Finance: Credit Card Surcharge Guidance Set To Start In New York
— By Damon Fletcher | February 6, 2024
Rochester, N.Y. (WROC) — There is a new guidance for New York State businesses when charging an additional fee to customers paying with a credit card, starting on February 11.
This new guidance comes after Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law Assembly Bill 2672 in December, which imposes disclosure requirements with respect to credit card surcharges for transactions with New York customers.
“Transparency is crucial in building trust between businesses and communities and now patrons will be empowered to budget accordingly,” Governor Kathy Hochul said.
The New York Department of State also provided a list of dos and don’ts:
DO:
The business lists the higher credit card price next to a lower cash price.
The business lists the credit card price for items and services, then lets customers know they will receive a discount for using cash.
The business changes all prices to the credit card price.
DON’T:
The business posts a sign on the door and at the register stating an additional 3.9 percent surcharge will apply for credit card purchases.
“This business has a 4 percent cash discount incentive built into all pricing. Any purchases made with a credit or debit card will not receive the cash discount and an adjustment in cost will be displayed on your receipt.”
A convenience fee, service fee, administration fee, non-cash adjustment, technology fee, processing fee, etc., is charged to credit card users and added as a separate line item on a customer receipt.
The price tag of an item shows “$10.00, + 4 percent if paying with a credit card.”
Vendors will be required to post the highest price that consumers might pay when using a credit card, along with the price that is offered when the customer uses another payment method such as cash, check, or debit card.
Any surcharge must be no more than the amount charged to the business by its credit card provider.
Failure to do so can lead to a $500 penalty after every violation.
Local businesses continue to take and utilize credit card usage. Some businesses that spoke to News 8 that their customers’ credit card usage is about 90%.
For Three Heads Brewing’s taproom, that figure amounts to about 70%, but the president of the company, Daniel Nothnagle, says that credit card surcharges still cost the brewery $1,500 – $2,000 a month.
“We’ve always looked it as a necessary evil, we all like using credit cards, I use them myself for all my purchases, so no one wants to see extra fees, so we’ve always rolled it into the cost of products at the bar, we can afford to cover the cost of the surcharge,” he said.
He added a bulk of that surcharge is businesses footing the bill for credit card rewards programs.
0 notes
Do you use child slaves like Nestlé?
No. We are different from Nestle in a number of ways:
Nestle does not give its profit to charity. Nestle gives its profit to shareholders, who are almost all already wealthy, which is weird, because why do THEY need money?
Nestle's coffee sucks.
Our coffee beans come from small farmers' collectives who we pay directly. It's perfectly roasted, comes in compostable packaging, is fresher than any coffee you can buy in a grocery store, and tastes fucking amazing.
596 notes
·
View notes
I'm still thinking about it (this poll) and I think I've come to the conclusion that while they all have their villains/cases of the week, ultimately Neal Caffrey's cons are about his own self-determination, Michael Westen's are self-preservation, and Nate Ford's are to punish/reward those he deems deserving (which process is in turn also sorta about his self-determination). Which means that
--well for one, if they're actually working against each other and not just seeming to for the sake of some terrifying ultimate multi-stage con, something in the world has gone dreadfully wrong. But also--
Nate and Michael could both achieve all their narrative goals without needing to get the metaphorical last word in (though it'd burn them both to hear me say it) but Neal's narrative goals are more about himself and less about any material objective. So maybe Nate gets the guilty party sorted and Michael gets the macguffin, but the episode ends with a nice comedic scan through their apartments to show them arguing family-style with their teams about what side Neal is really really playing, so it still feels in the last seconds of the show like he got one over on everybody, in a purely harmless way. Good for him!
So I did go back and vote for Neal, but also I'm going to be thinking about this a little bit forever.
7 notes
·
View notes
"Yoo Joonghyuk, defend me."
"What?"
I immediately closed my eyes and focused. I had become quite familiar with it after all the practice while sleeping. There was the feeling of my body sinking to the ground and darkness was everywhere.
I felt a shallow sleep and immediately used Omniscient Reader's Viewpoint.
NO HESITATION WHATSOEVER
They're in the middle of nowhere, literally surrounded by potential enemies, and Dokja doesn't even blink before leaving himself completely vulnerable, trusting Joonghyuk to watch over him while he totally zones out.
Talk about relationship growth.
26 notes
·
View notes
catching glimpses of self ship community drama is always like damn. okay. and why on earth do you care. can't you just post about taint and keep it moving or whatever. by attempting to create a 'safe space' for only the most palatable & understandable of individuals, by choosing to drive those who stray from your definition of morality away from your 'safe' community, you push those most vulnerable into dangerous circumstances. communities wherein their weaknesses shall be preyed upon by those you denounce. you play directly into their hands, all for an excuse to pat yourself on the back. thus, i must wonder, what is so safe about this community you've cultivated in the first place? your veneer of acceptance and righteousness makes no room for those stuck in between, nor is there included a moment of good faith or hope for a possibly misguided fellow man. of course, though, it was never you who cared. that was never the point. if your long, elaborate byf was mere virtue signaling, intended to show those who already agree with you that you're one of the good ones, all i ask of you is... did it work? are you as good as you want to be?
2 notes
·
View notes