11 ms·

The USA really needs better consumer protection laws. In my country that would clearly be an illegal bundled sale and illegal bait and switch. If you advertise

The USA really needs better consumer protection laws. In my country that would clearly be an illegal bundled sale and illegal bait and switch. If you advertise product A for X amount, then a customer with X amount in their pocket should be allowed to walk out with product A, any deviation from that should be illegal. (slightly off topic, but in my country consumer laws also mandate that sticker and advertised prices must be the final price including all taxes. The standard USA practice of stickers/adverts with pre-tax price is also absurdly anti-consumer).

nervousvarun 4y ago
Completely agree. A related question would be how does lobbying work in your country?
bushbaba 4y ago
The practice of not including sales taxes allows the government to raise sales tax without it impacting the inflation charts, and citizens recognizing the full impact to their wallet. Government gets more money this way
- niek_pas 4y ago
  Why, then, do most US states have such laughably low sales tax rates, compared to e.g. the EU?
  - dboreham 4y ago
    Because most US states also have income tax.
    - sergiosgc 4y ago
      That's not it. EU countries have income tax.
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      As does the EU. So that doesn't explain it.
  - mysterydip 4y ago
    You're trading programs for taxes. All those free benefits of society have to get money from somewhere.
    - acdha 4y ago
      It’s more that we shift where things are taxed (lower sales taxes are made up for with higher property taxes, etc.). Americans pay similar amounts to Europeans when you look at taxes + health insurance but we get less because of politically-mandated inefficiency.
      - junofan 4y ago
        Source for similar amounts? Median disposable income is way higher in the US.
        acdha 4y ago
        It depends on what you’re measuring and especially what income levels but https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-low-tax-america-why-americans-arent-getting-their-moneys-worth/274945/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myt... gives you the general idea of what to look for. In general, Americans pay less in total taxes but we give that back with much greater expenses for things like healthcare & drug costs, retirement, education, etc. At the top end that works out in your favor but there’s no equivalent for things like our rates of medical bankruptcy for everyone below the highest income levels.
    - weberer 4y ago
      But the USA is #10 in the world in welfare spending per capita. Even beating out a few countries commonly called "welfare states" like the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_welfare_spending#Per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_we...
  - MichaelApproved 4y ago
    I don’t agree with the person you replied to but the answer to your question is: Because the US collects taxes very differently, so you can never make a fair comparison between identical tax categories. Just look at the gasoline tax differences between the two. The core purpose of that tax and what it’s used to fund varies dramatically between the two regions. So, naturally the amount being taxed would be different. Also, The US govt tends to have taxes below the rates needed to operate (US has a higher deficit), so the taxes will more likely be lower by comparison.
    - b112 4y ago
      And a side note, as many EU residents constantly remind us in North America. We drive greater distances here. More rural miles. More highway miles. Rural driving (constant 50mph with no stop and start of lights for an hour or more), is far less damaging to roads than start and stop traffic. Interstate miles are the same concept. Beyond that, expanding and building roads, is cheaper in rural areas. So there may actually be more gas tax collected per repair cost, even with the rate lower in the US. Canada has higher gas tax than the US, but lower than the EU. But we also have cold weather everywhere, with frost and ice destroying roads. So on average, we need more than the US, which only has a few northern/cold states.
  - treis 4y ago
    The EU doesn't have a sales tax. They have a VAT which is a tax on net income not sales.
    - tzs 4y ago
      From the point of view of the consumer what's the difference? An item that is listed for price P online in the US costs a US buyer P x (1 + s) where s is the sales tax rate and costs an EU buyer P x (1 + v) where v is the VAT rate. As far as I can see the differences are in what happens on the retailer's supply side. In the US generally there won't be sales tax on the supplier's sale of goods to the retailer. In the EU there might be VAT on those, but the retailer might get to deduct the VAT they pay when they are remitting the VAT they collect. The net result in both systems is that the consumer pays all of the sales tax or VAT. In the US system the government doesn't see any of that until the final sale to the consumer. In the EU, entities up the supply chain pay part of it but get it back later via deductions so in effect VAT for those entities is a loan to the government which the government pays back from the VAT consumers pay.
      - treis 4y ago
        For the consumer not much difference. For comparing tax levels it makes a big difference. VAT is a tax on all the steps in the manufacturing & sales process. Sales tax is a tax on the last step alone.
kube-system 4y ago
The US has antitrust law prohibiting bundling as well.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
briffle 4y ago
I live in one of the few states in the US with no sales taxes. It boggles my mind when I go to a store in another state, and buy a $0.99 soda, and the total comes to $1.07. I have also never understood why the price isn't including the tax.
- CameronNemo 4y ago
  The sales tax rate can change (sometimes from city to city). It is easier to keep track at the register than it is to keep track in the aisles. That's my best guess.
  - jen20 4y ago
    I've always thought that it's probably done to engender anger at the notion of sales taxes by making the difference much clearer than it is in other places where the prices are typically bundled, and to display a lower price than the consumer is expected to pay. Not displaying the taxes is infuriating when visiting other places, since unless you look up all of the applicable taxes you're effectively just guessing at the cost of anything.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      I think originally there may have been some "grumble why do we have to charge" but I feel much of it now is big stores wanting to advertise one price for the whole country as best they can - and "tax licensing and dock fees" is a way to get around the varying prices.
  - yardie 4y ago
    The sales price can change at each store location. It would be even easier to put the full price on the item in the aisle. Stores now know their inventory and track it by the minute.
- tux1968 4y ago
  We had taxes bundled in the price for years in Canada. And it was changed to being separate and added on at the point of sale. The rationale given at the time, was that people should know the actual price of the things they're buying, and how much extra they're paying to support government. Essentially, the argument is that the cost of government shouldn't be invisible.
jsmith45 4y ago
Sales tax in the US is not a Value Added Tax, so putting just the post tax price on the sticker is not actually enough, the sticker would need the pre-tax price too, as some purchases can be exempt from sales tax. Most VAT based countries have a single VAT rate for the whole country (or possible a country-wide set of rates for different types of products). The United States is not like that. Even if we consider an individual state as the equivalent to Country, each state does not have one consistent sales tax rate. Typically the state will have one rate, the county can have its own rate, the city its own rate, and potentially even special districts with their own sales tax rates. That complicates things a lot. For example, if a law required the shown prices to include tax, it would mean that an online website cannot show you the price until you have entered your exact street address. Most people don't want to tell the website where they live just to find out a price that may not be any good. The variable tax rate means that if the law applied to advertised prices shown on say TV, it would not be possible to have nationwide advertisements that show a price, or even statewide advertisements, or in some cases not even city-wide advertisements. (Unless they set a post-tax price based on what they can sustain with the highest tax rate, which means charging people in lower tax areas a higher price than they would otherwise have charged, just to be able to mention a price at all on TV). Unless the law allowed "between $x and $y depending on your local tax rate" (where X and Y are based on the lowest and highest tax rate for the advertising area). Most people who want such post tax pricing laws would not be terribly happy with a law that allowed advertising a range like that.
- cowpig 4y ago
  > Unless the law allowed "between $x and $y depending on your local tax rate" (where X and Y are based on the lowest and highest tax rate for the advertising area). What's wrong with this solution? Getting rid of sales tax would be the best solution imo but complicated
  - b112 4y ago
    Very complicated. Getting rid of consumption tax, means income tax is the sole source for citizen taxation. To replace consumption tax, which ensures those with large savings, yet no income, still get taxed as they spend, you'd have to somehow have full disclosure of all assets, and tax that, along with all the privacy implications. And just imagine all the work, with every citizen's assets being examined yearly. Of course, there are other options, but not many which replace consumption tax.
cal5k 4y ago
Is the cost of living in your country, on average, higher or lower than in the United States? As far as I can tell there are a vanishingly small number of problems where "new laws" are the optimal answer. Increased regulatory oversight generally leads to ossified markets with higher costs. Many of the most reviled monopolies throughout American history got there in no small measure because of government protection in the form of "regulation". In this case, there are multiple car manufacturers available to Americans from around the world - if this makes GM vehicles more expensive or causes a consumer backlash that damages sales, GM will change their behaviour. That seems like a more responsive mechanism than piling on new regulation to dictate which types of fees are okay and which aren't.
- cowpig 4y ago
  > Many of the most reviled monopolies throughout American history got there in no small measure because of government protection in the form of "regulation". This is simply not true. The common reviled monopoly strategies include price fixing, collusion, natural monopolies, markets with high barriers to entry, network effects, and others in addition to regulatory capture. Regulations that contribute to monopolistic tendencies are "vanishingly small" in number, you just hear about them a lot because people don't like them. > if this makes GM vehicles more expensive or causes a consumer backlash that damages sales, GM will change their behaviour. It may be time to walk through history and see all the dark patterns that were solved by regulation. Before the EPA, it was common for manufacturing companies to dump industrial waste directly into rivers, for example. Consumers only have so much energy for backlash, and your theoretical system requires everyone to have an encyclopedic memory of all the shitty things that every company does and weigh all of that in their minds when making consumer choices. It's impractical and impossible. Regulatory agencies are a much better system and that's why every modern economy depends on them.
  - sirspacey 4y ago
    I’d add that recent deregulation (energy markets) & pre-regulation (like cryptocurrency) show that companies are remarkably fast & consistent in enacting proven, exploitive models. The idea that regulation is a burden on society is fanciful. What is burdensome is regulations that cannot be readily adapted. Unfortunately, popular myths like “regulation bad” is part of the reason regulators stay with policies they would much rather propose updating. Veteran regulators are quite eager to improve their frameworks. It is “politics” that prevents their evolution.
qeternity 4y ago
How on earth is this related to consumer protection? It's not as if they are forcing this retroactively. They're just increasing the price for a car by $1500 and including more functionality. They are a free enterprise that can offer whichever products at whatever prices they want. And consumers are free to vote with their wallets.
- delecti 4y ago
  > They're just increasing the price for a car by $1500 and including more functionality From TFA, they're advertising the vehicle's MSRP without the extra $1500 cost, and that extra $1500 is not optional when you go to actually buy one.
  - qeternity 4y ago
    No from TFA they’re breaking it out as a separate line item. We can debate that all you like, but it’s not as if they’re just lying about the cost, or charging people more after the fact. When you go to sign the dotted line, the price includes this charge. If you don’t like it, don’t sign.
- pibechorro 4y ago
  Its frightening how many people think we need the government to regulate the most minute details of everything. Vote with your dollar, period, that is the only way the right feedback gets to the right issues.
  - kalleboo 4y ago
    "The price shown should be the price paid" is not a "minute detail" it's like the fundamental basis of advertising. What's frightening is how many people believe in the myth of the free market of rational consumers.
  - gangstead 4y ago
    It's hard to vote with your dollar if the company can lie to you about the price. Sure in this case you'll find out the actual cost eventually but at a point where changing your vote is much harder (maybe a deposit has already been collected, credit check run, the other car you were considering has been sold etc)
JustSomeNobody 4y ago
> The USA really needs better consumer protection laws. I feel like we used to. Everything is so overtly nickle and dime the working class now.
tzs 4y ago
> (slightly off topic, but in my country consumer laws also mandate that sticker and advertised prices must be the final price including all taxes. The standard USA practice of stickers/adverts with pre-tax price is also absurdly anti-consumer). How does that work when advertising in media that is available in more than one country, such as broadcasts of major international sporting events?
mohaine 4y ago
While I agree this would be ideal, actual prices on cars actually wouldn't be possible in the US. For many (most?) states, for cars/trucks, you pay sales tax based on where you LIVE not where you purchased the car so the price would be different per buyer. Also, for most cars, paying sticker would be a rip off anyway. Unless there is a shortage going on, no one expects to pay sticker price.
solarkraft 4y ago
Where do you live and is Apple's bundling of iCloud (you can only use some major features like the App Store when signed in & you can't choose other providers to fullfil the same role) illegal there too?
- Macha 4y ago
  They haven't specifally addressed App Store + iCloud bundling... Because they have been specifically targeting iPhone + App Store bundling: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996248/apple-sideloading-apps-store-third-party-eu-dma-requirement https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996248/apple-sideloadin...

nervousvarun 4y ago

Completely agree. A related question would be how does lobbying work in your country?

bushbaba 4y ago

The practice of not including sales taxes allows the government to raise sales tax without it impacting the inflation charts, and citizens recognizing the full impact to their wallet. Government gets more money this way

niek_pas 4y ago
Why, then, do most US states have such laughably low sales tax rates, compared to e.g. the EU?
- dboreham 4y ago
  Because most US states also have income tax.
  - sergiosgc 4y ago
    That's not it. EU countries have income tax.
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    As does the EU. So that doesn't explain it.
- mysterydip 4y ago
  You're trading programs for taxes. All those free benefits of society have to get money from somewhere.
  - acdha 4y ago
    It’s more that we shift where things are taxed (lower sales taxes are made up for with higher property taxes, etc.). Americans pay similar amounts to Europeans when you look at taxes + health insurance but we get less because of politically-mandated inefficiency.
    - junofan 4y ago
      Source for similar amounts? Median disposable income is way higher in the US.
      - acdha 4y ago
        It depends on what you’re measuring and especially what income levels but https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-low-tax-america-why-americans-arent-getting-their-moneys-worth/274945/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myt... gives you the general idea of what to look for. In general, Americans pay less in total taxes but we give that back with much greater expenses for things like healthcare & drug costs, retirement, education, etc. At the top end that works out in your favor but there’s no equivalent for things like our rates of medical bankruptcy for everyone below the highest income levels.
  - weberer 4y ago
    But the USA is #10 in the world in welfare spending per capita. Even beating out a few countries commonly called "welfare states" like the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_welfare_spending#Per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_we...
- MichaelApproved 4y ago
  I don’t agree with the person you replied to but the answer to your question is: Because the US collects taxes very differently, so you can never make a fair comparison between identical tax categories. Just look at the gasoline tax differences between the two. The core purpose of that tax and what it’s used to fund varies dramatically between the two regions. So, naturally the amount being taxed would be different. Also, The US govt tends to have taxes below the rates needed to operate (US has a higher deficit), so the taxes will more likely be lower by comparison.
  - b112 4y ago
    And a side note, as many EU residents constantly remind us in North America. We drive greater distances here. More rural miles. More highway miles. Rural driving (constant 50mph with no stop and start of lights for an hour or more), is far less damaging to roads than start and stop traffic. Interstate miles are the same concept. Beyond that, expanding and building roads, is cheaper in rural areas. So there may actually be more gas tax collected per repair cost, even with the rate lower in the US. Canada has higher gas tax than the US, but lower than the EU. But we also have cold weather everywhere, with frost and ice destroying roads. So on average, we need more than the US, which only has a few northern/cold states.
- treis 4y ago
  The EU doesn't have a sales tax. They have a VAT which is a tax on net income not sales.
  - tzs 4y ago
    From the point of view of the consumer what's the difference? An item that is listed for price P online in the US costs a US buyer P x (1 + s) where s is the sales tax rate and costs an EU buyer P x (1 + v) where v is the VAT rate. As far as I can see the differences are in what happens on the retailer's supply side. In the US generally there won't be sales tax on the supplier's sale of goods to the retailer. In the EU there might be VAT on those, but the retailer might get to deduct the VAT they pay when they are remitting the VAT they collect. The net result in both systems is that the consumer pays all of the sales tax or VAT. In the US system the government doesn't see any of that until the final sale to the consumer. In the EU, entities up the supply chain pay part of it but get it back later via deductions so in effect VAT for those entities is a loan to the government which the government pays back from the VAT consumers pay.
    - treis 4y ago
      For the consumer not much difference. For comparing tax levels it makes a big difference. VAT is a tax on all the steps in the manufacturing & sales process. Sales tax is a tax on the last step alone.

kube-system 4y ago

The US has antitrust law prohibiting bundling as well.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

briffle 4y ago

I live in one of the few states in the US with no sales taxes. It boggles my mind when I go to a store in another state, and buy a $0.99 soda, and the total comes to $1.07. I have also never understood why the price isn't including the tax.

CameronNemo 4y ago
The sales tax rate can change (sometimes from city to city). It is easier to keep track at the register than it is to keep track in the aisles. That's my best guess.
- jen20 4y ago
  I've always thought that it's probably done to engender anger at the notion of sales taxes by making the difference much clearer than it is in other places where the prices are typically bundled, and to display a lower price than the consumer is expected to pay. Not displaying the taxes is infuriating when visiting other places, since unless you look up all of the applicable taxes you're effectively just guessing at the cost of anything.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    I think originally there may have been some "grumble why do we have to charge" but I feel much of it now is big stores wanting to advertise one price for the whole country as best they can - and "tax licensing and dock fees" is a way to get around the varying prices.
- yardie 4y ago
  The sales price can change at each store location. It would be even easier to put the full price on the item in the aisle. Stores now know their inventory and track it by the minute.
tux1968 4y ago
We had taxes bundled in the price for years in Canada. And it was changed to being separate and added on at the point of sale. The rationale given at the time, was that people should know the actual price of the things they're buying, and how much extra they're paying to support government. Essentially, the argument is that the cost of government shouldn't be invisible.

jsmith45 4y ago

Sales tax in the US is not a Value Added Tax, so putting just the post tax price on the sticker is not actually enough, the sticker would need the pre-tax price too, as some purchases can be exempt from sales tax. Most VAT based countries have a single VAT rate for the whole country (or possible a country-wide set of rates for different types of products). The United States is not like that. Even if we consider an individual state as the equivalent to Country, each state does not have one consistent sales tax rate. Typically the state will have one rate, the county can have its own rate, the city its own rate, and potentially even special districts with their own sales tax rates. That complicates things a lot. For example, if a law required the shown prices to include tax, it would mean that an online website cannot show you the price until you have entered your exact street address. Most people don't want to tell the website where they live just to find out a price that may not be any good. The variable tax rate means that if the law applied to advertised prices shown on say TV, it would not be possible to have nationwide advertisements that show a price, or even statewide advertisements, or in some cases not even city-wide advertisements. (Unless they set a post-tax price based on what they can sustain with the highest tax rate, which means charging people in lower tax areas a higher price than they would otherwise have charged, just to be able to mention a price at all on TV). Unless the law allowed "between $x and $y depending on your local tax rate" (where X and Y are based on the lowest and highest tax rate for the advertising area). Most people who want such post tax pricing laws would not be terribly happy with a law that allowed advertising a range like that.

cowpig 4y ago
> Unless the law allowed "between $x and $y depending on your local tax rate" (where X and Y are based on the lowest and highest tax rate for the advertising area). What's wrong with this solution? Getting rid of sales tax would be the best solution imo but complicated
- b112 4y ago
  Very complicated. Getting rid of consumption tax, means income tax is the sole source for citizen taxation. To replace consumption tax, which ensures those with large savings, yet no income, still get taxed as they spend, you'd have to somehow have full disclosure of all assets, and tax that, along with all the privacy implications. And just imagine all the work, with every citizen's assets being examined yearly. Of course, there are other options, but not many which replace consumption tax.

cal5k 4y ago

Is the cost of living in your country, on average, higher or lower than in the United States? As far as I can tell there are a vanishingly small number of problems where "new laws" are the optimal answer. Increased regulatory oversight generally leads to ossified markets with higher costs. Many of the most reviled monopolies throughout American history got there in no small measure because of government protection in the form of "regulation". In this case, there are multiple car manufacturers available to Americans from around the world - if this makes GM vehicles more expensive or causes a consumer backlash that damages sales, GM will change their behaviour. That seems like a more responsive mechanism than piling on new regulation to dictate which types of fees are okay and which aren't.

cowpig 4y ago
> Many of the most reviled monopolies throughout American history got there in no small measure because of government protection in the form of "regulation". This is simply not true. The common reviled monopoly strategies include price fixing, collusion, natural monopolies, markets with high barriers to entry, network effects, and others in addition to regulatory capture. Regulations that contribute to monopolistic tendencies are "vanishingly small" in number, you just hear about them a lot because people don't like them. > if this makes GM vehicles more expensive or causes a consumer backlash that damages sales, GM will change their behaviour. It may be time to walk through history and see all the dark patterns that were solved by regulation. Before the EPA, it was common for manufacturing companies to dump industrial waste directly into rivers, for example. Consumers only have so much energy for backlash, and your theoretical system requires everyone to have an encyclopedic memory of all the shitty things that every company does and weigh all of that in their minds when making consumer choices. It's impractical and impossible. Regulatory agencies are a much better system and that's why every modern economy depends on them.
- sirspacey 4y ago
  I’d add that recent deregulation (energy markets) & pre-regulation (like cryptocurrency) show that companies are remarkably fast & consistent in enacting proven, exploitive models. The idea that regulation is a burden on society is fanciful. What is burdensome is regulations that cannot be readily adapted. Unfortunately, popular myths like “regulation bad” is part of the reason regulators stay with policies they would much rather propose updating. Veteran regulators are quite eager to improve their frameworks. It is “politics” that prevents their evolution.

qeternity 4y ago

How on earth is this related to consumer protection? It's not as if they are forcing this retroactively. They're just increasing the price for a car by $1500 and including more functionality. They are a free enterprise that can offer whichever products at whatever prices they want. And consumers are free to vote with their wallets.

delecti 4y ago
> They're just increasing the price for a car by $1500 and including more functionality From TFA, they're advertising the vehicle's MSRP without the extra $1500 cost, and that extra $1500 is not optional when you go to actually buy one.
- qeternity 4y ago
  No from TFA they’re breaking it out as a separate line item. We can debate that all you like, but it’s not as if they’re just lying about the cost, or charging people more after the fact. When you go to sign the dotted line, the price includes this charge. If you don’t like it, don’t sign.
pibechorro 4y ago
Its frightening how many people think we need the government to regulate the most minute details of everything. Vote with your dollar, period, that is the only way the right feedback gets to the right issues.
- kalleboo 4y ago
  "The price shown should be the price paid" is not a "minute detail" it's like the fundamental basis of advertising. What's frightening is how many people believe in the myth of the free market of rational consumers.
- gangstead 4y ago
  It's hard to vote with your dollar if the company can lie to you about the price. Sure in this case you'll find out the actual cost eventually but at a point where changing your vote is much harder (maybe a deposit has already been collected, credit check run, the other car you were considering has been sold etc)

JustSomeNobody 4y ago

> The USA really needs better consumer protection laws. I feel like we used to. Everything is so overtly nickle and dime the working class now.

tzs 4y ago

> (slightly off topic, but in my country consumer laws also mandate that sticker and advertised prices must be the final price including all taxes. The standard USA practice of stickers/adverts with pre-tax price is also absurdly anti-consumer). How does that work when advertising in media that is available in more than one country, such as broadcasts of major international sporting events?

mohaine 4y ago

While I agree this would be ideal, actual prices on cars actually wouldn't be possible in the US. For many (most?) states, for cars/trucks, you pay sales tax based on where you LIVE not where you purchased the car so the price would be different per buyer. Also, for most cars, paying sticker would be a rip off anyway. Unless there is a shortage going on, no one expects to pay sticker price.

solarkraft 4y ago

Where do you live and is Apple's bundling of iCloud (you can only use some major features like the App Store when signed in & you can't choose other providers to fullfil the same role) illegal there too?

Macha 4y ago
They haven't specifally addressed App Store + iCloud bundling... Because they have been specifically targeting iPhone + App Store bundling: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996248/apple-sideloading-apps-store-third-party-eu-dma-requirement https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22996248/apple-sideloadin...