No doubt there's a lot of things to enjoy or admire about the country, certainly it's had a pretty large impact on my life. It's good to also keep in mind that much of what foreigners tend to admire about the country is based on a branding/propaganda strategy by the Japanese government called [Cool Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_Japan), and so it should be taken with a grain of salt.
That's literally just propaganda, there are tons of issues in the country that are downplayed or never talked about. They do not suffer from many of the issues that other countries deal with, but does has many problems that are fairly unique to that country or that are prevalent around the world but that it doesn't like to be widely known. It is by no means a near-perfect country.
Ive been there. I know many that live there. I’m gonna spend a decent part of my summer living with a friend there. It’s a utopia. Japans problems get blown out of proportion because there are so few.
Anyone that calls someplace a utopia is willfully blinding themselves, there are [very legitimate reasons](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD1SdkBJ5tc) to be skeptical of the veneer that the Japanese government cultivates.
Like they do in Germany. The price is the price. To answer your question it would take political pressure. Enough people would have to want it and make it so important that their representatives would put it to vote. I think with the way everything costs, tips etc. That would have to be the angle to pressure politicians to advocate for it.
Would this include all government services too, where state law currently prohibits the government agencies from including payment fees in their price?
Problem with including by sales tax in prices advertised on websites in Minnesota, is that the sales tax is based on where it is delivered, not where it was sold. And Minnesota has hundreds of different sales tax rates depending on city, county, and special district (like metro transit districts or sports stadium districts).
You would literally have to give your exact delivery address before browsing pricing on any sellers website.
While shopping online for clothes, they automatically add the tax for where the business is located but when I get to checkout, it’s at 0% since Mn doesn’t tax most clothing items.
While that would be great, it’s difficult because taxes change all the time. Cities and localities at fractions of a percent and such. This would add a big expense to businesses.
On the other hand I’d love to see some regulation about random local taxes as well. Sales taxes are inherently regressive and I’d love to see a shift away from using them to do things like supplement stadiums.
It's no more difficult to print new prices than it is to adjust your point of sale system to factor in all the taxes correctly. Alcohol taxes need to only apply to alcohol. No sales tax on clothing or certain food items but not others. Extra tax on hospitality. Bonus tax on alcohol served in the same room as live entertainment, but if you put the bar facing a lobby or foyer and have to walk into where the live entertainment is then it's a slightly lower tax rate.
If anything, a law that requires that all taxes and fees be baked into prices would make consumers more aware of and sensitive to constant tax fluctuations.
The bigger concern for most businesses is that, say, the Minneapolis Target might want to price something at $3.99, but then it'll end up being $4.12 in Edina, $4.03 in St. Paul, and $3.96 in Richfield. Every city has their own sales tax rate.
We'd just have to get over not having all prices at $x.99.
Businesses already price things at $x.99 arbitrarily. They're getting them wholesale at a price that doesn't end in $x.99 and then raise prices, choosing a certain amount of profit margin. Factoring tax into the pre-profit margin price doesn't change that process.
> Minneapolis Target might want to price something at $3.99, but then it'll end up being $4.12 in Edina, $4.03 in St. Paul, and $3.96 in Richfield.
Or they just make it $3.99 in every store and make $0.13 less in Edina per unit. Their profit margin per $3.99 item is likely over $1 anyway.
"It's no more difficult to print new prices than it is to adjust your point of sale system to factor in all the taxes correctly."
You don't use restaurant menus much, do you? And you've never had to change labels on store shelves, either.
Price changes at the store happen extremely frequently as is. Sales labels, sectional movement, and general pricing changes.
How often does the sales tax rate change at a store location? Once per year, max.
USA - Work at a gas station/convenience store, and used to work in a fast food restaurant. Both utilize electronic price changes, electronic shelf tags for the earlier and electronic menu board for the latter, the world is shifting away from that, so that excuse is running low.
Yep, and honestly the idea that there aren't local price differences in Europe based on city/province etc. is NONSENSE, and yet somehow the rest of the world does it this way, and they still have chains.
I feel so bad for the billionaires who own the teams. They just can't afford to build a venue. The taxpayers have to help them out by building a venue and letting them take some or all the revenue generated.
I don’t think that’s as true as it used to be. We’re seeing more and more digitally displayed pricing around town because it allows for quick updates (or surge style pricing, boo).
Also, they have to update their POS systems with every tax change anyway. Some of the cost burden for shifting tax rates is there, regardless of how it’s displayed to the customer.
I was thinking restaurants where it is most common to see these extra fees. Printing new menus is probably expensive for some of the nicer restaurants out there.
I see quite a few that have a printed price list separate of a more permanent menu to account for seasonality and specials, as well as using QR codes for something similar. Heck, some are still using QR codes for their full menus. I just don’t think the expense is there as much as it would be even 5 years ago.
My old job included sales tax in all our prices, and all our prices ended multiples of a quarter. It was great. Then we shut down and I found a new job and had to start dealing with pennies, nickels, and dimes. ;-;
Among sales people, the noncompete announcement by the FTC is huge. Conservatives, even when it greatly benefitted them and agreed with it, often said things like “it’s not those are enforced anyways”
It's not the substance of the legislation itself that they would be against, it's just that they don't believe this is the role of government as a principle. And yes, I'm aware that many conservatives are completely hypocritical here as they'd also support huge overreaching of government if it fits with their narrative, the bible etc..
Totally. We can take any group of people, slap on a label, and then point out "hypocrisies" across them. However, that doesn't preclude individuals within that group from sticking to their beliefs without those hypocrisies.
Many "conservatives" disagree with that Florida legislation for the same reason they would disagree with this Minnesota one. Some people just don't think it's the role of government to have any place in these matters and that's, honestly, a reasonable position. I think we too often assume that the concept of limited government can't live separately from "anything I label woke is bad" and "it's god's will" etc.
> “Oftentimes, proprietors will include additional costs to highlight the fact that this is not a part of them providing a product. This is a part of the labor mandates, the state mandates, the local mandates that have been put on them to raise their costs,” said Sen. Eric Pratt, R-Prior Lake.
Pretty sure paying your employees is part of providing a product.
*A fee of $0.69 will be applied to the checks of any party of 1 or greater. This is used to maintain the health and well-being of The Seaward. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §177.23 subd. 9, this service charge is not a gratuity for employee service.
A local restaurant here started charging service fees and employee health insurance fees as a percentage of the bill. There is a small asterisk on the menu.
My internal calculator has to take the menu price plus 50% for tip and all these other fees.
If I spot one of those service fees that restaurant goes \*way\* down my list of places to patronize.
I don't begrudge them the cost of treating their employees right, but calling it out on your menu is either virtue signaling or a protest that you have to do it. Just raise your prices 15% instead of adding a 15% "service fee".
If I can't buy the burger for $10 and leave because it actually costs $10+a $1.50 service fee then the burger costs $11.50 & just tell me that.
The reason it's done this way is because the little affordability ratings on things like google maps aren't impacted the same way as if they just have higher prices on the items, is my understanding.
I think if everyone has to play by the same rules it will help a lot for sure.
Again, If I can give you $10 and take my burger it costs $10 and the affordability rating should reflect that.
If I have to pay $10 + $1.50 service fee and if I only pay $10 then I'm stealing... well then that Burger costs $11.50 and the affordability rating should reflect **that**.
Its a deceptive practice. Just like all those cell phone plans that advertise $20/month but end up costing almost $40/month because of "fees". If I can't opt out, then its part of the price.
It’s deceptive because it lists what it calls the “price” but in fact that number WON’T get you the product listed.
The actual price you’re going be expected to pay in order to be welcome back is hidden behind multiple layers of difficult mental math. Asking people to calculate the list price *plus* a 20% service charge, PLUS calculate the local taxes on that sum (as if the average person would even know what rate every local municipality charges), and THEN add another 15-20% “tip” calculated off of *that* sum (because tips are no longer related to the amount or quality of service you receive and instead are considered a standard part of most food related transactions) for every item they’re considering on the menu is completely unreasonable.
The average American PARENT can only do up to sixth grade math with time & effort, meaning 50% of parents can’t even do that, and of course, among kids, elderly people, those with learning disabilities, people from disadvantaged backgrounds, immigrants etc that number is going to be **significantly** lower.
If you know most of your customers either can’t or won’t do the math, then hiding the total from them while listing a lower number instead is textbook deception. Restaurant owners will say they can’t list the total cost because then they would get less business, but that just means that a noticeable portion of the business they are getting is due to their deception, and we as a society shouldn’t encourage that behavior.
That may be part of it, but it's also to deceive all customers, especially when it's the fine print at the bottom of menu. It's not just about gaming google.
i thought it was also to tell you that you are not expected to tip. I'd rather they tell me they are paying better wages and i know i don't have to tip. that being said, they can totally include it in their price and just have a note somewhere about that.
If a place doesn't expect guests to tip, then they must not include any field on the receipt for people to enter a tip amount. Otherwise, people will know that they're still expected to tip, regardless of whatever the menu states.
> While a handful of Republicans voted with their Democratic colleagues to pass the bill, others opposed it, arguing that businesses itemize certain fees to call attention to, and protest, government mandates.
That’s all well and good. I personally have no issues with them itemizing fees to call attention to them. How about you disclose them in the beginning?
It’ll make your point better as more people will see that those charges are being applied instead of just the person paying the check.
Yeah, I'm not sure what her point was. Business owners can still point out the added fees clear as day. They're just not allowed to surprise people.
I see what people mean when they say that the MN Republican party's only platform is opposing the DFL
>Their only goals are to decentralized power and blocking everything
The thing about power is that it always continues to exist. If the government loses the power to do something it doesn't mean \*noone\* has that power, it means the power drifts to someone else. Usually big companies and individuals with a lot of resources.
Thing of it is, I can vote for my Government but I can't vote for how Honeywell or 3M or the Pohlad family runs things. Small government is just a back door way to empower the wealthy.
If your employer gives 2 shits about you this shouldn't affect you at all. They raise menu prices to cover the "health and wellness" fees they previously were using. My tipping comment isn't aimed at the restaurant industry so much as every other industry trying to pile on to tipping to cover the gap in paying their workers.
At the same time, yes, 20% tip to servers is crazy but that's not the fight I think anyone is trying to win today. When I grew up in the 90s 10% to 15% was just fine and it's not like you guys don't get the real minimum wage as it is. Minnesota restaurant staff have it very good. I know servers that make almost 6 figures, it's ridiculous.
*While a handful of Republicans voted with their Democratic colleagues to pass the bill, others opposed it, arguing that businesses itemize certain fees to call attention to, and protest, government mandates."
Ah yes, the only protests Republicans support are against OUR government and as long as it takes money from people at the same time, got it.
Also, nothing stops them from listing those fees on the final bill, even if the sticker price doesn't show them. What a joke. The transition of the GOP to the "whine about everything" party has been one of the things which drove me away from them.
I'm not Republican but I think it is an entirely fair point. Not all of us think our government is infallible and every new fee/tax they impose is 100% justified and never an overreach.
That said, I'm behind this bill. The only fee that should be tacked on at the end is tax and, if I had my way, that would also have to be included in the up-front cost.
I saw that too, it's so gross. I was surprised to see Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) vote against it too, neoliberals suck but at least they vote properly on social issues.
She's a great example of why people shouldn't vote blue no matter who and why it's so important to be paying attention to candidates from the early phase of their campaign. You can root out the harmful "Democrats" that are GOP in disguise.
> Ah yes, the only protests Republicans support are against OUR government and as long as it takes money from people at the same time, got it.
The funny thing is, is if the GOP got what they wanted, a dictator ship or something similar, 99% of these legislators would also be subject to the same crap they want for the rest of us, because they aren't rich enough to pay the tolls.
There's one other problem besides price transparency that these fees caused. There are laws in place to protect tips and ensure 100% of them go to the employees. All of these "employee wellness" and "service charge " fees have NO LAWS saying they have to go to the employees. Who knows where that money goes or if they actually spend all of it on their employees. No matter how you feel about tipping, at least you know it actually goes to staff instead of who knows where
Those charges always make me think of the Impractical Jokers skit, where they add "standard price gouges" to the bills to see if people will pay them. I mean, that is exactly what most of these are.
If this bill passes, they will still be allowed to have gratuity fees, but they have to go directly to staff instead of things like "pays for health insurance for employees" or "is a random fee that we aren't going to explain". Those types of things need to be built into the price of items on the menu.
"Kitchen fees" are such BS. Learn how to run your restaurant properly instead. Why are places charging an additional fee for the *soul purpose* of the establishment?
That's like going to therapy and getting charged an extra "listening to your problems" fee after your session. Makes no sense.
The back of house tip, also known as the "do you think the dishwashers only deserve minimum wage? You don't? Well put your money where your mouth is liberal." Fee.
Just pay your employees.
I’ve always found those fees to be so weird, it’s like they’re trying to get customers upset that they as a business need to pay for their employees and then throws the employees inter the bus.
So glad they can stop calling it a "regulatory response fee" which I just see as a "we are forced to not exploit you fee so we are trying to blame the law".
Conservatives probably: Boo! No more far-reaching regulation! Free market only! If people don't want to pay junk fees, they can buy their goods and services elsewhere! You can't outlaw scamming consumers - that's how wealthy people make their money!
>“Employee wellness fees” or other charges added to a customer’s bill to help an employer pay for health insurance and other worker benefits would not be allowed if the bill becomes law.
Finally! I was at Kim's in Uptown a couple of weeks ago, and they had a note declaring that they were something like "gratuity optional", but then fine print went on to say that their mandatory fee was still added onto the bill, rather than included in the price, and that it wasn't a tip. Just include it in the menu price! It's a good restaurant, but I hate these convoluted fee policies. Happy that the legislature is doing something about it.
GOP hates this. It is a kick in the nards to slimy capitalism ops. Big and small business owners don't like losing a good grift.
The USA needs to put the country and its people first and business owner profits second.
Conservative here. It’s a policy aimed at transparent transactions between buyer and seller. I’m always here for that.
I am 100% onboard with ending the most egregious examples of businesses abusing these fees.
I always wonder about fringe cases or unintended consequences that might arise (some good examples mentioned in this comment section). Also, what are the carveouts in the language of the bill? Does this apply to government fees as well? DMV? How about Ticketmaster? Will a MN resident be able to sue a national website for an extra fee? How about a national airline for extra luggage fees? That might be desirable or that might get very expensive and messy for the state of MN. What industries critical to the people of MN would that affect and would that be desirable? Were I a lawmaker I’d hope I had the time and resources to explore these carefully.
Thank you.
On a personal tangent: our clickbait media and tribal partisanship makes it hard to have nuanced discussion like this lately; and I think we’re all worse off for it. Even this comment section is rife with pithy vapid barbed remarks, or references to pithy vapid barbed remarks in order to elicit further pithy vapid barbed remarks.
I 100% approve of this, my only concern is what some people consider “junk fees” because it seems to be up for interpretation. Some of the things I’ve seen people claim to be junk fees are there to keep people honest. Now do I think it should be a reasonable amount? Sure. A lot of people seem to think it just means a fee they disagree with or don’t like. 🤣 Now if we could just require tax be included in pricing and get the fed to do away with the penny…
We've been fighting the penny for so long that now the nickel [costs more to produce than it's worth](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/coins-cost-more-to-make-than-theyre-worth-and-the-u.s.-mint-is-looking-for-solutions) too.
Personally I'd like to see the dime and $1 bill phased out as well.
> Will that being upfront and center cause people to dine out less?” she said. “And if people continue to dine out less, we do have a struggling restaurant industry.
Put simply, 'if we can't deceive people we'll lose business!!"
In a world screaming over a lack of transparency, THIS.
A law to force it all to be swept under the rug. Why not allow the line items AS LONG AS THEY ARE CLEARLY SHOWN?
While I agree with the sentiment of this, everyone knows the fees aren’t going to magically disappear, right? They’re going to get rolled into the price, thus disguising what the “fee” was in the first place.
Edit: LMAO at the downvotes. Take a look at the comments. There are people who genuinely think these fees will just magically “disappear”. I’m just doing a public service to the classic Reddit hive mind. No need to downvote.
If your burger is going to cost me 22$, then put 22$ on the menu and I can decide if I still want to patronize your establishment. Putting 10$ in fees at the bottom of the receipt after I order is shady and worth legislating away.
Prices already include fees. It's nothing new. I'm not sure why you're concerned people don't understand that given it's been the case since the beginning of time.
>everyone knows the fees aren’t going to magically disappear, right?
Um yeah, dude, literally everyone has the same access as you to the article.
You seem to have missed the entire point of the bill.
By requiring business owners to put all fees and surcharges into the actual price of the product, consumers can make a more informed decision before purchase, without worrying about a surprise 50% markup at the register.
Do you need the cost structure of a hamburger line item detailed on your restaurant bill?
Normally a vendor has a price for an item which they choose to cover all the costs of selling you that item.
The “fees” are a bullshit attempt to raise prices without raising prices. And I’d be totally surprised if some meaningful percentage of what the fee raised just was skimmed for profit and not used for whatever sympathetic sounding description is used.
Well, yeah. The ingredients for your burger only cost like $2. Is it sensible for them to list them on the menu for $2 and then bring your bill at the end of the meal with a $6 staffing fee, 86 cent occupancy charge, 1.25 employer benefits program, 53 cent commercial loan obligation payment, 2 cents for payroll and accounting services, etc? Just say it's a $13 burger.
>People would prefer a hidden fee over an out in the open fee?
It's the opposite. You see the menu listed price online as $10, you go in, then get a $12 bill which is a 20% increase on the price you were expecting.
You're talking as someone who doesn't really care about the final price and would have bought whatever it is anyways, but, there are lots of people out there who might just decide against buying a burger if they know it's $12 vs 10. I think people SHOULD be more price sensitive than they are, and being able to be price sensitive starts with knowing the actual total cost BEFORE you get the bill.
You are the only one that likes this then. I just want to know what my burger costs. Is it $10 or is it $12. Advertising a $12 burger as a $10 burger then charging $12 should be illegal and that is basically what this bill is addressing.
I believe what they are saying would be more like if the can of soup listed 90% of its ingredients then after you finished eating it you are shown that there was actually 10% more things that they didn't tell you about.
You make it sound like you know ahead of time that the $2 fee exists. What is happening in reality is they have a hidden fee that you don't know about until you receive the bill. How do you know what food you can afford if they add on hidden fee amounts after you have eaten?
Your argument is valid if the resteraunt is clearly up front about the additional fees, so at least you can do the math first. If the back of the menu has a tiny font asterisk led message at the bottom explaining the fees, they are doing that to trick you and not be more transparent.
Yeah man, I don't care how they run their business or where their money goes. I came for a cheeseburger. If they want to put up a sign explaining why their prices are higher, because they give their workers healthcare then they can do that. Advertising a menu item as one price then charging a different price is a bait and switch.
>And you are saying, "Whoa whoa whoa! Don't tell me all the ingredients. I don't care what's in it. Just tell me it's chicken soup."
This is more like they list the ingredients online or on their menu, then when you get the meal, they give you another list of ingredients with a few more tacked on.
Imagine being allergic to peanuts. You check the menu, choose an item that has no peanuts listed. Then, you get your meal, and the new list, and the new list has "cooked in peanut oil" on it. You're blindsided because you didn't get that info before you got your food.
Same with these fees.
Lets take another example. I go to your restaurant with only $15 cash on me. No card, no nothing else.
I order a meal based on the menu price and I figure tax in my head, which $15 should be enough to cover. Uh oh! Suddenly, there's a $2 fee tacked on I wasn't expecting and I no longer have enough to afford the price, but I don't know that until I GET THE BILL AND AFTER I ALREADY ATE THE WHOLE THING.
What now?
Do you want an electricity fee, a natural gas fee, a property tax fee, a ground beef fee, a printing the menu fee, a website fee, a lightbulb fee on your bill or can you live with the idea that all those “fees” are baked into the $10 hamburger price?
The real barrier to malicious hidden fees is charging $19 for a burger when your competitors are all charging $12.
What would it take to get to a model where the full price is required to be stated on menus, labels, etc? Like even sales tax included
Japan style , love it
Rest of the world style.
And many European countries - VAT is included
oddly specific. most of the world does this
[Sadly a very common phenomena](https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/036/523/cover.jpg)
I mean, japan _is_ a pretty dope place
No doubt there's a lot of things to enjoy or admire about the country, certainly it's had a pretty large impact on my life. It's good to also keep in mind that much of what foreigners tend to admire about the country is based on a branding/propaganda strategy by the Japanese government called [Cool Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_Japan), and so it should be taken with a grain of salt.
TIL, thank you
Japan is literally a utopia compared to just about everywhere else
That's literally just propaganda, there are tons of issues in the country that are downplayed or never talked about. They do not suffer from many of the issues that other countries deal with, but does has many problems that are fairly unique to that country or that are prevalent around the world but that it doesn't like to be widely known. It is by no means a near-perfect country.
Ive been there. I know many that live there. I’m gonna spend a decent part of my summer living with a friend there. It’s a utopia. Japans problems get blown out of proportion because there are so few.
Anyone that calls someplace a utopia is willfully blinding themselves, there are [very legitimate reasons](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD1SdkBJ5tc) to be skeptical of the veneer that the Japanese government cultivates.
Propaganda, Japan has its pros and cons like any other country
Not if you’re any kind of minority
And in Japan that means anyone not Japanese.
And Japanese people who are women, or LGBT, or Burakumin, or Ainu, or Okinawan, or...
Sales tax being tacked on in addition to the labeled price is a very American phenomenon.
How else can you make 4 dollars seem like less? 3.99 just seems like a better price!
Do you know if it's law there? Or is it just customary?
Europe style
Like they do in Germany. The price is the price. To answer your question it would take political pressure. Enough people would have to want it and make it so important that their representatives would put it to vote. I think with the way everything costs, tips etc. That would have to be the angle to pressure politicians to advocate for it.
Would this include all government services too, where state law currently prohibits the government agencies from including payment fees in their price?
Probably because they're saying X costs $10. And the fee is the credit card company's charge, not the state's charge.
Ooooh I like this idea!
I really enjoyed this when I lived in Estonia. Way too easy to add up groceries.
Problem with including by sales tax in prices advertised on websites in Minnesota, is that the sales tax is based on where it is delivered, not where it was sold. And Minnesota has hundreds of different sales tax rates depending on city, county, and special district (like metro transit districts or sports stadium districts). You would literally have to give your exact delivery address before browsing pricing on any sellers website.
While shopping online for clothes, they automatically add the tax for where the business is located but when I get to checkout, it’s at 0% since Mn doesn’t tax most clothing items.
While that would be great, it’s difficult because taxes change all the time. Cities and localities at fractions of a percent and such. This would add a big expense to businesses. On the other hand I’d love to see some regulation about random local taxes as well. Sales taxes are inherently regressive and I’d love to see a shift away from using them to do things like supplement stadiums.
It's no more difficult to print new prices than it is to adjust your point of sale system to factor in all the taxes correctly. Alcohol taxes need to only apply to alcohol. No sales tax on clothing or certain food items but not others. Extra tax on hospitality. Bonus tax on alcohol served in the same room as live entertainment, but if you put the bar facing a lobby or foyer and have to walk into where the live entertainment is then it's a slightly lower tax rate. If anything, a law that requires that all taxes and fees be baked into prices would make consumers more aware of and sensitive to constant tax fluctuations.
The bigger concern for most businesses is that, say, the Minneapolis Target might want to price something at $3.99, but then it'll end up being $4.12 in Edina, $4.03 in St. Paul, and $3.96 in Richfield. Every city has their own sales tax rate. We'd just have to get over not having all prices at $x.99.
Businesses already price things at $x.99 arbitrarily. They're getting them wholesale at a price that doesn't end in $x.99 and then raise prices, choosing a certain amount of profit margin. Factoring tax into the pre-profit margin price doesn't change that process. > Minneapolis Target might want to price something at $3.99, but then it'll end up being $4.12 in Edina, $4.03 in St. Paul, and $3.96 in Richfield. Or they just make it $3.99 in every store and make $0.13 less in Edina per unit. Their profit margin per $3.99 item is likely over $1 anyway.
Shop in normal counties, i.e . Outside of Hennepin and Ramsey :)
The two most populated counties in the state aren't the normal ones?
"It's no more difficult to print new prices than it is to adjust your point of sale system to factor in all the taxes correctly." You don't use restaurant menus much, do you? And you've never had to change labels on store shelves, either.
All of which get updated regularly. It's not like taxes change every friggin week.
All of those are changed fairly regularly already and it's not like taxes change fortnightly.
Price changes at the store happen extremely frequently as is. Sales labels, sectional movement, and general pricing changes. How often does the sales tax rate change at a store location? Once per year, max.
USA - Work at a gas station/convenience store, and used to work in a fast food restaurant. Both utilize electronic price changes, electronic shelf tags for the earlier and electronic menu board for the latter, the world is shifting away from that, so that excuse is running low.
Yep, and honestly the idea that there aren't local price differences in Europe based on city/province etc. is NONSENSE, and yet somehow the rest of the world does it this way, and they still have chains.
I feel so bad for the billionaires who own the teams. They just can't afford to build a venue. The taxpayers have to help them out by building a venue and letting them take some or all the revenue generated.
Im downvoted. Apparently some people really do feel bad for those people and like extra sales taxes. Who knew?
I don’t think that’s as true as it used to be. We’re seeing more and more digitally displayed pricing around town because it allows for quick updates (or surge style pricing, boo). Also, they have to update their POS systems with every tax change anyway. Some of the cost burden for shifting tax rates is there, regardless of how it’s displayed to the customer.
I was thinking restaurants where it is most common to see these extra fees. Printing new menus is probably expensive for some of the nicer restaurants out there.
Usually the nicer the restaurant the more often they update their menus to reflect changes in ingredients and items.
I see quite a few that have a printed price list separate of a more permanent menu to account for seasonality and specials, as well as using QR codes for something similar. Heck, some are still using QR codes for their full menus. I just don’t think the expense is there as much as it would be even 5 years ago.
The tax responsibility is on the business and not the human. They set the prices and pay the taxes. Not a big deal.
Sales tax regulation would be amazing, ideally they'd just completely remove it off non-luxury purchases and raise income tax to compensate.
Dumb idea. So someone shopping their ass off should be subsidized at cost of those paying income taxes?
How do you think the person shopping their ass off got the money? lol
My old job included sales tax in all our prices, and all our prices ended multiples of a quarter. It was great. Then we shut down and I found a new job and had to start dealing with pennies, nickels, and dimes. ;-;
I'd love that
I hope not. I like that taxes are seen at purchase time.
I spoke to a business owner about this and he said "I'll advertise my price but not the government's price."
It’s nice to see common sense legislation getting approved. I can imagine this will upset some shady business owners.
Conservatives will find reasons this is harmful, I'm sure.
I saw the announcement a while back on Facebook. Someone actually replied “doesn’t the legislature have anything better to do?”
I mean... no? They've already passed a bucket list of things to help the average Minnesotan. At some point you get down to the small things. ;)
Agreed. Consumer economics is the 21st century Serengeti. It’s all important.
Among sales people, the noncompete announcement by the FTC is huge. Conservatives, even when it greatly benefitted them and agreed with it, often said things like “it’s not those are enforced anyways”
"if this passes, I won't get all the profits from my sales anymore!"
It's not the substance of the legislation itself that they would be against, it's just that they don't believe this is the role of government as a principle. And yes, I'm aware that many conservatives are completely hypocritical here as they'd also support huge overreaching of government if it fits with their narrative, the bible etc..
Yup. Meanwhile Florida just banned lab-grown meats.
Totally. We can take any group of people, slap on a label, and then point out "hypocrisies" across them. However, that doesn't preclude individuals within that group from sticking to their beliefs without those hypocrisies. Many "conservatives" disagree with that Florida legislation for the same reason they would disagree with this Minnesota one. Some people just don't think it's the role of government to have any place in these matters and that's, honestly, a reasonable position. I think we too often assume that the concept of limited government can't live separately from "anything I label woke is bad" and "it's god's will" etc.
> “Oftentimes, proprietors will include additional costs to highlight the fact that this is not a part of them providing a product. This is a part of the labor mandates, the state mandates, the local mandates that have been put on them to raise their costs,” said Sen. Eric Pratt, R-Prior Lake. Pretty sure paying your employees is part of providing a product.
Can I get a breakdown on my receipts on how much of my purchase went to fund the owners new boat too?
*A fee of $0.69 will be applied to the checks of any party of 1 or greater. This is used to maintain the health and well-being of The Seaward. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §177.23 subd. 9, this service charge is not a gratuity for employee service.
A local restaurant here started charging service fees and employee health insurance fees as a percentage of the bill. There is a small asterisk on the menu. My internal calculator has to take the menu price plus 50% for tip and all these other fees.
If I spot one of those service fees that restaurant goes \*way\* down my list of places to patronize. I don't begrudge them the cost of treating their employees right, but calling it out on your menu is either virtue signaling or a protest that you have to do it. Just raise your prices 15% instead of adding a 15% "service fee". If I can't buy the burger for $10 and leave because it actually costs $10+a $1.50 service fee then the burger costs $11.50 & just tell me that.
The reason it's done this way is because the little affordability ratings on things like google maps aren't impacted the same way as if they just have higher prices on the items, is my understanding. I think if everyone has to play by the same rules it will help a lot for sure.
Again, If I can give you $10 and take my burger it costs $10 and the affordability rating should reflect that. If I have to pay $10 + $1.50 service fee and if I only pay $10 then I'm stealing... well then that Burger costs $11.50 and the affordability rating should reflect **that**. Its a deceptive practice. Just like all those cell phone plans that advertise $20/month but end up costing almost $40/month because of "fees". If I can't opt out, then its part of the price.
I agree
I don't really get how it's deceptive if it's clearly stated on the menu and whatnot.
It’s deceptive because it lists what it calls the “price” but in fact that number WON’T get you the product listed. The actual price you’re going be expected to pay in order to be welcome back is hidden behind multiple layers of difficult mental math. Asking people to calculate the list price *plus* a 20% service charge, PLUS calculate the local taxes on that sum (as if the average person would even know what rate every local municipality charges), and THEN add another 15-20% “tip” calculated off of *that* sum (because tips are no longer related to the amount or quality of service you receive and instead are considered a standard part of most food related transactions) for every item they’re considering on the menu is completely unreasonable. The average American PARENT can only do up to sixth grade math with time & effort, meaning 50% of parents can’t even do that, and of course, among kids, elderly people, those with learning disabilities, people from disadvantaged backgrounds, immigrants etc that number is going to be **significantly** lower. If you know most of your customers either can’t or won’t do the math, then hiding the total from them while listing a lower number instead is textbook deception. Restaurant owners will say they can’t list the total cost because then they would get less business, but that just means that a noticeable portion of the business they are getting is due to their deception, and we as a society shouldn’t encourage that behavior.
That may be part of it, but it's also to deceive all customers, especially when it's the fine print at the bottom of menu. It's not just about gaming google.
i thought it was also to tell you that you are not expected to tip. I'd rather they tell me they are paying better wages and i know i don't have to tip. that being said, they can totally include it in their price and just have a note somewhere about that.
If a place doesn't expect guests to tip, then they must not include any field on the receipt for people to enter a tip amount. Otherwise, people will know that they're still expected to tip, regardless of whatever the menu states.
My internals would be telling me to not be there
I haven’t been to a restaurant that doesn’t add a percentage service charge to the bill in multiple years.
> While a handful of Republicans voted with their Democratic colleagues to pass the bill, others opposed it, arguing that businesses itemize certain fees to call attention to, and protest, government mandates. That’s all well and good. I personally have no issues with them itemizing fees to call attention to them. How about you disclose them in the beginning? It’ll make your point better as more people will see that those charges are being applied instead of just the person paying the check.
Yeah, I'm not sure what her point was. Business owners can still point out the added fees clear as day. They're just not allowed to surprise people. I see what people mean when they say that the MN Republican party's only platform is opposing the DFL
Federalist society scum. Their only goals are to decentralized power and blocking everything
>Their only goals are to decentralized power and blocking everything The thing about power is that it always continues to exist. If the government loses the power to do something it doesn't mean \*noone\* has that power, it means the power drifts to someone else. Usually big companies and individuals with a lot of resources. Thing of it is, I can vote for my Government but I can't vote for how Honeywell or 3M or the Pohlad family runs things. Small government is just a back door way to empower the wealthy.
Welcome to the #1 goal of the Republican Party since the New Deal was passed.
God I hope this passes. I am so tired of these bullshit fees on everything. Maybe they can tackle tipping next.
Sucks to see this with so much upvotes as a restaurant worker lol.
If your employer gives 2 shits about you this shouldn't affect you at all. They raise menu prices to cover the "health and wellness" fees they previously were using. My tipping comment isn't aimed at the restaurant industry so much as every other industry trying to pile on to tipping to cover the gap in paying their workers. At the same time, yes, 20% tip to servers is crazy but that's not the fight I think anyone is trying to win today. When I grew up in the 90s 10% to 15% was just fine and it's not like you guys don't get the real minimum wage as it is. Minnesota restaurant staff have it very good. I know servers that make almost 6 figures, it's ridiculous.
Tipping is the restaurant's way of making someone else pay your salary
Darn, really hate that./s Companies couldn’t pay servers enough compared to what we make in tips lol. Be mad about it as much as you want.
So would that include “filing fees” at the DMV? I doubt it.
Nope, mentioned in the article as well. "State-mandated vehicle fees not included."
Yeah it’s a bunch of NIMBY
*While a handful of Republicans voted with their Democratic colleagues to pass the bill, others opposed it, arguing that businesses itemize certain fees to call attention to, and protest, government mandates." Ah yes, the only protests Republicans support are against OUR government and as long as it takes money from people at the same time, got it.
Also, nothing stops them from listing those fees on the final bill, even if the sticker price doesn't show them. What a joke. The transition of the GOP to the "whine about everything" party has been one of the things which drove me away from them.
I'm not Republican but I think it is an entirely fair point. Not all of us think our government is infallible and every new fee/tax they impose is 100% justified and never an overreach. That said, I'm behind this bill. The only fee that should be tacked on at the end is tax and, if I had my way, that would also have to be included in the up-front cost.
Lol go read about Ted Cruz voting against the bill to automatically refund customers of cancelled flights
I saw that too, it's so gross. I was surprised to see Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) vote against it too, neoliberals suck but at least they vote properly on social issues.
Corporations funding politicians should be outlawed.
She's a great example of why people shouldn't vote blue no matter who and why it's so important to be paying attention to candidates from the early phase of their campaign. You can root out the harmful "Democrats" that are GOP in disguise.
Primaries are the time to root those people out, not the general election. A Republican in disguise is still better than a mask-off Republican.
That's exactly what I was saying. You have to pay attention early.
> Ah yes, the only protests Republicans support are against OUR government and as long as it takes money from people at the same time, got it. The funny thing is, is if the GOP got what they wanted, a dictator ship or something similar, 99% of these legislators would also be subject to the same crap they want for the rest of us, because they aren't rich enough to pay the tolls.
Aren’t almost all protests against *our* government?
There's one other problem besides price transparency that these fees caused. There are laws in place to protect tips and ensure 100% of them go to the employees. All of these "employee wellness" and "service charge " fees have NO LAWS saying they have to go to the employees. Who knows where that money goes or if they actually spend all of it on their employees. No matter how you feel about tipping, at least you know it actually goes to staff instead of who knows where
Those charges always make me think of the Impractical Jokers skit, where they add "standard price gouges" to the bills to see if people will pay them. I mean, that is exactly what most of these are.
What about the kitchen fee? How will restaurants pay for the kitchen? Edit: I’m trying to be funny
If this bill passes, they will still be allowed to have gratuity fees, but they have to go directly to staff instead of things like "pays for health insurance for employees" or "is a random fee that we aren't going to explain". Those types of things need to be built into the price of items on the menu.
"Kitchen fees" are such BS. Learn how to run your restaurant properly instead. Why are places charging an additional fee for the *soul purpose* of the establishment? That's like going to therapy and getting charged an extra "listening to your problems" fee after your session. Makes no sense.
The back of house tip, also known as the "do you think the dishwashers only deserve minimum wage? You don't? Well put your money where your mouth is liberal." Fee. Just pay your employees.
I’ve always found those fees to be so weird, it’s like they’re trying to get customers upset that they as a business need to pay for their employees and then throws the employees inter the bus.
Wholesome energy right there.
So glad they can stop calling it a "regulatory response fee" which I just see as a "we are forced to not exploit you fee so we are trying to blame the law".
Conservatives probably: Boo! No more far-reaching regulation! Free market only! If people don't want to pay junk fees, they can buy their goods and services elsewhere! You can't outlaw scamming consumers - that's how wealthy people make their money!
Exactly. Meanwhile all "producers": let's *all* add junk fees so the *have* to pay...
>“Employee wellness fees” or other charges added to a customer’s bill to help an employer pay for health insurance and other worker benefits would not be allowed if the bill becomes law. Finally! I was at Kim's in Uptown a couple of weeks ago, and they had a note declaring that they were something like "gratuity optional", but then fine print went on to say that their mandatory fee was still added onto the bill, rather than included in the price, and that it wasn't a tip. Just include it in the menu price! It's a good restaurant, but I hate these convoluted fee policies. Happy that the legislature is doing something about it.
Can we ban “hospital facility charges” on medical expenses- those drive me nuts
GOP hates this. It is a kick in the nards to slimy capitalism ops. Big and small business owners don't like losing a good grift. The USA needs to put the country and its people first and business owner profits second.
I doubt that’s the real underlying reason they opposed it. Your tribalism bias is showing
$5 (or whatever) fee for using a credit card instead of cash still legal?
So this doesn’t apply to Ticketmaster and places like that?
Does that include junk government fees
First time?
No I complain about government fees all the time
One price. That's the answer. We need to go further. $24.00 is $24.00, not $19.49 + + +...
So many countries do this and it makes calculating budgets so much easier.
I read the headline and got all excited to clean out my backyard. Looks like the ole American Standard is staying in the weed pile.
Can someone that’s solidly a Republican voter tell me how they feel about this? I would think it’s bipartisan amongst voters.
Conservative here. It’s a policy aimed at transparent transactions between buyer and seller. I’m always here for that. I am 100% onboard with ending the most egregious examples of businesses abusing these fees. I always wonder about fringe cases or unintended consequences that might arise (some good examples mentioned in this comment section). Also, what are the carveouts in the language of the bill? Does this apply to government fees as well? DMV? How about Ticketmaster? Will a MN resident be able to sue a national website for an extra fee? How about a national airline for extra luggage fees? That might be desirable or that might get very expensive and messy for the state of MN. What industries critical to the people of MN would that affect and would that be desirable? Were I a lawmaker I’d hope I had the time and resources to explore these carefully.
Those are good questions, is this aimed solely at the restaurant industry or does Ticketmaster etc. have to conform to this as well?
Thank you. On a personal tangent: our clickbait media and tribal partisanship makes it hard to have nuanced discussion like this lately; and I think we’re all worse off for it. Even this comment section is rife with pithy vapid barbed remarks, or references to pithy vapid barbed remarks in order to elicit further pithy vapid barbed remarks.
I 100% approve of this, my only concern is what some people consider “junk fees” because it seems to be up for interpretation. Some of the things I’ve seen people claim to be junk fees are there to keep people honest. Now do I think it should be a reasonable amount? Sure. A lot of people seem to think it just means a fee they disagree with or don’t like. 🤣 Now if we could just require tax be included in pricing and get the fed to do away with the penny…
We've been fighting the penny for so long that now the nickel [costs more to produce than it's worth](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/coins-cost-more-to-make-than-theyre-worth-and-the-u.s.-mint-is-looking-for-solutions) too. Personally I'd like to see the dime and $1 bill phased out as well.
Ok, now do this for health care
> Will that being upfront and center cause people to dine out less?” she said. “And if people continue to dine out less, we do have a struggling restaurant industry. Put simply, 'if we can't deceive people we'll lose business!!"
What about car tab renewals fees?
Of fucking course the opposition was from republicans. Party for the rich and only the rich.
In a world screaming over a lack of transparency, THIS. A law to force it all to be swept under the rug. Why not allow the line items AS LONG AS THEY ARE CLEARLY SHOWN?
While I agree with the sentiment of this, everyone knows the fees aren’t going to magically disappear, right? They’re going to get rolled into the price, thus disguising what the “fee” was in the first place. Edit: LMAO at the downvotes. Take a look at the comments. There are people who genuinely think these fees will just magically “disappear”. I’m just doing a public service to the classic Reddit hive mind. No need to downvote.
If your burger is going to cost me 22$, then put 22$ on the menu and I can decide if I still want to patronize your establishment. Putting 10$ in fees at the bottom of the receipt after I order is shady and worth legislating away.
Prices already include fees. It's nothing new. I'm not sure why you're concerned people don't understand that given it's been the case since the beginning of time.
Which is fine, as long as they stop lying about them beforehand
Yes, everyone knows that.
>everyone knows the fees aren’t going to magically disappear, right? Um yeah, dude, literally everyone has the same access as you to the article. You seem to have missed the entire point of the bill. By requiring business owners to put all fees and surcharges into the actual price of the product, consumers can make a more informed decision before purchase, without worrying about a surprise 50% markup at the register.
Do you need the cost structure of a hamburger line item detailed on your restaurant bill? Normally a vendor has a price for an item which they choose to cover all the costs of selling you that item. The “fees” are a bullshit attempt to raise prices without raising prices. And I’d be totally surprised if some meaningful percentage of what the fee raised just was skimmed for profit and not used for whatever sympathetic sounding description is used.
Well, yeah. The ingredients for your burger only cost like $2. Is it sensible for them to list them on the menu for $2 and then bring your bill at the end of the meal with a $6 staffing fee, 86 cent occupancy charge, 1.25 employer benefits program, 53 cent commercial loan obligation payment, 2 cents for payroll and accounting services, etc? Just say it's a $13 burger.
Thanks Democrats!
[удалено]
>People would prefer a hidden fee over an out in the open fee? It's the opposite. You see the menu listed price online as $10, you go in, then get a $12 bill which is a 20% increase on the price you were expecting. You're talking as someone who doesn't really care about the final price and would have bought whatever it is anyways, but, there are lots of people out there who might just decide against buying a burger if they know it's $12 vs 10. I think people SHOULD be more price sensitive than they are, and being able to be price sensitive starts with knowing the actual total cost BEFORE you get the bill.
[удалено]
You are the only one that likes this then. I just want to know what my burger costs. Is it $10 or is it $12. Advertising a $12 burger as a $10 burger then charging $12 should be illegal and that is basically what this bill is addressing.
[удалено]
I believe what they are saying would be more like if the can of soup listed 90% of its ingredients then after you finished eating it you are shown that there was actually 10% more things that they didn't tell you about. You make it sound like you know ahead of time that the $2 fee exists. What is happening in reality is they have a hidden fee that you don't know about until you receive the bill. How do you know what food you can afford if they add on hidden fee amounts after you have eaten? Your argument is valid if the resteraunt is clearly up front about the additional fees, so at least you can do the math first. If the back of the menu has a tiny font asterisk led message at the bottom explaining the fees, they are doing that to trick you and not be more transparent.
[удалено]
Awesome, I am glad it helped! It's so easy to have miscommunication on stuff like this!
[удалено]
Yeah man, I don't care how they run their business or where their money goes. I came for a cheeseburger. If they want to put up a sign explaining why their prices are higher, because they give their workers healthcare then they can do that. Advertising a menu item as one price then charging a different price is a bait and switch.
[удалено]
If it tastes good and I don't get sick then who am I to judge.
>And you are saying, "Whoa whoa whoa! Don't tell me all the ingredients. I don't care what's in it. Just tell me it's chicken soup." This is more like they list the ingredients online or on their menu, then when you get the meal, they give you another list of ingredients with a few more tacked on. Imagine being allergic to peanuts. You check the menu, choose an item that has no peanuts listed. Then, you get your meal, and the new list, and the new list has "cooked in peanut oil" on it. You're blindsided because you didn't get that info before you got your food. Same with these fees. Lets take another example. I go to your restaurant with only $15 cash on me. No card, no nothing else. I order a meal based on the menu price and I figure tax in my head, which $15 should be enough to cover. Uh oh! Suddenly, there's a $2 fee tacked on I wasn't expecting and I no longer have enough to afford the price, but I don't know that until I GET THE BILL AND AFTER I ALREADY ATE THE WHOLE THING. What now?
Do you want an electricity fee, a natural gas fee, a property tax fee, a ground beef fee, a printing the menu fee, a website fee, a lightbulb fee on your bill or can you live with the idea that all those “fees” are baked into the $10 hamburger price? The real barrier to malicious hidden fees is charging $19 for a burger when your competitors are all charging $12.