FTC rule on unfair or deceptive fees to take effect on May 12 • Hacker News Board

Re: FTC rule on unfair or deceptive fees to take effect on May 12

#131

Post by Jach » Thu, May 08, 2025, 8:08 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #14

I'm assuming that "short-term rental" means your standard "night or two" hotel rooms (not just extended say). It sounds like it, from the report. I remember staying in hotels in Japan, and they would say 1,600 Yen per night, and ... I get the bill for two nights, and it's 3,200 Yen. Not so, US hotels.

I was thinking about Japan too. In situations like store prices, Japan is pretty transparent, having the total price including taxes displayed up front. But for various live shows/concerts there's typically a mandatory "drink fee" of 500 or 600 yen, cash only, that you pay separate to your ticket. (The ticket can usually though not always be paid with a card on a site, sometimes with a benefit of a small discount for purchasing at least a day early, minus a CC processing fee.) The drink fee is usually listed in the advertising for the event, though, so it's not as hidden as some of the hidden fees this new rule is trying to address, but it's still always felt odd and the cash-only aspect gives a sense of maybe being tax-dodging related.

I haven't stayed at a 1600 yen capsule hotel before, but my favorite one-step-above (small private rooms, shared bathrooms on each floor) hostel-lite, which is usually two to three times that amount (when they have availability, I think too many other people discovered it), started charging like a 100 yen towel exchange fee if you wanted a fresh towel during your stay. Then at bigger hotels you start getting into extra taxes (a few hundred yen per night) when your rate exceeds 10,000 yen. Especially when your rate fluctuates over a stay, it's just a weird small amount of extra hassle you have to pay when you check in separately from the online system, though the systems do usually mention somewhere that there might be additional tax related fees when you arrive. Still, it all feels pretty smooth vs. US hotels where if they include for example any snacks in the room or drinks in the fridge you don't even want to touch them for fear of a surprise $20+ charge later. (A work friend did successfully win against a hotel that tried to charge him drink fees; their "smart" fridge detected he removed some drinks from the fridge to make room for his stuff, it did not detect that he put them back, and these weren't the kind of drinks that would spoil if left out.)

Re: FTC rule on unfair or deceptive fees to take effect on May 12

#132

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Fri, May 09, 2025, 5:51 PM UTC

Jach wrote: post #131

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #14

I'm assuming that "short-term rental" means your standard "night or two" hotel rooms (not just extended say). It sounds like it, from the report. I remember staying in hotels in Japan, and they would say 1,600 Yen per night, and ... I get the bill for two nights, and it's 3,200 Yen. Not so, US hotels.

I was thinking about Japan too. In situations like store prices, Japan is pretty transparent, having the total price including taxes displayed up front. But for various live shows/concerts there's typically a mandatory "drink fee" of 500 or 600 yen, cash only, that you pay separate to your ticket. (The ticket can usually though not always be paid with a card on a site, sometimes with a benefit of a small discount for…

The 1,600¥ was an example, but we regularly stayed at the Shinagawa Prince, which was generally 1,900¥ per night, but that may no longer be the case. Also, since I worked for a Japanese company, we may have gotten discounts.

Re: FTC rule on unfair or deceptive fees to take effect on May 12

#133

Post by kulahan » Fri, May 09, 2025, 9:34 PM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #87

kulahan wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t it kind of helpful to have an attorney’s opinion on law? Anyways, it’s very easy to complain there isn’t a law which eliminates whatever fees you think are ridiculous across a large swathe of industries. What specific implementation would you suggest, though? I’ve not heard of these apparently simple approaches.

> What specific implementation would you suggest, though? I’ve not heard of these apparently simple approaches. Good question! Thank you for asking, I will do my best to help provide the answer: One common implementation is to require that all marketing show the final price most prominently, which seems reasonable to me. "But wait," some may interject, "That final price may vary depending on jurisdiction!" Yes, that…

Thanks for answering! So you’re saying the solution is basically more clarity? I think I could agree with that. Probably effects similar to when we added calorie counts to menus here in America.

Re: FTC rule on unfair or deceptive fees to take effect on May 12

#134

Post by _blk » Sun, May 18, 2025, 4:32 AM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #88

_blk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that legislation is also not in their favor because companies will just find new ways to make money [as they should - I just wish they were more creative in providing value rather than just the "added fee shortcut"] In the end it's on consumers: People should just reward better service instead of picking the seemingly cheapest option and then cry that the world is unfair and someone has to fix it for them..

> People should just reward better service instead of picking the seemingly cheapest option This is easy for us hackernews types with disposable income to say and very hard for the average person to implement. 57% of Americans can’t afford an unexpected $500 expense [1] Always keep in mind the boots theory of economic unfairness: > A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boot…

True but that lies in the nature of choices people make. Apart from mortgage (or in general credit on appreciable assets) I would not recommend the on-credit lifestyle that is ad-suggested as the American Dream™ (that's different for businesses, I'm not against credits in general). As an individual carry insurance, pay the year ahead. Yes it hurts, but not as much as that unexpected 500$ expense... The boot theory works pretty well with credit though ;)