Live data from Hacker News

Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

squareup.com

121–130 of 176 posts

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#121
post #86

Sounds like the real villains are the credit card companies who have the market power to enforce fees on cancelled payments. They are so entrenched no one is even questioning their position anymore. Visa and Mastercard are massive drains on our economy - it's ridiculous how unquestioningly their 3% tax on commerce is accepted.

Cash still works and if you can get enough people to go back to using it then credit cards will have to change or be more ripe for disruption.

Ever since they got rid of floppy drives, I can't figure out how to insert cash for online purchases?

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American system is too deeply tied to capital to have a policy that actually helps citizens and small businesses get passed. The second a government official proposed something like this, the espionage arms of the credit card corporations would come down so hard on them and arrange for them to fail their next appointment (through "lobbying")

CC companies are genius. They charge companies 3% -> companies embed that 3% in their prices -> customers get a 1% refund from CC companies. - If you do NOT use a CC, you effectively pay _more for CC users_ (3%!). - CC companies make the customer feel like they have a benefit, while in fact, they are net payers too (2%). - They have access to all (private) data of the customer, which is extremely powerful in this age…

I honestly have no idea how the hell the US public is still deluding itself to not make this illegal.

Are the only ones that get it so content with their 1-2% pieces of silver that they're fine in trading the wellbeing of the less fortunate?

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia, this is regulated and they can charge no more than 1.5%. https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/pricing/card-surcharges This could be changed overnight with 1 piece of legislation.

That article is about businesses charging excessive surcharges to customers (e.g. Jetstar back in the day charging 5% extra for Visa/MasterCard, when it only cost them 0.7%). There are no laws against high processing fees; Afterpay takes around 8% for example.

There are, and both Visa [0] and MasterCard [1] have both recently been in trouble for it. Instead of it being a specific maximum, however, it must be "reasonable" and allow for competition. The network also chooses the cheapest routing, by default.

[0] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/visa-undertakes-to-add...

[1] https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/mastercard-in-court-fo...

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#124
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those businesses don't get a refund on their electricity costs from cancelled sales.

Poor poor ticket master.

It's a genuine point, they did incur non-zero real costs to process the order then the refund.

Low effort trolling doesn't help anyone.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#125
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Majority of returns are for BS reasons, regardless of how quality your listings and products are. "Item Defective" - Unopened factory sealed, tamper-proof blister pack. "Not Received In Time" - Delivered 3 days ahead of schedule. "Too Small" - Item clearly says in multiple places, and even demonstrates in images, the item is 2mm in diameter. The result? Everyone pays more for the products so we can support a few bad…

Another big one is clothing. Order two sizes and send the one back that doesn't fit.

Zappos is a prime example of this. Most folks order two or three of the same shoe, and return the ones that did not fit. Zappos has Free Shipping to you, and Free Return Shipping.

And... if you price shop the shoes, Zappos is rarely-if-ever the cheapest. You pay for that "service"...

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#126
post #86

Sounds like the real villains are the credit card companies who have the market power to enforce fees on cancelled payments. They are so entrenched no one is even questioning their position anymore. Visa and Mastercard are massive drains on our economy - it's ridiculous how unquestioningly their 3% tax on commerce is accepted.

I don't know enough about the topic to analyze whether 3% is high or low, but I don't think it makes sense for them to refund the fee in the case of refunds. They have provided the same service, same costs. So I would hardly call them villains for that aspect.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia, this is regulated and they can charge no more than 1.5%. https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/pricing/card-surcharges This could be changed overnight with 1 piece of legislation.

The American system is too deeply tied to capital to have a policy that actually helps citizens and small businesses get passed. The second a government official proposed something like this, the espionage arms of the credit card corporations would come down so hard on them and arrange for them to fail their next appointment (through "lobbying")

Debit card interchange fees have been regulated (aka price controls) in the US since at least 2011 https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R41913.pdf

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#128
post #86

Sounds like the real villains are the credit card companies who have the market power to enforce fees on cancelled payments. They are so entrenched no one is even questioning their position anymore. Visa and Mastercard are massive drains on our economy - it's ridiculous how unquestioningly their 3% tax on commerce is accepted.

I don’t know if it’s worth 3% but the convenience of not having to have and handle cash is worth something, for both buyers and merchants.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#129
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CC companies are genius. They charge companies 3% -> companies embed that 3% in their prices -> customers get a 1% refund from CC companies. - If you do NOT use a CC, you effectively pay _more for CC users_ (3%!). - CC companies make the customer feel like they have a benefit, while in fact, they are net payers too (2%). - They have access to all (private) data of the customer, which is extremely powerful in this age…

I honestly have no idea how the hell the US public is still deluding itself to not make this illegal. Are the only ones that get it so content with their 1-2% pieces of silver that they're fine in trading the wellbeing of the less fortunate?

On the one hand, 3% cc fees are much higher than what would be set by a competitive market and are only possible with an oligopoly. On the other hand, the convenience that they allow for not carrying cash is often worth more than the 3% to consumers/merchants like me. E.g. any online payment. So while it's massively overpriced, it's still a win win usually, and I think that's probably why people aren't madder about it.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#130
post #86

Sounds like the real villains are the credit card companies who have the market power to enforce fees on cancelled payments. They are so entrenched no one is even questioning their position anymore. Visa and Mastercard are massive drains on our economy - it's ridiculous how unquestioningly their 3% tax on commerce is accepted.

I don’t know if it’s worth 3% but the convenience of not having to have and handle cash is worth something, for both buyers and merchants.

If a business doesn’t accept credit cards, they’re going to lose a lot more than 3% in lost transactions.
Post reply on HN