New York City to to ban deceptive subscription practices(www.theguardian.com)
327 pointsby randycupertino5 hours ago37 comments
  • sxp4 hours ago
    It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print.

    From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I haven't eaten there recently so I can't confirm.

    [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...

    • dghlsakjg4 hours ago
      Fees on one time services are not what this is targeting. This legislation is not meant to address that, and wouldn't apply to that.

      They are going after recurring billing (that's what the headline means by "subscription"). It mentions things like gyms, online subscriptions etc.

      It would be pretty wild if they had managed to get service fees at restaurants when they were not at all targeting service fees, restaurants or one time in person purchases.

      • sxp4 hours ago
        From TFA:

          > Rule from Mamdani administration ... targets ‘junk fees’
  > The city is also targeting so-called “junk fees” that raise the final price of everything from apartments to sporting events, with a proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front”, according to a release shared with the Guardian.
        • ryandrake3 hours ago
          > proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front”

          This is going to be tough to enact, anywhere in the USA, even New York. There is nothing quite as American as "not knowing what you're going to pay for something until you have to pay." Whether it's your doctor bill, restaurant bill with tips and service fees, your hotel stay with a hidden resort fee, or just general purchases where tax is computed at the very end right before you pay... We are culturally so used to this abuse.

          • baq3 hours ago
            You may find some bits of culture are easier to change than others and I wager this one falls squarely in the ‘surprisingly easy’ category.
          • kevin_thibedeau3 hours ago
            FTC has mandated all-in pricing for hotels since last year.
          • nemomarx3 hours ago
            I mean culturally we're used to it, but it seems really easy to test for and therefore fine businesses doing it in NYC? Just go ring up some purchase and see if they add a tax onto the listed price, and if they do report it.
        • socalgal22 hours ago
          The latest one for me is renting a new apartment, getting told it cost $XXXX a month, then being told I'm required to have $XXXXXX amount of renter's insurance at $XXX a month and oh, by the way, click here to use ours.
          • dml2135an hour ago
            A requirement to obtain renter’s insurance is not an example of the type of fees this legislation is targeting.
          • fibonachosan hour ago
            The insurance requirement isn’t uncommon where I am (California). Though I would avoid whatever plan they are pushing. I got mine through my existing insurance provider and it worked out to ~$15 per month IIRC.
          • nxm20 minutes ago
            Renter’s insurance is not a fee.
    • teaearlgraycold4 hours ago
      At least in CA they need to disclose them now. Previously some restaurants would just hit you with a surprise mandatory tip.
      • Rebelgecko4 hours ago
        Usually by the time people are seated and you read the fine print on the back of the menu, inertia has taken over.
        • pkaye3 hours ago
          Some people say they use the fine print as a reminder to cut back on the tips proportionally.
    • wnevets4 hours ago
      > which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print.

      I don't think I go to the same restaurants as everyone else.

      • nkrisc4 hours ago
        I tried searching for what a "lifestyle fee" is and all I could find is references to "living wage fee" which is essentially a forced tip added to the bill.

        A service charge for large groups though is understandable as they typically will require much more attention and work from waitstaff than the typical small dining party.

        • pnw3 hours ago
          Large groups are also the most notorious non-tippers.
      • buzer4 hours ago
        It's unfortunately somewhat common these days and personally I actively avoid any place which does this. At least it's only somewhat common rather than the standard so it's still possible. Couple of examples:

        https://sushiconfidential.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/sc_... "3.5% Living Wage Surcharge added to each bill which allows us to provide the service you have always enjoyed!"

        https://www.pacificcatch.com/menu/ "NorCal - A 3% surcharge (5% in San Francisco) will be added to all Guest checks to help offset the rising cost of wages and benefits. This is not gratuity."

        • patrickmay4 hours ago
          Because increasing prices by that percentage is too hard?
          • LordAtlas3 hours ago
            They're trying their best to make it seem that government policies and regulation compliance costs are responsible, hence the names of these charges.
            • ryandrake3 hours ago
              Yea, it's basically restaurant owners trying to get their customers involved in their political whining.

              Notice how you never see things like "Business License Fee" or "Restaurant Electricity Bill Surcharge" listed out as separate line items on customers' bills. Those are things restaurant owners have to pay, too, so why don't they get their own charges to customers? Why does only "Living Wage" get a line item on the customer's bill?

              • robocat2 hours ago
                > Electricity Bill Surcharge

                "Fuel surcharge" on flights. Which should be illegal: the cost of hedging fuel cost risk should be included in any ticket price.

                A friend said that Uber was charging a fuel surcharge here in New Zealand, but that it wasn't passed on to the driver (who pays for the fuel). If true I would find that interesting.

                • lostloginan hour ago
                  > A friend said that Uber was charging a fuel surcharge here in New Zealand, but that it wasn't passed on to the driver

                  I did a bit of a dive on this and I think it’s not correct. I have a low threshold for hating them, after the reports of how females staffers were treated a few years back, but this new thing seems to be untrue.

                  https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/128042303/uber-introduces-f...

              • baq3 hours ago
                The elephant in the room would be an ‘employee salary surcharge’
              • xp843 hours ago
                Hey now, let's not get carried away, these jackass restaurant owners want to make it clear, the "Living Wage" guilt trip is the tip part, and the fees THEY put on are to pay for "benefits like healthcare" and you're not allowed to consider it part of the tip.

                Nevermind that California doesn't even have a lower "tipped" min wage like some states do, so by supporting tipping, we're just saying that servers simply "deserve" more money for some reason than people who stock shelves or pick orders at Amazon or Walmart.

                • expedition322 hours ago
                  If it is hard to find staff the wages go up. At least that's how it works in my country.

                  Although I will admit service is notoriously bad over here but in honesty that's secretly how we all want it.

          • fhdkweig3 hours ago
            If you want to claim "we have the lowest prices in town" in advertising, you can't increase the "price".
        • quickthrowman2 hours ago
          They need to price it in to the menu.

          I run Union electrical jobs and I don’t list out every fringe benefit they receive on an itemized invoice. It’s $163/hr with everything baked in.

          If restaurants want to pay a living wage, charge more money for food.

    • xp843 hours ago
      Check who Mamdani's friends are to find the likely carveouts - just like Newsom's Panera Carve-Out on our minimum wage law.
  • gumby4 hours ago
    These rules are great but “landmark” seems like puffery, as California has had such rules for quite a while.

    Ironically that has meant it’s hard to unsubscribe from the New York Times except in California.

    • aczerepinski3 hours ago
      I once wrote code that checks location before hiding/showing the cancel button. It’s really absurd that the nice experience exists on all subscription sites by now but you only get to see it if your state demands it.
      • ar_lan2 hours ago
        I have no context of who you are/your position here, but the responses you're getting seem absurd to me.

        I just don't understand people placing the blame on you when it should be on your company. Most people in the world are just trying to keep their job - you did it. It wasn't something illegal, it was something that if you didn't do, you would have risked your job and then someone else would have done it anyway.

        • 59percentmore2 hours ago
          Because the difference between what he's done and, say, the practice of the people who peddled opioids for a paycheck is one of degree, not kind.
          • sillyflukean hour ago
            Obviously the difference of degree on the spectrum between the two in this case does vary greatly, but your comment reminded me of an interview with a journalist who had compiled a collection of interviews with midtier drug dealers in various cartels and one thing that stood out to him was that almost all of them, when asked why they did what they did, would respond by saying that if they didn't someone else would.
          • SecretDreamsan hour ago
            Yeah, but it's multiple orders of magnitude apart.

            Are we also going to start putting LLM engineers to the fire because they're accelerating the enshitification of our world? Probably not.

            • LadyCailin23 minutes ago
              That’s not a good example, since you can argue that LLMs have utility to humanity. Hiding the cancel button has none, except for rent seeking.
        • forgetfreeman2 hours ago
          "I was just following orders" is not, and has never been, a credible defense of unethical behavior.
          • littlecranky672 hours ago
            Unless you were in the US. There it always worked.
        • atonse2 hours ago
          Exactly. Those low quality comments are an example of the sad erosion of quality of comments on HN that I and others have complained about in recent times.
          • ToucanLoucan2 hours ago
            It's perfectly valid in our increasingly enshittified world to be angry with all those responsible for it. As much as you're right to point the finger a the C-suites, ultimately ALL of these user-hostile features, every single one, only exists because devs keep putting fingers to keyboards in exchange for checks.

            Tech workers had a time where unionization and getting a voice in our companies was very much on the table, and the biggest voices among us shouted down the others in the name of rockstar salaries and free beer at the office. The "top contributors" at huge companies were scared shitless that they might have to accept a wage too much like the REST of their software engineer coworkers. The horror.

      • Rebelgecko3 hours ago
        Same with websites like Airbnb. Last I checked, their search results only showed the 'real' prices (eg including fees) for certain states and countries. In some states you have to click into the listing before learning that there's an extra $500 cleaning fee on top of the nightly rate :)
      • Larrikin3 hours ago
        Congrats on using your education to make the world a worse place
        • acdha2 hours ago
          I don’t like it either but blame goes to the top of the org chart. That’s not illegal or, by the standards of the field, flagrantly unethical so it’s a bit extreme to expect someone to resign over.
          • Larrikin29 minutes ago
            You were just following orders, that's a great argument
          • walt_grataan hour ago
            Blame goes to everyone involved. From the decision makers to the implementors
          • dml2135an hour ago
            I don’t know what standards you are referring to, but yea I would call it flagrantly unethical for sure.
      • qmr3 hours ago
        Why would you do something so immoral?
        • jvanderbot2 hours ago
          To get paid, obviously. We're all self interested actors here.
          • ubertaco2 hours ago
            Same reason people lobby for fracking or sell mass surveillance software.
        • nashashmi2 hours ago
          You should ask that question to the workers at palantir
      • IshKebab3 hours ago
        How does it feel to be at the epicentre of arseholery?

        Genuine question. Not sure how I'd feel.

        • mschuster912 hours ago
          At the end, someone will be there desperate enough to follow the boss's whim. Always.

          That is why regulation is so important.

          • LadyCailin20 minutes ago
            We need regulation, yes, but also people who have a sense of goodness. We can’t legislate every aspect of a respectable society.
    • woodruffw2 hours ago
      I think you, as the reader, are expected to mentally append “in NYC” when a link comes from nyc.gov. It seems very silly for a given municipality to need to qualify every sentence on its own website.
      • henryfjordan2 hours ago
        The municipality is already qualifying the sentence! Instead of "NYC announces click-to-cancel law" they qualify it with "landmark".

        I think it's silly for a municipality to lie (by omission?) in their own press announcements.

        • woodruffw2 hours ago
          It’s a landmark change in NYC.

          Again: this is NYC’s official website. It might (as a stretch) be a “lie by omission” on a national newspaper’s website, but this is a website that is solely dedicated to NYC itself.

          • henryfjordan2 hours ago
            Now I'm being super pedantic, but every town can't have the same "landmark" law. What makes a law a "landmark" is that other municipalities look to it for direction.

            In a world where the California law exists, and the New York Times has been used as an example of the success of that law for years already, claiming some sort of moral victory with the "landmark" qualifier is objectively wrong.

            Does any of this matter? No, but I like arguing about it.

            • woodruffw2 hours ago
              If you want to be pedantic, NYC is a different “land” to have a “landmark” for :-)

              (I like arguing too. Nothing wrong with that. I think in this case it suffices that they’re regulations in different states with relatively different political histories, even if the political valence of the two is somewhat similar. I would agree if this was a “landmark” change for Irvine, CA.)

    • dang26 minutes ago
      I took the "first" bit out of the title above - thanks!
    • dylan6042 hours ago
      The ironic thing to me is that Mamdani is only the mayor of NYC. He is not the governor of NY state. So if you live in Buffalo, you will still have to suffer through shenanigans?

      Edit: I see others with similar thoughts from further down the scroll

    • returningfory244 minutes ago
      This information about the NYT is out of date; it's now easy to unsubscribe from anywhere.
    • arjie2 hours ago
      It's just local NYC news. Thinks are landmark to them that are often commonplace elsewhere which makes sense since millions call that place home that are not acquainted with other places. It is truly America's one megacity so that sort of puffery is expected.

      The advent of dumpsters was similarly hailed there, though almost no other cities in the US throw their trash on the sidewalk.

    • throwaway274482 hours ago
      Oh, is new york in california?
      • tzs2 hours ago
        Generally when a seller in state X in the US sells to a buyer in a different state Y the consumer protection laws of state Y apply.

        Even if the seller in X does not have a presence in Y, and so you might think Y has no jurisdiction, purposefully conducting business within a state is sufficient to allow Y to assert jurisdiction in regards to that business.

        • throwaway27448an hour ago
          > Generally when a seller in state X in the US sells to a buyer in a different state Y the consumer protection laws of state Y apply.

          I've found the person who lives in California lol, no it does not work that way.

          • tzsan hour ago
            No, you've found the person who (1) remembers Civil Procedure from the first year of law school [0], particularly the case of International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) [1], (2) did some checking to make sure that between then and now nothing significant has changed (it hasn't--International Shoe is still the foundational case in this area), (3) remembers several large non-California companies California has successfully enforced its consumer protection and privacy laws against and several non-Illinois companies Illinois has enforced its similar laws against.

            "Minimum contacts" is a good term to include in searches if you want to learn more on this.

            [0] Note: I am not a lawyer. Near the end of law school I decided I'd rather be a programmer with a decent knowledge of law than a lawyer with a decent knowledge of programming.

            [1] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/310/

    • testfrequencyan hour ago
      The NYC propaganda is strong right now with Mamdani.

      California still S-tier for protecting its land and people.

    • browski3 hours ago
      Outsiders need to append a "for NYC".

      They didn't here because for them as representatives of NYC that's all they are speaking to.

      Technical pedantry like this just displays poor language and social skills.

  • SkipperCat2 hours ago
    This is what legitimate government looks like. Leaders actually advocating for the people who are being deceived by those in power instead of helping those in power.

    While this may be a trivial issue, being able to cancel a gym or newspaper subscription, it sends a signal. Companies need to view customers as partners in a business transaction and not objects to be exploited.

    • ianmarcinkowskian hour ago
      I have similar feelings.

      I am sympathetic to a perspective that says this is not the responsibility of a mayor of a single city... But also; who else is going to do it?

      Normal people have very little say over the politicians that govern them in larger electoral regions like states or provinces, and maybe this can signal to other levels of government that they should implement similar rules... If it works.

      • hughw6 minutes ago
        CFPB once played that role for financial services. Ah well.
      • colechristensen43 minutes ago
        >I am sympathetic to a perspective that says this is not the responsibility of a mayor of a single city... But also; who else is going to do it?

        With a population of 8.5 million if NYC was a state it would be the 13th largest so I'm quite all right with the city going beyond the normal purview of a city government.

        • culi40 minutes ago
          And if it were a country, it would be the 10th largest economy in the world and the 105th most populous
      • voidhorsean hour ago
        Mamdani has been doing great in NYC so far. The hope is that he will inspire similar behavior in others. And drive similar approaches to politics in other constituencies.
        • aliasxneoan hour ago
          I'm all for it. Would be great to see exactly how all of his policies play out across a larger area.
    • amazingamazingan hour ago
      Lol wait for enforcement before declaring victory
    • jafo1989an hour ago
      > Leaders actually advocating for the people who are being deceived by those in power instead of helping those in power.

      Who is deceiving who now? And I'm not sure who is in power here...

  • xp843 hours ago
    I wonder if the bit about 'junk fees' will include undisclosed hotel fees. I just stayed there last week in a no-frills "hotel" which doesn't include daily room cleaning, has no staff at night, and has no amenities whatsoever, and they charged me a surprise-at-check-in $35 a night resort fee. This fee was not described in the booking.
    • criddell3 hours ago
      That hotel may have broken an FTC rule that's been in effect for about a year now.

      > Effective May 12, 2025, the FTC’s Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees, 16 C.F.R. Part 464, prohibits bait-and-switch pricing and other tactics used to obscure and misrepresent total prices and fees for live-event tickets and short-term lodging.

      https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/rule-unfair-...

  • bkeyes3 hours ago
    Funny this should come up today.

    I just got a notice from my credit card company that Evernote just charged my credit card after 2 'successful' cancellations of my subscription each of the last 2 years, and the complete deletion of my account several months ago.

    Hopefully these will become more widespread - I'm not in NY or CA.

    • brookside3 hours ago
      Bending Spoons acquired Evernote:

      "What is Bending Spoons? The little-known AOL and Vimeo owner that's now public" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48799966

      • The_Bladean hour ago
        yes, that is happening to me real-time, the article in the Economist reminded me (https://www.economist.com/business/2026/07/01/can-bending-sp...), right down to Evernote being the one they are attempting to gouge me on at best and charge illegally at worst. so i had a closer look at bank and PayPal GLs

        i found similar issues with Paddle (attempted to quit), Proton (double charged), Splashtop (attempted to quit), and Bloomberg via Apple (attempted to quit) and the common thread is PayPal. never Stripe.

        my PayPal account is ancient (2002) and knowing what i know about payments (perhaps a little) i believe there is something akin to a hole regarding legacy pre-auth tokens in a PayPal architecture which is old enough to run for the US House. at least Bending Spoons would be willfully exploiting such a hole, because after i refunded / cancelled, 9 days later they were able to charge again. PayPal also seems to have an open marriage with PCI-DSS / SOC2

    • summarybot3 hours ago
      Sharks will keep eating easy prey until they hit an iron bar. I also hate this fact about the world by the way :) Just a [hardwon] observation.
      • puchatek3 hours ago
        People who forget to cancel are easy prey.

        Cancelling then being charged anyway is something else. Something akin to being robbed IMHO.

    • MBCook2 hours ago
      There’s a reason they were used as a poster child of a bad actor when the FTC rule was made a few years ago, before the current administration shredded it.
    • vvpan3 hours ago
      A complimentary complaint is that payments are a "pull" operation with subscriptions. You can't decide who gets your money. How retro is that!
  • jzer0cool4 hours ago
    Nintendo (subscription I have for my switch to access some older a classic games btw) is very good reminding me I have a subscription and whether I want to cancel (or renew). I don't have the email at hand but what I remember is thinking they really desire you to reflect to cancel (rather than a push to renew) if not wanting continued service. Sentiment of politeness and I find a good example what to do.

    Also, not a subscription but seeing some dark practices after COVID onset at any fast-food like business (including cafes, juices, cupcakes, etc) where a preselected tip is selected. Default should be no.

    • dqv3 hours ago
      It goes

      > Subject: Information about Your Automatic Renewal

      > This is an automatically generated email from Nintendo for customers who have a Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack individual 12‑month (365‑day) membership set to renew automatically.

      > Dear [user],

      > Your Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack individual 12‑month (365‑day) membership will automatically renew soon.

      > ...

      > Deadline to turn off automatic renewal: [1 month from now]

      It also does this right when you first sign up for automatic renewal except the deadline is [1 year from now].

      • littlecranky672 hours ago
        Because this is mandatory in the EU probably.
        • MBCook2 hours ago
          They know my US address. I have an American eShop account.

          Why would EU rules apply?

          Nintendo is just a decent company compared to most others.

        • antiframe43 minutes ago
          Even if that were true, Nintendo is better than most companies, which will use deceptive practices wherever they are allowed, even if they have to pay to maintain multiple systems and configurations.
    • bikelang3 hours ago
      I really appreciate companies that are transparent with renewals. I’m sure it cuts down on customer support load a lot too. Kagi goes as far as not billing you if you don’t use their service in the prior month. I was pretty shocked the first time I got that email. Made me a customer for life.
      • spiderfarmer3 hours ago
        Sadly, it's often just because they were forced by the EU and several other markets.
        • kylecazar2 hours ago
          I think the card networks are responsible for forcing subscription reminders. Annual renewal and when a trial ends.

          They don't like disputes so it's preemptive.

        • expedition322 hours ago
          Well yeah in a perfect world we would not need laws against greed and fraud but alas.
    • Swizec3 hours ago
      > where a preselected tip is selected. Default should be no.

      A lot of this push to higher and higher and preselected tip options comes from POS software providers (Square et al) and credit card companies. They make money on transaction volume. Higher transaction -> more fees

      • nsagentan hour ago
        The restaurants get to set those values though. A coffee shop near me puts the default options as $1, $2, $3 for low order totals. So if I go in and get a coffee (which is $4.50), the lowest tip option is 22% and the highest is a whopping 66%.

        I've seriously gotten tip fatigue and have been working to move back to a sane standard. I've noticed the places that have these crazy tips, also pay their staff well.

    • lostloginan hour ago
      Unless I’ve missed something, Nintendo seem to have really good business ethics.
      • antiframe42 minutes ago
        I agree. I do wish they would use replaceable batteries outside the EU, where they are mandated, though.
    • lokar2 hours ago
      GeForce NOW as well. Very straight forward and clear email every month.
    • throwaw123 hours ago
      Maybe their PMs haven't attended top MBA schools in the USA, yet
  • mi_lk2 hours ago
    Just want to add to the pile that The New York Times is notorious for its unsubscription shenanigan
    • sandcat_2 hours ago
      For what it's worth, I just tried cancelling my NYTimes subscription to see if it was still as bad as I'd remembered, and aside from desperately begging me not to leave, it was quite simple. No need to contact support. I wasn't planning to go through with it, but I still got a nice discount for the next year, so.. thanks!
    • jazzyjackson2 hours ago
      Anything Condé Nast too, which is pretty much everything. Nice office in the World Trade Center tho so they’ve got revenue figured out.
  • kombine2 hours ago
    I remember trying to cancel NYT subscription a few years back and it was almost impossible. I didn't expect it from such a reputable establishment.
    • bertil2 hours ago
      As someone who doesn’t live in the US, it was hilariously impossible: you had to call on the phone a number in New York, which never picked up, so you had to pay hours of internal call, or send a fax, something I hadn’t done in two decades…

      Thankfully, I had a bank that used technology from this century, including a disposable credit card number. I stopped paying and that lead them to them calling me.

    • jonathanlydallan hour ago
      This is where getting it via Apple’s App Store is nice for consumers.

      I (a non-American) had a NYT subscription through the iOS app some years back and cancelling it (like any other subscription through the App Store) was as as simple as:

      - Open Settings

      - Tap my account

      - Tap Subscriptions

      - Tap the New York Times option (or whatever it’s called)

      - Tap Cancel

      While the gate keeper aspect of Apple may not be good in many ways, at least we get this kind of benefit from it.

  • CSMastermind3 hours ago
    Is this something that cities can really enforce? Like I get that NYC is a bit of an exception but let's say a 5 person town in Wyoming decides that they want to make this practice illegal and they all vote to do so. It's not clear to me that would mean anything at all.
    • kulahan3 hours ago
      Your question answers exactly how enforceable it is. It’s directly linked to your population size and how much it can hurt the wallet of the company.

      Edit: but also, who cares? Literally no solution to anything on earth works for EVERYONE

    • an hour ago
      undefined
    • quickthrowman2 hours ago
      NYC has ~2% of the US population, and it’s a relatively wealthy slice compared to the mean. NYC has roughly 13x as many people as the entire state of Wyoming. I could see a company writing off Wyoming entirely (not likely, but possible) but not NYC.

      States like CA, FL, NY, and TX can pass state laws that create defacto national regulations through sheer size, but smaller than that and you’ll have trouble.

      • CSMastermindan hour ago
        Sure but say some company based in Lousiana has a website that violates NYC law.

        What exactly will NYC do about it? Is there some mechanism to for them to block the website inside of NYC? The company would presumably have no property they could seize or employees they could imprison.

        If it were a state passing the law then they could sue for enforcement in federal court but I don't think a city could?

  • munk-a4 hours ago
    I suppose right now there is no federal preemption - but I fully expect gym & similar lobbying at the federal level to get a rule in place to allow preemption challenges.
  • petilon3 hours ago
    Will New York City residents be able to avoid AT&T's "Administrative and Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee"?

    https://www.al.com/news/2026/07/att-customers-your-cell-phon...

  • nadermx3 hours ago
    The irony with all this, is if a company makes it difficult to cancel their subscription, it's probably not a good product. Antidotically, I've found that making it easy for users to not only cancel, but refund, has given me eye opening things to fix in some products that made it so less people cancelled or refunded. So I try to always err on best user experience.
    • jonahx2 hours ago
      > Antidotically,

      Anecdotally

      • lostloginan hour ago
        The practice being discussed is poison, so it sort of works.
    • IncreasePosts2 hours ago
      NYT made it difficult, and they are a pretty good product. If you didn't live in california and wanted to cancel your subscription, you were required to talk to a service rep who would try to get you stay by giving you some free period before normal subscription billing resumed
      • lostloginan hour ago
        I know of 4 NYT subscriptions that have not been made due to the difficulty in cancelling.

        I’m sure they know the exact stats, and are getting more cash as a result of their BS.

        Good site, trash business practices.

    • plagiarist3 hours ago
      You are interested in providing something worth paying for. Other people are interested in maximizing ROI for ad spend.
  • aubanel2 hours ago
    Probably a great decision, but why/how can it be decided at a local level by a mayor, instead of a federal level?
    • woodruffw2 hours ago
      I don’t think it would be a federal concern, but a state one.

      However, in this case it’s because NYC law is typically allowed under NY state law to be stronger (but not weaker) than any corresponding state law.

    • ezfe2 hours ago
      why: because the federal level is not doing it

      how: by declaring it a law in that area

      • readthenotes12 hours ago
        And yet an executive action is not a law. It's a dictate.

        Course, one should never underestimate the value of a benevolent dictator...

  • warumdaruman hour ago
    I think there should be a day (e.g. Sylvester), where all subscriptions auto end and renewal should be a proactive choice by the user.
  • lifeisstillgood2 hours ago
    This is really a banking / credit card thing. CC suppliers put a lot of effort into packaging recurring subscriptions for their businesses because … people forget to cancel. So the real leverage here is not go to each individual website to one click cancel, but just cancel the direct debit / subscription from in your banking or credit card app.
  • taerican hour ago
    Is NYC the first just because every city in California does it by state rules? I'm confused.
  • Esophagus43 hours ago
    > When the Biden administration introduced a junk fee rule in 2024, the US Chamber of Commerce argued it was “an attempt to micromanage businesses’ pricing structures”, and apartment fees were cut from that federal rule after lobbying by the real-estate industry.

    This drives me nuts to read, because it’s usually the same pattern.

    Rule -> lobbyists descend -> politicians cave -> carve out that takes away the whole point of the rule -> everyone declares victory

    • make32 hours ago
      I don't expect that Mamdani will cave in to real estate lobbyists lol. What you're describing is exactly why Establishment Democrats are losing to Mamdani and his ilk (DSA)
      • throwaway274482 hours ago
        I don't see Mamdani as somehow invulnerable to lobbyists; but they realistically have little leverage over him.
  • Animats2 hours ago
    That's pretty much standard in the EU. Nice to see the biggest city in the US catching up.
  • econ4 hours ago
    Maybe it should be required to review quality laws in other countries in general. One advantage is that you don't have to pretend or imagine what will happen if it's been tested in the wild.
  • jjuhl2 hours ago
    Wow, only in the US. In every other country, this is not a problem.
  • summarybot3 hours ago
    Just compel Stripe to do it,* problem 99% solved.

    *Direct click-to-cancel with subscription receipt.

  • morkalork25 minutes ago
    I don't understand because I'm not American but how does New York the city have such powers? At least where I am, cities aren't really "real" in that they are constructs the provincial government creates (and can uncreate). A city here could never make such a ban.
  • aizk2 hours ago
    Completely sensible legislation in my eyes.
  • gzer03 hours ago
    Another one that belongs on this list: AI-generated photos in housing listings. You can no longer tell what the property actually looks like, and the images conveniently erase the problem spots you'd only catch in person. False advertising is getting completely out of hand.
    • nemomarx3 hours ago
      It's crazy that people think they should get away with these. I've seen some examples where basic things like the number of windows or where the garage and driveway are was totally misrepresented - surely they'd at least look at the results?
    • CodingJeebus3 hours ago
      I agree, but how does one begin to enforce a ban like this? Bait-and-switch has always existed in real estate, which is all the more reason to do full due-diligence and inspect the property thoroughly and not just put in an offer sight unseen. If a seller is using AI to that extent, I'd be worried about what else they're hiding about the property.
      • simpaticoder2 hours ago
        >I agree, but how does one begin to enforce a ban like this?

        Look to something that works to modify behavior: credit reports. Make it easy to report an actor for malfeasance, assume they are guilty until proven innocent, and force them to defend themselves to the agency. Since we invent these tools for evil, we may as well use them for good.

      • plagiarist3 hours ago
        Simply remove protections and deal out massive fines to platforms hosting obviously fraudulent listings, they will figure out solutions overnight.
  • bell-cot4 hours ago
    No mention of the New York Times, or its practices?
    • gruez4 hours ago
      Why should it be mentioned? The article doesn't call out any other specific company by name. Is the Times really that egregious of a offender compared to the other businesses? Does new york city have a history of selectively enforcing laws to favor local businesses?
      • cm20123 hours ago
        New York Times is one of the worst and most famous offenders of making it hard to cancel your subscription. There are companies that make it as hard or spammy but few with the reach of the NYT
      • lostloginan hour ago
        > Is the Times really that egregious of an offender compared to the other businesses?

        Yes.

      • wincy4 hours ago
        If anything, based on Louis Rossman’s experiences it’s quite the opposite - petty bureaucrats do their damndest to ensure it’s as difficult as possible to run a business in New York.
      • bell-cot3 hours ago
        I was thinking more of the Times and Guardian being in rather similar lines of work, and the opportunity to cast some shade on a rival.
      • IncreasePosts2 hours ago
        NYT is the biggest brand that I know of that pulls these "easy to subscribe, hard to unsubscribe" antics. Especially galling because if you live in california, you can cancel with just a click, so obviously it is possible, but if you live in 49 other states you are forced to listen to a sales pitch from a human before being allowed to unsubscribe
  • oulipo2 hours ago
    When a Mayor does more for the citizen than the government...
    • Cyclone_2 hours ago
      What do you mean? The mayor is part of the government.
  • tamimio3 hours ago
    Should ban the tips if it’s not included in “hidden fees”, and force restaurants to pay proper wages like other workers.
    • seattle_spring3 hours ago
      The "and" is very important here. Places like Seattle now mandate servers get a real wage. It inexplicably hasn't changed tip culture at all, so now they get regular wages and still complain when someone doesn't tip 20%+ for a takeout order.
      • mmmattt2 hours ago
        The mandate stipulates that they can get minimum wage, I wouldn’t call that a “regular” wage, and certainly not a livable one.
        • paulfri2 hours ago
          Seattle and its surrounding cities have among the highest minimum wages in the entire world (~$22/hour). You're maybe not renting a studio apartment by yourself but it is far from destitution.
        • FireBeyond2 hours ago
          I mean it's still rough if you want to live close to downtown, but it's also $21.30/hr and going to go up in 2027.
    • bijowo16763 hours ago
      for service workers, up to 25k in tips can be deducted from taxable income ("no tax on tips")
      • dmboyd3 hours ago
        Why should customers need to care about a store’s employees tax bracket
        • throwaway274482 hours ago
          Because that's the shithole we live in. If you don't like it, take your head out of your ass and crucify a politician or move
      • rafram2 hours ago
        From 2025 to 2028, in a specific list of qualified occupations, as long as your AGI is below $150,000.
        • 2 hours ago
          undefined
      • IncreasePosts2 hours ago
        Is there something about serving people food that means you should get a tax break? Or is that just a holdover of cash tipping to kindly get servers to actually declare the full value if their tips as wages instead of just saying they magically weren't tipped all year
  • josefritzishere3 hours ago
    This should be federal law.
    • Arubis3 hours ago
      Indeed. But the feds have picked a side, and right now, it's not yours.
  • TylerE4 hours ago
    A big one I’ve been seeing a lot lately is advertising annual subscriptions as monthly rates. It isn’t $12/month subscription if I have to pay $120 in a lump sum up front. The actual monthly rate is often basically double what they’re advertising.
    • Jblx24 hours ago
      >$12/month subscription if I have to pay $120 in a lump sum up front.

      Sounds like they are giving you two months free if you pay with a lump sum in advance.

      • arrowsmith3 hours ago
        Yes but it's always advertised as "$12/MONTH" in big letters with billed annually written somewhere small and non-obvous.
      • nemomarx3 hours ago
        Which is a fair discount, but it should be like "15 a month, 120 if you get a year up front" right?
        • Jblx2an hour ago

            $15/month * 12 months = $180
  $12/month * 12 months = $144
  $120 / 12 months = $10/month
  • cyberax4 hours ago
    Nice. Now just force stores to display actual prices with tax.
    • summarybot3 hours ago
      In Australia they call this price the price-"sorted."

      "7 dollars sorted." for example.

      • tc432 hours ago
        Australian here, never heard "sorted". It does sound very Australian though, probably a Queensland thing.
        • anenefanan hour ago
          Queenslander here and not a term I've noticed myself, bar one commercial on tv that used an animated meerkat, other than that not a big consumer of buying much or booking things online, though I'd understand if I saw it tagged to something where one time pricing event might sprawl ... subscription stuff, nah not happening.
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
  • drcongo4 hours ago
    Any chance you could lend Mamdani to the UK? We have a vacancy.
    • 4 hours ago
      undefined
    • 3 hours ago
      undefined
    • xp843 hours ago
      Depends who you ask!
    • Apocryphon3 hours ago
      Hasn’t Sadiq Khan been a similar story, from a Muslim immigrant family turned popular mayor of the nation’s largest city? Though from what I understand he’s from the more business-oriented center-left, in contrast with Mamdani.
  • j453 hours ago
    Long overdue, enshittification reaching SaaS undermines trust in all tech in the long term.
  • Razengan4 hours ago
    Did a politician's kid rack up hundreds of dollars on some stupid game?

    I still don't know why Apple, oft parading as the people's champion, automatically converts trials to subscriptions.

    So many scummy apps exploit this by offering a 1 week trial and saying like "only $4/month!" but charging a 1 year's sub after the trial period ends.

    • expedition322 hours ago
      Don't link a card or bank account to your play store account. They can't take money that isn't there.
  • aioproductos4 hours ago
    I'm building a SaaS right now and made the "non-deceptive" choices this law wants: cancellation is one click from settings, no retention maze, no surprise renewal, 30-day money-back. What surprised me is how much the tooling assumes you want the dark patterns. Billing platforms ship "cancellation flow" templates that are really retention funnels — discount offer, pause offer, survey, guilt screen, then maybe the button. The default path is the deceptive path; you have to actively rip stuff out to be straightforward.

    Which I think explains why this needs regulation at all. Every individual dark pattern is locally rational — it demonstrably improves net retention, so any PM optimizing a dashboard will keep it. The cost (people who feel trapped and tell everyone) never shows up in the same spreadsheet. Markets are bad at pricing "customers who quietly hate you."

    The one-click-cancel requirement is the part with real teeth. Junk-fee rules die by carve-out (see California's restaurant exemption), but "cancel must be as easy as signup" is binary enough to actually enforce.

  • hrdwdmrbl3 hours ago
    [dead]
  • clonedhuman3 hours ago
    OH NO THIS IS THE SOCIALISMS!!!!!111
    • summarybot3 hours ago
      How many legislative days did it take to get this policy in place, I wonder