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

Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

oag.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 480 posts

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#71

Post by bryans »

latentcall wrote: post #6

Just need other states to follow suit. However, I personally haven’t dealt with hidden fees and don’t know how prevalent they are in the US. Is it a widespread issue? I suppose none of the companies I do business with have them.

I just moved into an apartment advertised at $1,420/mo that is costing over $1,700/mo because of extra fees only mentioned in fine print inside a 100+ page lease. The "no hidden fees" ISP that I'm now forced to use has over $30/mo in hidden fees. It's not just prevalent, it's business as usual for every company everywhere -- because they can and they know nobody will do anything about it.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#72

Post by mrktf »

xmprt wrote: post #31
adasdasdas wrote: post #7

I don't know why we can't just force everyone to show post tax/fees price upfront. It's complete bullshit that every restaurant bill comes with 3 different taxes.

Taxes are set at a multiple levels (federal, state, district, and city) so it's pretty much impossible to show the post tax price on the label. Hidden fees are a completely different issue.

That argument about multiple level taxes is always beyond me. Taxes are not stock market which changes in unknown direction constantly, they are always known at the worst weeks before implementation.

In my eastern European country even biggest supermarkets can change all labels overnight (I even bet they can can do at least twice daily - albeit with here and there confusions when there multiple labels for same good)

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#73

Post by wolfendin »

smt88 wrote: post #48
sfmike wrote: post #15

We could learn from for example Japan where there is no cents and all fees included so 5000 Yen is 5000 yen no tip no tax no fees no cents it's really cortisol reducing.

Including taxes in the sticker price is bad. It allows the government to quietly increase taxes without people noticing. Sales taxes are in general regressive and harm lower-income people the most, so they should be visible and attributable to government.

The price goes up on everything so I’m not sure how you think it’s without people noticing.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#74

Post by zzo38computer »

It would be a good idea to make in other places too, so that the advertising of prices will not be deceptive, so that you will know what they are. If someone charges you money they did not say (due to the service that was agreed on), it is false advertising and they should not do that.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#75

Post by tjbiddle »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #47
xmprt wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxes are set at a multiple levels (federal, state, district, and city) so it's pretty much impossible to show the post tax price on the label. Hidden fees are a completely different issue.

I never understand this argument at all. Your shops have computers with label printers, right? At the Co-op supermarket in our little UK town (population 3000) they’ve even just replaced the shelf price tickets with tiny colour displays.

1. Taxes can change quickly, and it's a pain in the ass to keep up with. If you're now needing to deal with changing the printed price on tens, hundreds, thousands of items - I can't even imagine.

2. Online sales you won't even be able to calculate it until the customer puts in their shipping information. And no, they can't figure that out beforehand as there are a myriad of reasons why where their IP is does not mean where it's being shipped to, which is where the taxes need to be calculated.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#77

Post by seer »

guitarbill wrote: post #58
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #50

Comments that are bringing up taxes (which are totally exempted by this bill anyway) and tips (with one small caveat) are completely missing the point. You can have a debate about how to display those items on a price list, but everyone knows about them and they are expected. The whole point of this bill is to prevent bait-and-switch, where loads of unknown or variable fees are tacked on after the price is initially…

Disagree. Bait and switch is one symptom of the issue that the price is not what you'll pay. Which to be clear is awful. And that matters if you have to be careful about spending. Also, "everyone knows about them", really? If it's so easy to "know" the local tax rate for various things, why isn't it easy to label them? See the rest of the world, where even young kids can go shopping. If you give them 5 , and the item…

I really like how tips are done in most of europe, where the tip is included by default in the restaurant price. So now your choices are - add additional tip if you’re really satisfied with your service, or retract the default tip if you’ve been wronged in some way.

Just by default you don’t have to think about it, and it shows up in all the places if should - government included.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#78

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #46
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Note the California bill specifically exempts taxes from this "upfront pricing" requirement. The reason I think listing taxes separately is OK is because (a) it is not something that the business itself has any choice over, and (b) all businesses have to tax the same for equivalent services. I think listing the taxes separately serves an important purpose to remind the purchaser about where your payments…

but I will say that restaurants I've been to always highlight any mandatory fees besides normal sales tax on the menu In San Francisco, restaurants rarely highlight the fees. They are usually in smaller font at the bottom of the menu (and maybe only on one side of a double-sided menu) and sometimes not discoverable until you get the bill. Here's a typical example (click on 'menu'): https://maps.app.goo.gl/XS3puQEttQV…

Perhaps "highlight" was the wrong word choice, but it is specifically called out on that menu example. I didn't read the full bill but I'm assuming since the required charge is fully visible, this restaurant would be fine (of course, as long as that required charge was also shown in any advertising that included prices).

FWIW, I think those kinds of "5% employee surcharge" fees are total bullshit and should be included in the price. The only reason "fees" should ever be pulled out separately are if they're optional, variable, or depend on something besides the unit cost on the product.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#79

Post by sowbug »

ngoel36 wrote: post #2

Glad we are focused on the most critical issues facing society.

This comment is a partial example of the fallacy of relative privation. It's only partial because usually when people make it, they go the extra mile to include the thing that they think is more important.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Relativ...

Post reply on HN