Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Credit Card Checkout Fees start in New Jersey. Coming to a place near you soon?

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


I disagree about choice.

All we have to do is pass another stupid law that says, you Must accept credit cards or have all permits and licenses revoked and face a 50,000 fine or 5yrs in jail. I am sure we could word it better but you get the point.

Once we abandoned Free Market theory we were doomed. This happened before credit cards were even invented.

Now the game is who can get what laws passed first wins.




posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Sadly in my industry that is simply not the case. I would lose thousands a year to no-shows if we did not already have their credit card info. As it is people will often go home and "charge-off" a no show. At that point the money immediately comes back out of my bank account and I have to prove they owed it.

I freaking hate the CC companies. I flat out refuse to take AMEX as it is 1% more in merchant fees than Visa or MC.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Mamatus
 
That sucks for you, as I said it depends on the business. I guess there are more challenges for you in a situation where you're forced to deal with the demon banks by your market.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 

Yes it does suck. I would love nothing more than to not work with the banks. Sadly I am well on my way to making my first million by 50 years old and doing that without playing The Game simply won't happen.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Hey what happen to old cash system and checking accounts?

Start paying with cash or write your checks.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Hey what happen to old cash system and checking accounts?

Start paying with cash or write your checks.
Still works for me, customers even get a nice discount if they pay by cash instead of cheque



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


Exactly!!!!!!!!!! I tell you, as long as you get your money in cash from your bank or a machine that host your bank is not charge, cash is a good way to watch what you spend.



Still I got a nice stack of moldy and dusty checks some where around, time to dust them out and start using them.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
First, it costs a retailer money to process a credit card transaction. Why should I lose money because you are too lazy to go to the bank? Or, indeed, are using a credit card to buyt something you dn't actually need with money you don't actually havxe .... Second, it can take longer to process card transaction than cash. So you're holding people up, making them angry as they wait to pay for their goods with cash in hand whilst you struggle to remember your pin number to pay for a pint of milk .....

I use card (debit or credit) solely for online transactions. I urge everyone else to do likewise and help make the world a less stressful place.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Any retailer who has been in business for a while has already adjusted their sales prices to be in alignment with their tender types and associated processing fees. In other words, they have been passing along these CC processing fees to consumers for quite some time whether you use a credit card or not. It's reflected in the sales price. To add another new fee on top of that would appear to be taking advantage of consumers... Retailers who do this will no longer get my business, whether I'm paying cash or credit.

I'd much rather see them offer discounts for using cash. Incentives tend to work better than penalties in the retail world.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


Actually, this is happening in one of the 40 states that had previously prevented the banksters from charging those fees so the retailers haven't yet raised their prices to reflect the new costs.

I think charging an extra fee on credit card users is more fair. Instead of making everyone pay for the credit card fees, only the credit card users will pay since they are the ones costing the businesses extra money.

If I live within my means and don't rely on a credit card, why should I be forced to subsidize their reckless spending?

IMO, if any company is brave enough to start charging this fee, it means that they are not passing the cost along to the rest of their customers and I think people should SUPPORT those businesses for taking a brave stand against the banksters.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 



Actually, this is happening in one of the 40 states that had previously prevented the banksters from charging those fees so the retailers haven't yet raised their prices to reflect the new costs.


I don't think that's accurate.

The banks have always charged the per-transaction fee to the retailers. This new development is allowing retailers to apply an additional surcharge to consumers...up to the amount of the fee that the banks charge. It is different for each card type. Retailers have always had the ability to adjust their prices up and down, so it's very likely they already have this priced into their operating plans.

Additionally, retailers pay the processing fee because it brings in customers. If they don't want to accept credit cards, no one is requiring them to do so. It really depends on the type and size of business.

You make a good point in that cash-payers should not have to pay the higher prices that occur as a result of credit card processing fees. However, that can be easily passed along as an incentive in the form of a cash discount.

I don't think we'll see too many retailers adopting the surcharge. The ones that do are hoping you're not paying attention.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


The article was pretty clear; this was banned in 40 states until the banksters had their courts overturn the state's laws.


The change in surcharges is the result of a settlement following a 2005 lawsuit between a group of retailers and MasterCard, Visa and other financial institutions.

The retailers claimed those groups conspired to fix the added charges.

The checkout fee is no longer banned in 40 states , but it is still illegal in New York and Connecticut.



I'm still curious how NY and Connecticut got exempted from this ruling.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Sick of it. Can we please just see this country burn already so we can start over. I love this country, don't get me wrong, but because of our Government we are bound to burn. Please just happen now so things can get better.
There's nothing worse about destruction than sitting on the brink of it and suffering. Let it commence, the sooner the SHTF the sooner it can be over....and we can start anew again asap. It's IS going to happen, so get on with it already! Stop putting using painkillers for that headache to mask the symptoms and let it go through it's due course so it can heal!



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:11 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 



The article was pretty clear; this was banned in 40 states until the banksters had their courts overturn the state's laws.


Yes. The article was very clear, but I get the feeling that you didn't read it correctly.


The retailers claimed those groups conspired to fix the added charges.


The "banksters" lost to the retailers on this one.

Why would the banksters have their courts overturn a law that was in their favor to begin with?

You should celebrate that those evil banks lost one this time


And as a result, discerning retailers can choose to screw their customers if they so choose.
edit on 29-1-2013 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I can certainly understand them wanting to do that.
Most retailers lose that 4% on every purchase. Because of the surcharge that some credit card companies charge.
And usually some processors don't pay up right away.

And then you have charge backs and whatnot.
Sometimes taking a card is a losing experience. Especially with Amex if the costumer complains.

So don't complain about the stores charging the extra fee. Complain about the processors being a hassle to deal with.


Amex is the worst for a retailer. You could have video of you and the customers mother hand delivering the package. Amex will still side with the customer and give them their money back after receiving the item!



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Good. I like this ruling. When customers start seeing a 4 percent surcharge on top of the purchase price, hopefully they will think twice about using the credit/debit card a pay in cash instead. In NYC, the corner delis and such are all cash only...and that's a good thing.
edit on 29-1-2013 by Circumstance because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I have been waiting for this to happen. First the citizens are encouraged to utilise their 'plastic' money as a more convenient method of managing their finances, as opposed to cash.

The citizens do as they are told and use their credit cards all the time. Next step - but only when the population are all using their 'plastic' money - do the cabal/illuminati/whatever start to impose charges, taxes, levies it's all the same at the end of the day.

The citizens are all too busy to notice or even care and continue on with using their 'plastic' money. The aim of the cabal/illuminati/whatever is to eradicate cash all together. Should they actually eradicate cash then citizens will be completely controlled by the government.

I have had this conversation with many people and until you bring to their attention - no thought goes into the fact money, cash money, allows us to maintain our freedom - to a certain extent.

I am all for cash. When I see people at the supermarket using the self service registers I feel sorry for them because they have no idea how controlled they are and how they are playing straight into the hands of those who run this planet. Cash only - plastic money is a trap! The fees and charges and levies and taxes and interest - whatever you want to call it - just another method for the psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists to make more money for themselves.

Much Peace...



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


I looked up more info on the court case and it looks like you were right on this one, the banks did "lose" on this one. They settled the issue before it went to court.

The 40 states that are being forced to change their laws didn't ban banks from charging transaction fees, they banned the merchants from passing those fees on to their customers.


What the Credit Card Interchange Settlement Means for Financial Institutions

Key provisions of the proposed settlement include the following:

◦Cash Payment – The card networks and bank participants in the suit will make a $6.05 billion payment to the retail participants.

◦Temporary Interchange Reduction – A 10 basis-point reduction in credit card interchange rates will be implemented for eight months, estimated to equal approximately $1.2 billion. This interchange reduction will be paid out to retail participants in the suit and deducted from the interchange revenue of all institutions. It is estimated that this reduction would result in a 5 percent reduction in interchange revenue for that eight-month period.

◦Surcharging – The card networks and banks will eliminate network prohibitions on retail surcharges for customers who use credit and charge cards at point of sale, subject to a cap and significant consumer disclosures by the retailers. In essence, this permits the merchant to impose a checkout fee at the cash register for the use of the card.

◦Injunctive Relief – The settlement includes provisions removing the ability of all merchants to challenge network rules on point-of-sale issues, including interchange price setting. It also includes merchant concessions that address retailer competitiveness concerns over interchange rules.

Financial Reform Insights

Of course, a "loss" for the banksters is never really a loss; they still get to set their own interchange fees at whatever rate they please, after the 8 month temporary reduction and the retailers were forced to make concessions as well. Add to that that American Express wasn't a defendant in the lawsuit and most retailers would take a hit if they started charging the fees and it looks like a win for the banks all around.


Mr. Charles said he did not expect much of the payment, which includes more than $6 billion in cash and an eight-month reduction in credit card transaction fees worth $1.25 billion, to reach him. And while the settlement is noteworthy because it allows merchants for the first time to charge more when customers pay with a credit card, Mr. Charles said he had no plans to do so. (In the past, credit card companies have not objected to retailers, like gas stations, that give a discount to customers who pay cash.)

But even if he wanted to impose a surcharge, Mr. Charles is one of many merchants who would not be able to, because of a sort of Catch-22 provision in the settlement that makes it effectively impossible for establishments that accept American Express to take advantage of the new rules.

But American Express has its own rule that says merchants must treat every form of electronic payment equally — and that means that to add the surcharge to American Express transactions, the merchant would have to add it to every other card it accepted, including debit cards. But both Visa and MasterCard prohibit surcharges on debit cards — Catch-22! — which effectively means merchants cannot add a surcharge to any transaction.

Some merchants and retail advocates, including four organizations that are plaintiffs in the lawsuit, oppose the deal because, they say, it offers too little and will make it harder to take legal action against credit card companies in the future. The settlement is still subject to court approval and is unlikely to become official before the middle of next year.

“There’s nothing there,” said Mallory Duncan, senior vice president and general counsel at the National Retail Federation, a trade association that was not involved in the lawsuit. He called the cash and fee reductions a “drop in the bucket” compared with the amount banks had overcharged merchants to process credit cards.

NY T Visa and MasterCard Settle Lawsuit, but Merchants Aren’t Celebrating

Even when the banksters "lose" in a court case, they always find a way to come out as winners in the end.


ETA: I still think people should support retailers who do choose to use this option. Anything that sticks it to the banksters and discourages overspending is a good thing IMHO.



edit on 1/29/13 by FortAnthem because:
_________ extra DIV



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Several of the gas stations in my city posts two costs for gas: one for credit and one for cash. I don't have a problem with it. One observation I do have is that most people don't want to go into the gas station which you have to do to pay cash. Really the only people I know of that go in regularly are smokers getting their cigs.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by WildWorld
Gas stations where I live do this. You pay more per gallon if you're using a credit card instead of cash.


Yup, same here. We also have retailers who require at least a 5 dollar purchase to use a credit card. Don't worry all, these fees will disappear as soon as that chip is implanted in your wrist






top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join