I never understand this argument at all. Your shops have computers with label printers, right?
At the Co-op supermarket in our little UK town (population 3000) they’ve even just replaced the shelf price tickets with tiny colour displays.
At the Co-op supermarket in our little UK town (population 3000) they’ve even just replaced the shelf price tickets with tiny colour displays.
And this problem is harder than some might think. I knew someone who lived on a street that was a "dividing line" for this stuff: same zip code, same city, but one side had a 9% sales tax, the other side had around 7%. We tested a lot of online stores and none of them got it right. Including Amazon.
In that same way they know what price to show you.
Did you miss the part about it being calculated in the cart? That’s after you’ve made the decision to purchase, a decision which presumably included the price. I would refuse to give every vendor my address just to see a price.
How does it work now? If you don't give your address, but the price depends on your address, how does the store know how much to charge you? If you don't have to give your ID then surely you just say you're from the lowest tax location?
It only really matters where the goods are delivered.
I don’t want to give my address to see the price. After I’ve decided to buy the thing, I’m okay disclosing who I am. But simply to see the price?
Also, if I’m a retailer and people are giving me their address before I price them, on what planet am I not going to use that to help me price discriminate?
Taxes don't change every street.
Ha. Oh boy. I remember when an engineer at a POS system start-up said something similar. It's like when someone decides they're going to roll their own time zone calculation.
In case you're curious, yes, two people in the same city can be in different counties, different school districts, different water boards, et cetera. Each of those typically has taxing authority. And this is before we get into crap like urban enterprise zones [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:New_Jersey_Urban_Ente...
Also, Apple Park is in Cupertino the city but not the school district.
I've seen cases where a neighborhood was split. Two near-identical houses, but one had less than half the property tax of the one next to it.
I live near a place called Westlake Village that straddles the LA County/Ventura County line. In LA County, Westlake Village is a city. In Ventura County, Westlake Village is a neighborhood within Thousand Oaks, and it has a different tax rate. But both mailing addresses use Westlake Village as the city.
Similarly, I have friends that live in Newbury Park, and that's what is on his mailing address. But Newbury Park is just a neighborhood within Thousand Oaks.
The location detectors are notoriously bad. I'm either placed in some town in Washington (multiple states from me) or somewhere else that does have different local tax than my part of my state.
It also doesn't work for online sales, where the final price can depend on the final destination of the goods or service. e.g. the taxes cannot be displayed until you've been given a street level address.
For me for example even my zip code spans 3 different cities with different tax codes, my street is literally one block from a different city in one direction, and about 5 blocks to another. \o/
They really shouldn't be advertising false claims in the first place.
>It also doesn't work for online sales, where the final price can depend on the final destination of the goods or service. e.g. the taxes cannot be displayed until you've been given a street level address.
That one has an easy solution: Just ask for the destination.
So basically what you’re suggesting is banning any ads (besides billboards etc.) from advertising any prices? How does that benefit consumers at all?
Just to be clear, you're suggesting that all pricing be removed from all advertising nationwide. This would clearly be to the detriment of the consumer.
> That one has an easy solution: Just ask for the destination.
Again, this is to the customer's detriment. They have to provide their personal information just to see the price of any item on any website they visit? And that's somehow worse than having to mentally add a percentage to any price they see until checkout? You must be kidding.
If you have a practical alternative that could somehow allow for advertising with prices that include tax, I'd love to hear it. (Just to make sure we're on the same page ahead of time: amending the Constitution to strike the Tenth Amendment so that the Federal Government can prevent states from levying their own taxes is not "practical".)
Localized advertising as you put it, with included tax info, cannot work for: TV, radio, billboards, internet advertising, and is not useful to consumers for seat advertising, bus stops, etc.
Circulars only work because they can be printed in large numbers and delivered cheaply because they are delivered to every house in a region. Except delivery regions are by zip code, not by city or municipality - my zip code has three cities in it. As I have said elsewhere I am around 10 houses from a different city, so postal delivery for circulars that includes the prices is out unless you include multiple prices, but that's still kind of busted because if I get a circular I might stop at the store in a different city along my commute.
So now if I see a "full price" from X different ads, which "full price" is correct for where I would be shopping? Hence what matters in this environment is that all advertisers are providing a complete price where the only difference is the tax.
If the tax people were paying was transparent it would help people to comparison shop where they paid lower prices. I really see it as win-win.
And even if there was a carve-out for non-location-specific advertising, at a bare minimum brick and mortar stores (and restaurants) should display the prices they actually expect you to pay.
They aren't false advertising, they say "$X + tax and fees", this law is about removing the "and fees" bs where the seller is actually charging more than the advertised price but pretending it's a nebulous fee they didn't set.
I also think you may not be understand the degree of BS. My partner and I were recently buying a new car, and not one car dealership was advertising a true price for their cars. Multiple dealers had something that they literally stated was a "market price adjustment fee", that was not given until you were in the process of purchasing the car. These "fees" were 5-10 thousand dollars on a 30k car.
> That one has an easy solution: just ask for the destination.
So you would be ok if the first step in shopping online is giving the site your street address? you're saying that you could not price compare online without first providing your address to every company you were looking at.
I'm assuming you aren't in the US, so you aren't familiar with how its governance works. Every state, county, and incorporated city can have its own sales and service taxes. It doesn't matter if you think that's a questionable setup - the US constitution guarantees that right at at least the state level, and most states have similar laws guaranteeing some amount of that power to county and city governments, so it is literally impossible to remove this structure. So this issue is how do you make this law work, given the constraints of how the US government is constructed. "Solutions" that require any kind of unification of governance are almost certainly unconstitutional (again this separation of governance is a part of the US bill of rights).
If we locate the same product on the Amazon US site, it's $499.99 before tax. Amazon has two choices: show their price before tax or require shipping information from the user to see a price at all. (An estimated geolocation is not precise enough to determine a price.) For most consumers, I suspect seeing a pre-tax price upfront is better than having to provide personal information to see a price at all.
That explains online sales, but let's address brick and mortar retail. Imagine you go to Best Buy to comparison shop against Amazon and the price says $550 including tax. Is tax on this item in this location 10%? Or is it 5% but Best Buy's base price is higher than MSRP? It's up to me to find out the local tax rate and do the math. Let's say they agree to price-match Amazon; the clerk will need a function on the register to input a pre-tax price to facilitate this.
So, given this complexity and disparity, US manufacturers list MSRP without tax. Retailers display pre-tax prices for marketing and competitive reasons, generally never exceeding MSRP. Customers have come to expect this nationwide, so changing now would be challenging. (There are other good reasons to stick with pre-tax, too. In grocery stores, for example, pre-tax prices are very useful for SNAP beneficiaries.)
Do I think it would be useful to display tax calculations on signage in-store? Absolutely, and for some goods in some states, they do. But without laws or customer demand, retailers have no incentive to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage.
2. Online sales you won't even be able to calculate it until the customer puts in their shipping information. And no, they can't figure that out beforehand as there are a myriad of reasons why where their IP is does not mean where it's being shipped to, which is where the taxes need to be calculated.
Like, how quickly?
<1 day? otherwise it shouldnt be a problem
It sounds like your legislature spend all their time setting taxes?