Welcome to the Community @dakermw
I merged your post into this existing one, and there are other related topics such as
Many of us have a similar opinion that a business is free to designate how it will accept payment, and if that has an extra cost it should be part of their business costs not added on. A counterpoint is that cash customers would also be funding card fees even though they are not using cards or incurring the fees on the business.
What government has done is to enact what it believes is a ‘happy medium’ whereby actual costs can be recovered but not more. A cynic might think business has been (wink wink nudge nudge) encouraged to both add that cost of business into their prices as well as add it onto card sales. The problem is in the proof if that is being done case by case, business by business.
FWIW card fees are all but unheard of in the US, but from memory there are reports US prices are 5%+/- higher than they otherwise would be because of absorbing card fees. Neither way is fully transparent.
Our government has taken the position that competition should cause business to absorb or minimise fees. Whether it is working that way is arguable. Yet it is not a new topic, nor one that has a lot of traction since there are always ways to do ‘end runs’ To wit, Is an item for $10 w/no card fees a better deal than one at $9.75+1.85%? Many of us would prefer paying $10, all done, rather than potentially saving $0.07 by paying the fee. How does any company establish their price this way or that, and as for legislation to regulate it, how?
It seems a catch-22 where business is ‘the dealer’ either way.
