#junk fees

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Apple faces criminal sanctions for defying App Store antitrust order

I'm on a 20+ city book tour for my new novel PICKS AND SHOVELS. Catch me at NEW ZEALAND'S UNITY BOOKS in AUCKLAND TODAY (May 2), and in WELLINGTON TOMORROW (May 3). More tour dates (Pittsburgh, PDX, London, Manchester) here.

Epic, makers of the wildly popular Fortnite video-game, have waged a one-company war against the "app tax" – the 15-30% rake that the mobile duopoly of Apple/Google take out of every penny we spend inside of apps.

Epic's own digital practices are hardly spotless: just this year, the company was caught cheating players – many of them children – with deceptive practices and had to refund over $72m:

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/fortnite-refunds

But in this fight, Epic is on the side of the angels. The 30% that Apple/Google sucks out of the mobile economy is a brutal tax, and not just on app makers. Patreon performers recently raised a stink when the company announced that it would be clawing back 30% of the money pledged by their supporters – that 30% surcharge is passed straight through to Apple/Google:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/12/24218629/patreon-membership-ios-30-percent-apple-tax

From independent news outlets to crafters selling their work out of small storefronts, all the way up to massive entertainment services like Disney Plus and Fortnite, the mobile cartel takes 30% out of every dollar, a racket they maintain with onerous rules that ban apps from using their own payment processors, or even from encouraging users to click a link that brings them to a web-based payment screen.

30% is a gigantic markup on payment processing. It's ten times the going rate for payments in the USA, already one of the most expensive places in the world to transfer money from one party to another. In the EU, payment processing typically runs 1%…or less.

But crafters, Patreon podcasters and small-town newspapers are in no position to fight Google and Apple. Instead, we get Epic, a multi-billion-dollar company that's gone to the mattresses to fight these multi-trillion-dollar companies. Personally, I dote on billionaire-on-trillionaire violence.

Epic was wildly successful. It mopped up the floor with Google, securing an especially punitive award from a judge who was furious that Google had destroyed evidence:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/12/12/im-feeling-lucky/#hugger-mugger

Epic also won against Apple, though not as thoroughly as it had with Google, because Apple had the commonsense not to get up to the kind of shenanigans that make federal judges very, very mad. In the Google case, the court found that Google had acted as a monopolist and ordered it to open up the payment system in Google Play, a direct blow to the Android app tax.

In the Apple case, the judge did not find that Google had acted as a monopolist, but did rule that the App Store's payment processing racket violated the law, and ordered Apple to end its own app tax:

https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/30/epic-games-just-scored-a-major-win-against-apple/

That's where things get gnarly. Apple is addicted to corrupt sources of income – like the tens of billions it illegally receives every year in bribes from Google make it the default search:

https://apnews.com/article/google-antitrust-search-engine-verdict-apple-319a61f20fb11510097845a30abaefd8

And it really, really loves the app tax. When the EU ordered Apple to allow third-party app stores (as a way of killing the app tax), the company cooked up a malicious compliance plan that was comically corrupt:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/06/spoil-the-bunch/#dma

So, the mere fact that a federal judge had ordered Apple to open up its app store to competing payment processors was not going convince Apple to actually do it. Instead, Apple cooked up a set of rules for third-party payment processing that would make it more costly to use someone else's payments, piling up a mountain of junk fees and using scare screens and other deceptive warnings to discourage users from making payments through a rival system:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/judge-rules-apple-executive-lied

That's the kind of thing that is apt to make a federal judge angry – and, as noted, angry federal judges can make life very hard for tech monopolists, a lesson Google learned when it destroyed key evidence in its Epic case. But Apple didn't just flout the court order – they lied about it to cover it up, and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is furious. She held that Alex Roman, Apple's Vice-President of Finance, "outright lied under oath," and she has raised the possibility of criminal contempt penalties for Apple:

https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/05/01/pacer_epic_vs_apple_injunction_judgement.pdf

The judge further wrote:

This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order. Time is of the essence. The Court will not tolerate further delays. As previously ordered, Apple will not impede competition. The Court enjoins Apple from implementing its new anticompetitive acts to avoid compliance with the Injunction. Effective immediately Apple will no longer impede developers’ ability to communicate with users nor will they levy or impose a new commission on off-app purchases

In other words, any junk fees, any impediments to opening up third party payments, will be switfly and harshly dealt with. As of right now developers can start to build third-party payments into their apps and Apple cannot block them. It's the end of the app tax, a source of about $100b/year for Apple:

https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/01/apple_epic_lies_possible_crime/

The world is on fire and everything is terrible, but we are also living through the most consequential season in the history of the war on corporate tech power. Google has been convicted three times of being a monopolist and is almost certainly going to have to sell off Chrome, most of its ad-tech stack, and possibly Android. Meta just put up a pathetic showing in an equally serious antitrust case that could see it forced to sell off Instagram and Whatsapp:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/04/11/it-is-better-to-buy/#than-to-compete

Countries around the world have passed big, sweeping, muscular antitrust laws specifically aimed at smashing corporate tech power, like the EU's Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act:

https://www.eff.org/pages/adoption-dsadma-notre-analyse

Most importantly, all of this is happening from the bottom up. There is no dark money campaign to fuck up the tech companies. The politicians and enforcers who are taking on Big Tech are being shoved from behind by billions of everyday people who are furious and refuse to take it any longer:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/04/10/solidarity-forever-2/#oligarchism

I am deeply grateful for the public servants who have championed this cause, but I also know that these people are the effect of our movement, not the cause. When Kier Starmer fires Britain's brilliant and effective top competition enforcer and replaces him with the former head of Amazon UK, that does nothing to tamp down the political outrage that Britons feel towards America's tech giants:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/22/autocrats-of-trade/#dingo-babysitter

All over the world, countries that passed IP laws to protect US tech interests in exchange for tariff-free access to US markets are grappling with the end of free trade with America. This represents a generational opportunity to pass laws that enable local technologists to jailbreak US tech exports and liberate their people from the extractive practices of Big Tech forever:

https://archive.is/CiBIz

There is nothing harder to stop than an idea whose time has come to pass.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/01/its-not-the-crime/#its-the-coverup

Image: Alex Popovkin, Bahia, Brazil from Brazil (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Annelid_worm,_Atlantic_forest,_northern_littoral_of_Bahia,_Brazil_%2816107326533%29.jpg

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

--

Hubertl (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2015-03-04_Elstar_%28apple%29_starting_putrefying_IMG_9761_bis_9772.jpg

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

[tomorrowusa]

The Biden administration is trying to limit junk fees. The president made reference to this during the State of the Union speech on Thursday. Of course Republicans think junk fees and screwing the consumer are great.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Tuesday unveiled a heavily anticipated rule cutting the late fees that credit card issuers can charge, delivering on an objective that President Joe Biden touted in his State of the Union address last year. The regulation caps fees for a missed payment at $8, down from the current level of up to $41. The rule has already sparked intense pushback from banks and congressional Republicans pledging to fight its implementation. The Chamber of Commerce is vowing to sue.

Republicans are serving predatory banks which give them big campaign contributions. Excessive fees enable the banks to get fat off of poor people. Most likely the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would be abolished or neutered by a second Trump administration.

The rule will “stop some credit card companies from ripping you off with late fees,” Biden said at a meeting of the White House Competition Council Tuesday afternoon. “This action will collectively save families $10 billion in credit card late fees every year.” The rule is part of the Biden administration’s broader campaign against so-called junk fees that has targeted industries from car dealers to cable operators. It’s a central focus of Biden’s reelection campaign and one that he’ll likely highlight in Thursday’s State of the Union speech. “Late fees have gotten out of control,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said on a call with reporters Monday. “Today the credit card industry hauls in more than $14 billion in late fee revenue, which our research shows is more than five times that of the companies’ associated costs.”

Banks would still make insanely large profits even with reduced junk fees. But greed makes them want to squeeze every cent they can out of American consumers.

Yeah, rightwingers already find themselves on the wrong side of the abortion and IVF issues. Now they are also trying vigorously to position themselves as defenders of price gouging, junk fees, and shrinkflation.

Tens of millions of Americans are inundated by credit card junk fees — and now right-wing media are rallying to defend this price gouging

[indiesellersguild]

Our Statement to the US Federal Trade Commission

Below the embedded link, you will find the preamble from the article in question and a small excerpt from the statement itself.

You are encouraged to go here and share your own comment with the FTC regarding restrictions on unfair and deceptive fees. The deadline to do so is January 8th.

To everyone who joined our discussion on the FTC’s proposed “Junk Fee” rule, thank you! We drafted a statement summarizing the experiences of our members, and submitted it to the FTC this morning. Continue scrolling to read it. We also encourage each and every one of our members to submit your own comment. The FTC would appreciate comments with specific examples on how unfair or deceptive fees affect specific types of creative businesses. Deadline for public comments is next Monday – January 8th, 2024.

[wat3rm370n]

Always check bank statements regularly.

I've had this account since 2007. I've not gotten paper statements in well over a decade now. They just hit me with a $2.00 "paper statement fee" when I actually just talked to someone at the bank last week because I got a notice they were transitioning the checking accounts and I called right away to make sure i was in a no fee checking account. And voila. Now I'm getting a paper statement fee when I haven't had paper statements in years.

Banks. They need more regulation.

[unitedstatesrei]

San Diego Tenants Sue Greystar Over “Junk Fees” Refunds

Legal Framework and Allegations Against Greystar's Fee PracticesA sweeping federal lawsuit filed in California targets Greystar Real Estate Partners. The company is accused of violating multiple state and federal consumer protection laws. The issue revolves around the alleged imposition of what plaintiffs describe as illegal "junk fees." These fees are said to be widespread across Greystar's rental portfolio.The class action litigation includes violations of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act and the Honest Pricing Act. Also noted are breaches of the False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law. Federal consumer protection statutes also play a role in the complaint. This lawsuit has been filed in a California federal court.Legal definitions in the case describe junk fees as unnecessary charges. They claim these fees serve no legitimate purpose beyond profit maximization. Plaintiffs argue that market adaptations similar to those in NYC real estate could be necessary for resolving issues like these fees.Plaintiffs Kaidi Wu and Juhyun So argue that tenant rights are undermined. They claim these practices use deceptive disclosure methods. The complaint alleges that Greystar conceals mandatory fees for pest control and trash services. Importantly, these fees are only disclosed after tenants pay application fees and tour properties. This timing allegedly prevents informed decision-making about true rental costs. California's legislative framework focuses on pricing transparency.This transparency forms the foundation for the allegations against Greystar. Their practices are said to constitute unfair and deceptive business conduct. The lawsuit seeks relief for affected tenants charged fees exceeding advertised rental rates over the last six years.Financial Impact and Class Action Implications for California RentersFinancial devastation threatens thousands of California renters. Greystar's alleged junk fee practices extract over $500 annually from tenants.The company's rental empire reportedly generates tens of millions in disputed profits. The class action lawsuit represents all Californians charged excessive fees. Earth-inspired colors create inviting, comforting spaces that feel like home, while neutral tones serve as versatile backdrops allowing tenants’ personal touches to stand out.These charges fall under the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The Honest Pricing Act also plays a key role in the case.Fee Impact CategoryAnnual Cost Per TenantTotal Junk Fees$500+Utility Admin Fees Alone$57The collective industry impact runs into tens of millions. The geographic scope affects Californians statewide.Mandatory fees devastate tenant budgets. Advertised rental prices become meaningless, as renters face undisclosed costs post-lease signing.The lawsuit aims to recover significant refunds. It addresses systemic fee transparency violations in Greystar's California properties. The FTC filed legal action against Greystar in January as federal oversight intensifies.Market distortion escalates as true rental costs remain hidden. This erosion of consumer trust impacts the entire property management sector.AssessmentThe Greystar litigation is a pivotal moment for California's rental market. Its implications could extend far beyond San Diego.Property management giants are now under unprecedented scrutiny. Fee structures that generated millions are in question.The case's outcome may reshape industry practices nationwide. Operators might be forced to rethink their pricing models.This could lead to a wave of similar lawsuits in major metropolitan markets. Investor portfolios may need immediate compliance assessments.

[alaturkaamerika]

Airbnb’de Sürpriz Ücret Dönemi Sona Eriyor: Tüm Fiyatlar En Baştan Görülecek!

💵 “Gecelik $100” deyip, ödeme ekranında $170 mu çıkıyor? Artık değil!🏠 Airbnb, temizlik ve hizmet ücretlerini gizleyemeyecek.📅 12 Mayıs 2025 itibarıyla tüm ilanlar gerçek ve toplam fiyatı göstermek zorunda olacak. Gizli Ücretler Tarihe Karışıyor Airbnb, ABD dahil 200’den fazla pazarda, artık kullanıcılarına ilk bakışta toplam maliyeti göstermek zorunda kalacak. Bu kapsamda: Temizlik…

[tocitynews]

Dollar General, Dollar Tree And Kroger Customers Pay Over $90 Million A Year In Cash-Back Fees, Federal Agency Finds – Los Angeles California reporting

● Dollar General, Dollar Tree and Kroger have charged customers who ask for cash back in recent years.

● Their cash-back fees amount to more than $90 million a year, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau reports.

● Such fees may disadvantage those in banking deserts, where they don't have easy access to cash for free. Retailers say they offer a lifeline to such consumers, who may not otherwise be able to get cash.

Three of the nation's largest retailers — Dollar General, Dollar Tree and Kroger — charge fees to customers who ask for "cash back" at check-out, amounting to more than $90 million a year, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Many retailers offer a cash-back option to consumers who pay for purchases with a debit or pre-paid card.

But levying a fee for the service may be "exploiting" certain customers, especially those who live in so-called banking deserts without easy access to a bank branch or free cash withdrawals, according to a CFPB analysis issued Tuesday.

Not all retailers charge cash-back fees, which can range from $0.50 to upwards of $3 per transaction, according to the agency, which has cracked down on financial institutions in recent years for charging so-called "junk fees."

[avandelay20]

Good for you California. Hopefully there will be a similar law at the federal level soon.

Drip Pricing has to end.

The expenses that any employer bears that they expect to recover from customers should SIMPLY be embedded in the price of the product being sold.

Businesses (cafes, bars, restaurants, airlines, hotels, etc) that tack on a 4% "cost of living fee / to cover healthcare for our employees" is absolute non-sense and is NOT how a business should operate.

Drip Pricing distorts how we (and the government) observe and measure price increases and prevents customers from shopping for the best price.

Drip Pricing also results in frustrated customers who end up punishing those same businesses when the customer is surprised by the fee only AFTER engaging with the business and sometimes not even seeing the fee until after they get the bill.

It is unacceptable for any business to surprise a customer with unexpected fees no matter what justification the business has for the fee.

All any business has to do is embed their junk fees into the price of the food, room rate, or ticket. No business should be complaining about this approach.

[whitesinhistory]

EXPOSED: Ted Cruz ROBS Americans With CORRUPT Airline Law | The Kyle Kulinski Show

[indiesellersguild]

Some updates on our work within the legal system.

First, on "junk fees":

Some of our members have a meeting on Dec. 11 with a US Federal Trade Commission lawyer to discuss a proposed new rule to prohibit the use of "unfair or deceptive fees" — or, long version, "unfair or deceptive practices relating to fees for goods or services, specifically, misrepresenting the total costs of goods and services by omitting mandatory fees from advertised prices and misrepresenting the nature and purpose of fees. "

You can find the proposal and make a public comment on the Federal Register here.

Important for our meeting specifically: We want to hear your feedback and questions so we can accurately represent the views of our members in the meeting. Your comments on this post or via asks will be shared with the involved members and considered on Dec. 11. Your voice will be heard and, hopefully, make a lasting impact.

Second, in brief, on Etsy's payment reserve issue:

As we are still gathering statements and signatures from buyers and sellers affected by this, there has been an exciting development in possible legal recourse that will be ready to share soon. Stay tuned!

[davestone13-blog]

Let's Trash Junk Fees Now

President Biden is cracking down on deceptive fees that cost American consumers tens of billions of dollars a year.  By Sarah Anderson | October 18, 2023 Republished with Permission: The Roosevelt Island Daily News My contact lenses are crazy expensive. So when I’m about to run out, I do some comparison shopping to get the best deal on an online order. A love story about belated…

[wauln]

[ POTUS Biden Saves Us From Junk Fees ]

[canisalbus]

Have you considered selling merch? Some stickers pins or patches of the boys would go hard

.