3 ms·
Not a Californian, but which bill number is it? SB 1524 seems to do the opposite: service fees are allowed (terrible, but a separate issue), and non-tax fees ha
by hn_acker 2y ago
Not a Californian, but which bill number is it? SB 1524 seems to do the opposite: service fees are allowed (terrible, but a separate issue), and non-tax fees have to be rolled into menu prices [1].
[1] https://sf.eater.com/2024/7/1/24189966/california-restaurant-service-fees-sb-1524-law https://sf.eater.com/2024/7/1/24189966/california-restaurant...
- lotsofpulp 2y agoYour link says SB1524 does exactly what I wrote in my post. SB478 banned junk fees, including at restaurants, in Oct 2023, and then SB1524 a week ago allowed restaurants to charge junk fees. > SB 1524 was a last-minute bid by lawmakers to extract restaurants from the junk fee ban known as Senate Bill 478, which Newsom approved in October 2023. There is no reason that a restaurant menu should have a mandatory charge on everything shown separately from the prices for the food, other than for restaurants to be able to make prices seem lower than they are.
- hn_acker 2y agoOops, you're completely right. I retract my previous comment. I not only copied the wrong article (got the "rolling" part from https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-charge-service-fees-an-emergency-measure-passes-unanimously https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-ch...) but also misidentified which bill would have required rolling.