Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 691 posts

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#331

Post by TylerE »

dotancohen wrote: post #300
breadwinner wrote: post #140

This shouldn't be controversial. FTC isn't banning these fees, it is only requiring merchants to disclose the fees. Why would anyone be against that? Another good rule is click-to-cancel. Just a couple of days ago I logged into my Dish Network account to cancel it (after they hiked prices). There is no way to cancel online. There is no way to cancel via chat. You have to call. As soon as you call you're told the wait…

Why is a law needed to address this? Isn't the market supposed to adjust for companies like this?

We have hundreds of years of examples of the blessed free market failing to do exactly that.

If the free market had it's way we'd still be under the yoke of Standard Oil and Ma Bell.

One key element of a free market is the "well informed consumer". How is the consumer supposed to be informed about what new cutting edge chemicals are toxic, for instance?

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#332

Post by turbojet1321 »

ssl-3 wrote: post #260
darknavi wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a good guess and let the user type in their zip code?

Zip codes are for postal routing, not tax rates. Items I order at home are subject to a 7.25% sales tax rate. My neighbor across the street (our front doors are maybe 80 feet apart) pays 6.75%. We both live in the same zip code. We both live within the same city. We both live in the same school district. We each live in two different counties . (And up the road a bit, a third county is involved instead.)

This seems less like a defense of pre-tax prices and more like an indictment of a thoroughly ridiculous tax system.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#333

Post by mr_toad »

crazygringo wrote: post #80
guidedlight wrote: post #10

They should ban hidden taxes too. The sticker price should be the final price.

If you're talking about sales taxes, they can't until you input your shipping address. Because they depend on where you live. Nobody's trying to fool you by not including sales taxes. There's just no way to show them in advance, unless you want to start typing your address and zip code into every shopping website before you even browse.

Why do US states allow counties and cities to raise so many taxes?

Usually (across the world and across history) the power of taxation is very jealously guarded, and local government is usually only allowed to gather a limited range of taxes. Historically sovereigns have treated attempts by subordinates to raise their own taxes as tantamount to treason.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#334

Post by TeMPOraL »

hiatus wrote: post #303
paulryanrogers wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this what small claims court is for?

So now likely hundreds (or more) of individuals have to not only wait on hold forever, but have to learn the process of and actually go through with filing a small claim? That there is recourse is beside the point when it is mired in bureaucracy (not to mention taking days off to show up to court, etc).

I'm surprised I haven't yet heard of companies who would handle this for you, like there are e.g. for handling the process of getting compensation when an airline screws up scheduling or loses baggage, etc. I'm guessing there isn't enough money to be won there for them to be able to survive off a percentage of it.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#335

Post by throwaway2037 »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #250
mulmen wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are estimated prices being advertised in Australia, Japan, or Denmark? Why is North America uniquely susceptible to A/B testing? Municipal taxes are not an edgecase in the United States at least. They’re very much the norm, especially in telecommunications.

Because according to Japanese law, in most of the scenarios, the full price, to your best ability, has to be presented to the potential customer. Same goes for Australia, if I recall correctly. No clue about Denmark, I'm sorry. But assuming it's similar over there as well. It's not that NA is the only one susceptible to A/B testing. It's more of a - it's-grey-area-to-illegal to not show full prices outside of NA.

    > Because according to Japanese law, in most of the scenarios, the full price, to your best ability, has to be presented to the potential customer.
Are you sure? When I shop in Japan, it seems like about 50/50 where they have sales tax included, or not. However, the price tag will be clear if the price includes sales tax or not.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#336

Post by meiraleal »

hiatus wrote: post #313
meiraleal wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The realist might be an idealist that is seeing inexistent flaws tho

Then that's not a realist, by definition. > accepting a situation as it is and being prepared to deal with it accordingly. or > representing a person or thing in a way that is accurate and true to life.

That's the point, a wrong realist.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#337

Post by TeMPOraL »

meiraleal wrote: post #304
sdwr wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idealist: "the free market is perfect!" Realist: "the free market has flaws, which can be addressed by..." Replace "free market" with anything you like

The realist might be an idealist that is seeing inexistent flaws tho

They most likely aren't idealist, as that isn't a requirement. Anyone who's smarter than a potato can notice some of the more glaring failures (even if they don't understand the mechanism behind it).

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#338

Post by theossuary »

throw10920 wrote: post #255
jfengel wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a move afoot to eliminate all regulations unless they've been specifically passed by Congress. Which is basically incapable of passing anything. Ironically, that inherent dysfunction is the main reason to suspect that won't happen. But politically, every regulation as automatically partisan, even when it has overwhelming support.

> There is a move afoot Who is behind this move? What individuals, and what politicians? By what legal means is this happening? I've literally never heard of anything like this before - without further details, this is just political flame-baiting.

You shouldn't assume others are acting in bad faith when the much more likely explanation is you're just not paying attention.

Three major developments from the courts in this direction have been:

- The overturning of Chevron gave courts the power to interpret portions of laws written by subject matter experts, instead of those experts themselves.

- The big questions doctrine has allowed the courts to decide when the legislature has deligated too much power.

- Cornerpost has removed the statue of limitations for challenge policies and rules out in place by agencies.

These together clearly paint a picture. Any policy can be challenged (in any venue, allowing the plaintiff to pick their venue). This allows policies in place for decades to be challenged and brought to the supreme court. The most recent court has adopted the major questions doctrine, allowing them to strike down any policy they feel pertain to "issues of major political or economic significance." (no they didn't define it more than that). Or, if they can't make that argument, they can interpret the law to strike down the policy due to the overturning of Chevron.

We've seen an unprecedented shift of power to the supreme court in the last few years. They're using the disfunction in the legislature as an opening to gain power. Which is scary considering it's a group of 9 unelected people with lifetime appointments.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-strikes-dow...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_questions_doctrine

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/corner-post-inc-...

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#339

Post by nxm »

mentalgear wrote: post #6
munk-a wrote: post #3

An excellent change. It's unfortunate that stewardship of the committee will soon change hands as Khan has been a great advocate for fair contracts between companies and consumers during her tenure.

Indeed, Khan has been the first real pro-public steward of the FTC for decades.

[flagged]

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#340

Post by nxm »

websap wrote: post #101
BurningFrog wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a free market fan, Khan seems to have been pretty terrible. But this looks genuinely good! It's basically banning fraud. ---[EDIT], since everyone is asking for reasons here are two libertarian/conservative critiques: • https://reason.com/2024/11/07/good-riddance-lina-khan/ • https://archive.ph/IjNmZ

Khan has been absolutely spectacular for the free markets. Transparency in pricing (with this law), transparency in cancellation of subscriptions, blocking acquisitions where businesses should fail. The free market shouldn't allow monopolies, or duopolies to form. Bad businesses should fail, not absorb more capital and continue scaling.

Her policy changes have been countlessly shut down/overturned by courts since she's overstepped her authority.
Post reply on HN