat "10% sales tax" on every single item in a store, the store could simply print price tags with that included. Marketing materials posted in the store could have the advertised price slapped on a sticker by the store too.
The issue is really that taxes in most places are not uniform in application, not necessarily just because of geography, but also all of the specific carve outs and exceptions and so on that America tends to have, e.g., SNAP and WIC often don't pay sales tax. So its actually hard to know what someone is going to pay without communicating with them personally beforehand.
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sharks will keep eating easy prey until they hit an iron bar. I also hate this fact about the world by the way :) Just a [hardwon] observation.
People who forget to cancel are easy prey. Cancelling then being charged anyway is something else. Something akin to being robbed IMHO.
It is being robbed.
Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
A requirement to obtain renter’s insurance is not an example of the type of fees this legislation is targeting.
It should also be illegal. If I want to risk loss of my personal property that should be my decision to make.
It’s not your property they care about. They usually want this because it includes liability insurance if you damage their property or someone else’s, or your negligence causes harm to someone.