stores to start charging for using credit cards

[Lifted]

About time. We've been subsidizing these bullshit rewards cards and general CC fees for way too long. It's the hidden second tax.

 

[zzuupp]

It's about darn time.

 

[Lemon law]

Pardon me here if I have a different take here from grim experience. As no has considered the possibility of identity theft that plagues all honest merchants. And for that matter all honest consumers.

As credit card companies make money two ways. (1) By charging the merchant some 3% plus on every transaction that sticks to the credit card company, when the merchant would make more money accepting only cash. Lets ignore the risks of merchants accepting check for the moment or reward card that rely on fees above 3% for the moment. (2) The real giant money made by credit card companies is on the 18% interests charged to the intellectually weak who are allowed to borrow too much money on credit cards. As they finally find out they can never pay back the debt. As maybe our nation can simply say, fools and their money are soon parted. Especially when the fools have no choice to resort to bankruptcy in which case they have a clean credit rating, can get new credit cards like candy, and start the same cycle again.

As I submit only those who become victims of credit card fraud can really understand how corrosive the credit card system is.

As I amplified for credit, gradually built up my credit rating, and even got two credit cards I used very seldom. Then one fine day, a credit card identity thief got enough information, and in the space of a month, applied for a pile of new credit cards in my name, they sailed through given my credit rating, and at the same time the identity conveniently thief made themselves as co users on my account. And even more conveniently changed my billing address to somewhere else. It too me better than a month, to find out, what a thrill to find out I had so many credit cards I never applied for, and all maxed out in a matter of days. What a deal, what a deal, I ended up getting all the bills and the identity thief got all the goods.

But at least I could have some faith that the US credit system would work as I was foolishly thrilled my credit rating was thrashed. Meaning the identity theft could get no more credit in my name. But no no no, there are many companies who don't bother to pay credit rating agency fees, and assume if someone granted me credit before, they could safely do the same. As I begged US credit rating agencies not to allow me or anyone else to apply for credit in my name as I had the weekly thrill of discovering new maxed out credit cards in my name.

To make a long story short, it took me 3.5 years to clean up my credit rating, and when the identity was finally caught, no credit card companies lifted a finger to see the fraud was prosecuted to protect the integrity of the credit card system.
And instead the credit card companies paid up. Because if the credit card companies ever asked the merchant to check if the name and drivers license of the User of the credit card matched up with the name on the credit card. And then went on to the required step further to say if a merchant did not do that simple check, the credit card company would let the merchant eat the fraud.

But no no no, rather than having the first line defense against fraud, instead credit card companies always pay up, because if they don't, merchants will discover, credit cards are not always gooder than gold. And even worse, start questioning why they should be paying 3% plus on every transaction.

As a result, identity theft rolls merrily along. I hope it never happens to you, as almost nothing I can do can prevent from happening to me again, but there is nothing more disillusioning in calling the cops and finding out you would be better off in calling a hippie.

 

[IronWing]

Can't say I'd blame some stores for doing this. I've noticed more and more customers using CC and debit cards for $2-$3 purchases at convenience stores.

 

[RossMAN]

http://slickdeals.net/f/5822408-Credit-Card-Additional-Surcharge-Fees-to-begin-Jan-27th

 

[tboo]

Wow, times are great. My health insurance went up, the take-home in my paychecks went down, gas has been over $3 a gallon now for quite some time and now I might get hit for using my credit card. Sweet!

 

[dud]

http://slickdeals.net/f/5822408-Credit-Card-Additional-Surcharge-Fees-to-begin-Jan-27th

"Businesses charging this fee must post signs at checkouts."

"For this change, Visa/MC are NOT charging extra fee they are not already charging. So NO additional fee from Visa/MC."


There are other points that I could quote but the Wiki at SD is very informative, thank you. I guess the bottom line is to be aware when you make a purchase. I live in a state that does not allow the surcharge so I will be keeping track of any attempt to add this surcharge ... or surreptitiously increase the price of things I buy.

 

[Murloc]

I don't approve this, I understand that small business owners like this but this acts as a disincentive towards a paper-free society.

 

[Engineer]

I suspect that at some point, the merchants will "experiment" with a small credit card sales fee and once the public has accepted it, they will slowly bump it up to the legal limits. At the same time, there will be no adjustments down (or holding steady) of prices, in essence, a bump of 1 to 3% over and above the regular inflation that stores would normally do.

Again, I'll have no part of it. If you're behind me in line, be prepared to call me a dick as I take my sweet time filling out my check after the order total is complete. I won't even get it out of my pocket until the order is complete. I might even stop my current habit of helping to bag the items so I can not only get out faster but help out everyone behind me also.

Maybe I'll extreme coupon too? Well, that might be too much for even me!

As you can tell, I disapprove of this very much in the light that they are already recovering this charge via built in higher pricing.

 

[amdhunter]

Seriously, if I knew a store was doing this; I'd get a whole bunch of items, wait until it's rung up, then leave everything at the register with a big fuck you as I walk away.

We all know most merchants won't lower cash prices, they'll just double dip off customers.

 

[jersiq]

Seriously, if I knew a store was doing this; I'd get a whole bunch of items, wait until it's rung up, then leave everything at the register with a big fuck you as I walk away.

We all know most merchants won't lower cash prices, they'll just double dip off customers.

This approach does nothing more than give more work to the retail clerks in larger businesses. It's not as if the CEO walks around and asks the clerks what they think are the burning problems of the company.

In small businesses, they are likely to call you a douche, put the stuff back and go about their day.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Can't say I'd blame some stores for doing this. I've noticed more and more customers using CC and debit cards for $2-$3 purchases at convenience stores.

You can easily side step this by charging the fee for purchases under $X or by not allowing cards for purchases under $X amount.

 

[BoomerD]

I've been seeing a LOT of this already. 10 cents per gallon for credit card purchases, 50 cents (or more) for using a credit or debit card at the register...

As for Lemon's comments about identity theft, I'd support the card companies requiring merchants to check the ID of folks using cards. Even though it's supposedly against the terms of service with the card companies currently, I still appreciate it when a merchant asks for ID.

Unfortunately, it's one of those things, like writing a check in the grocery store check-out, that will just piss off those who think their time is valuable...

 

[Imp]

I'm really not feeling too much sympathy for retailers. From what I've heard, they already jack up all their costs to compensate, passing costs onto customers.

A few computer stores I used to frequent had 1-3% discounts if you used cash, but I still chose to use credit -- most of those stores are now dead, and the most successful one still alive got rid of that policy and charges a single price for all.

Then I start thinking about the benefits of allowing credit card transactions to stores. By allowing them, purchases might be quicker, potentially requiring fewer cashiers. And lots of purchases are made on borrowed money (i.e. people have shit in their bank accounts and wouldn't buy anything otherwise). Being borrowed money, the bank fronting the money, network service, and card system all provide a service and take on some risk. After all this, I remember that these same stores bitch about having to pay staff and try their best not to hire full-time staff (benefits...).

 

[BarkingGhostar]

they've been doing it here in Denmark for a while, I'm not opposed to it.

Its nice if that is how credit transactions were introduced in Denmark, but here in the good ole US of A that merchant fee for each transaction should be absorbed into the business operating cost.

Should we now be expected to see all operating cost being passed along explicitly so there isn't any business operating cost?

If a business cannot achieve burying their operating cost in the same price and sustain a business then they are a failure, IMO. Its like the airline industry unwilling to bury all the cost in the plane ticket, but instead have to nickel and dime the passengers in an explicit manner.

I don't want to know what it costs the business for their business. I want a flat price, not "ha ha fuck you" for doing business with them.

 

[lupi]

Kind of an interesting thread title as reports I've seen have 0 major retailers stating they have decided to charge along with this fee only applicable to some cards.

 

[Staples]

And live in the wonderful State of Colorado!

I think that list is incorrect. There are a lot of businesses, many small but plenty of gas stations (many big players) and educational systems (state run) that charge surcharges for CC use. This is in California by the way, where this practice is supposedly banned.

But I must confess, when I see comments like yours, I hope what the poster stands against happens.

 

[QueBert]

Its nice if that is how credit transactions were introduced in Denmark, but here in the good ole US of A that merchant fee for each transaction should be absorbed into the business operating cost.

Should we now be expected to see all operating cost being passed along explicitly so there isn't any business operating cost?

If a business cannot achieve burying their operating cost in the same price and sustain a business then they are a failure, IMO. Its like the airline industry unwilling to bury all the cost in the plane ticket, but instead have to nickel and dime the passengers in an explicit manner.

I don't want to know what it costs the business for their business. I want a flat price, not "ha ha fuck you" for doing business with them.

The credit card fee's need to be implemented, and I don't want them built into the operating costs. The only way they could make this happen would be by raising the prices on everything. But people like me only carry cash so burying costs for credit card fees screws cash only customers.

 

[Newbian]

The credit card fee's need to be implemented, and I don't want them built into the operating costs. The only way they could make this happen would be by raising the prices on everything. But people like me only carry cash so burying costs for credit card fees screws cash only customers.

The problem is they won't lower prices if they do this like many have said so either way you are already paying the increased price.

 

[QueBert]

The problem is they won't lower prices if they do this like many have said so either way you are already paying the increased price.

I worked at multiple stores and the prices reflect a flat 15-20% over the invoice cost. Stores don't jack the price an additional 2-3% to cover CC fees, they take it in the ass as a cost of doing business. With this new law stores can keep from fucking over us cash people, but not have to eat credit card fees. This is a win/win and how it should have always been.

 

[Nintendesert]

I think that list is incorrect. There are a lot of businesses, many small but plenty of gas stations (many big players) and educational systems (state run) that charge surcharges for CC use. This is in California by the way, where this practice is supposedly banned.

But I must confess, when I see comments like yours, I hope what the poster stands against happens.

http://usa.visa.com/personal/using_visa/checkout_fees/index.html




Don't be jelly!


There's a list there with the laws pertaining to California if you're interested.

 

[dawheat]

There are two competing forces here - the rewards that people want from using credit cards (1-5+%) and the merchants who are charged to accept credit cards.

AFAIK - it works mostly like this:

- Credit card bank A provides 2% cash back on everything
- Customer users Card A at Merchant
- Merchant is charged 40 cents and 2.5% by their bank
- Their bank pays Visa 40 cents, pays Credit Card A issuer 2.2% and keeps .3%

Visa gets 40 cents for their network/switching role
Credit Card A issuer gets 2.2% to cover their 'costs' (which include rewards), their risk from fraud, and some profit
Merchant's bank gets .3% for providing the equipment, depositing funds, and some profit

The higher the rewards on the card, the higher the percentage fee - it's by far the driving force to the variable percentage.

 

[Engineer]

I worked at multiple stores and the prices reflect a flat 15-20% over the invoice cost. Stores don't jack the price an additional 2-3% to cover CC fees, they take it in the ass as a cost of doing business. With this new law stores can keep from fucking over us cash people, but not have to eat credit card fees. This is a win/win and how it should have always been.

So what you're saying is that they are currently adding 15-20% and eating the fees and now they will be adding 15-20% and not eating the fees. In other words, your cash price isn't going down and the credit card price is going up, in effect, adding to the store's bottom line.

It's a gamble and they know it. They might lose business or they may not but I can guarantee that they will lose business from me. One small loss of 2 to 3% in sales far outweighs the 1-3% they would pick up in revenues from credit card using customers.

 

[QueBert]

So what you're saying is that they are currently adding 15-20% and eating the fees and now they will be adding 15-20% and not eating the fees. In other words, your cash price isn't going down and the credit card price is going up, in effect, adding to the store's bottom line.

It's a gamble and they know it. They might lose business or they may not but I can guarantee that they will lose business from me. One small loss of 2 to 3% in sales far outweighs the 1-3% they would pick up in revenues from credit card using customers.

What I'm saying is current prices don't factor in CC fee's, many low dollar items we sold were sold at a loss. Stores shouldn't have to mark up prices because some people don't carry cash. I know we had daily customers who came that we lost money on every day because they'd buy $2 worth of shit on a visa.

 

[Imp]

What I'm saying is current prices don't factor in CC fee's, many low dollar items we sold were sold at a loss. Stores shouldn't have to mark up prices because some people don't carry cash. I know we had daily customers who came that we lost money on every day because they'd buy $2 worth of shit on a visa.

How come you didn't completely stop accepting credit cards?