rant on:

I am sick and tired of people who are selling things trying to pass their Paypal costs off on to me. I don't get it. They sign up to accept payments via Paypal, as a business decision (to make selling their own stuff easier) but don't want to accept the cost of expanding their base of potential buyers. Thieves, I tell you.

Why do they even bother signing up for Paypal?? And because they choose to accept Paypal I have to pay an additional 3%? GTFOOH.

When I sell and someone pays via Paypal, the paypal fee is bourne by me, since I like the security of getting my money up front, quickly.

I will NOT buy from anyone who passes along their Paypal costs. Period.

I REFUSE TO COVER ANYONE'S PAYPAL COSTS, EXCEPT MY OWN.

rant off.

It would be your choice as to deal with the merchant/seller or not. As such, they are not thieves. How could they be? If I were to offer you a widget for $1, and you say you want to buy it, I am not a thief, even though included in that $1 was a paypal charge? Conversely, if I said that I was going to charge you $.70 for the item plus $.30 for the paypal charge, you would call me a "thief" but how is it any different?

In either of those circumstances, you are the sole decision maker as to part with your money or not. Couldn't you make the argument that studio owners are thiefs because (1) part of their charge relates to property taxes, utilities, etc. (2) part of the charge relates to equipment upkeep & purchases (3) part of their charge might be for assistants, etc.? Wasn't all that a business decision to buy property, and buy equipment, and offer plumbing to get you in the door, and thus, shouldnt they absorb all that cost and charge you for their mere labour? Didn't they only hire their assistants to make it easier for them to do business? So it shouldn't have a charge assessed, right?

Perhaps a seller is deciding to accept paypal for the buyers convenience. If you operated a pizza store where you only operated in a barter fashion. Perhaps many potential customers came in and said "I'd love to buy pizzas here, but I'd like to pay in cash, and not have to trade something for the pizza". As a seller, it perhaps would be wise to thus, accept cash. In the same manner, some don't prefer to take paypal, but do it cause its more convenient for you to use a credit card, than for you to run out to get a money order or bank cheque.

I personally have no problem with sellers doing whatever they want to do. The buyers are the chief controller of their own destiny. If I want to buy a SM57 from you, and you want to sell it for $400, and I agree, I can't call you a thief - as I decided to complete the transaction.

If there are two sellers offering the same exact item, Seller A charging $100 out the door, and Seller B charging $50 shipped + 3% Paypal fee, would you seriously buy from Seller A as to avoid the other sellers paypal fee?

Technically, charging the 3% to the buyer is against Paypal's terms of service. If you ever got into any kind of dispute over an item and this were brought to light, you would automatically lose.

It's the cost of doing business. Just like a merchant pays 3-5% for the ability to accept MC/Visa.

On big ticket items I sometimes request a split of the paypal fees, just so I can keep my asking price reasonable. Otherwise I'd have to jack up my asking price to cover my costs (this is legal, by the way).

Dirk

it is illegal to pass on the pay pal charge to buyers using pay pal.
report them they will be warned if they continue they will loose their account.
it is like a credit card it is illegal for the seller to pass on any charges for using a credit card and pay pal is viewed by law as such.

C'mon, this example is just silliness. Would it be okay if I decided to wait for a reasonable seller who was not trying to pass his Paypal cost on to me? Could I wait for the guy selling one for $55 or $60 or even $50 without the paypal costs, or MUST I choose only from your extreme duo? I have rarely needed something so badly I couldn't wait for a reasonable price. You posit 2 sellers, but don't say what the typical going rate is for the item being sold. If the going rate was $90 I'd be suspicious of the $50 guy anyway. The devil is in the details, no?

You remain free to do as you please wiith your money. Just as you are free to think me foolish for my exercising my freely chosen choices.
As far as my money goes..I choose not to knowingly pay the Paypal ransom.

Just to clarify though, it IS legal to pass this surcharge along to the buyer if you are in the UK.

I agree, this is very stupid. Like someone said before the company or store takes the hit for CC payments with visa or AMEX. I can see giving a 3% discount for cash!!! I think some places do this just to make things easier. But you never hear of a store charging 3% more for something!


Just keep reporting the person. I would look into the UK thing b/c paypal and other CC companies do not allow this! But I just may be speaking for the US.... Thank God I am AMERICAN!

It's in Paypal's user agreement. If you are a resident of the UK you are allowed to pass on the cost of using paypal to your buyer. Anywhere else you are not.

That does not stop you from offering a discount for cash, or rolling the fees into "shipping and handling" charges.

Dirk

I have never charged a buyer for paypal fees, but here goes a question for you all.

Is 3+1 different from 4?

As in, if Seller X decides to sell an item for $3 plus a $1 paypal charge, is it really any different from Seller X selling the item for $4 with "no paypal charge"?

I am aware that it defies paypal rules to explicitly state that the buyer is assuming paypal fees, but if its included in the price and not broken out, how is that any better/worse?

Setting:
I drive into a gas station. Using a credit card, the price is $3.09/gal, while using cash, the price is $3.00/gal.

Perspective A:
The station owner has given you a 3% DISCOUNT for using cash. To you - this is great.

Perspective B:
The station owner is CHARGING you an ADDITIONAL 3% for using a credit card. To you - this is terrible.

Conclusion:
Giving a discount for one behavior is the same as passing along an additional charge for the inverse behavior.

Hi,

I am not terribly familiar with the mechanics of PayPal, although I use it for domestic (US) purchases. I had the impression that all out-of-country deals using PayPal meant that the seller would get socked with a fee.
The times I have bought from overseas (Canada mainly), the vendors have been perfectly up-front about this, and in the end we have settled on money orders instead.
Maybe there should be a site available spelling out PayPal's policies (maybe there is and I am just too uncoordinated to find it .)

Best,

in the u.s. here it is not really a pay-pal issue it is not legal to charge someone for using a credit card.
pay pal is viewed as a credit card and falls under the same usury laws.
i do not now about the UK.
their are ways around it as mentioned just tack a nominal % into shipping and handling.

Thats funny. As I was reading this thread the <b> Same </b> thought went through my head..

ERic

ERic

3% is a lot of money, especially if you tack on the ebay fee. I usually don't put as an acceptable form of payment but lately, i get asked if I take it after the auction. I can't see swallowing that fee after the fact so if the customer is in that much of a hurry, they can pay it. Otherwise, it's 2 days, 39¢ for a stamp and less than a buck for a money order.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthrea...hlight=pay+pal

i'd went around on this issue already.

the paypal agreement says you don't tack the fee on top of the agreed upon sale price. period.

if you follow the rules when you transact, then you absorb those fees as a seller, and absolutely should not be asked to do it again as a buyer by those sellers who try to ignore the rules. i transact just often enough that i find myself unwilling to pay the fees again as a buyer since i've done my part by paying them when i am a seller.

paypal benefits the seller and buyer equally. if folks get all worked up over this fee, they ought to be just as worked up over the ebay fees i'd suspect.

i think it's grand that there is a method that allows individuals who aren't merchants to easily transact this way, and this security and convenience comes as the same price for us as it does for vendors. we just don't need any specialized hardware. seems fair enough. if you are that against the fees, dont' use paypal. if you do use paypal, play by the same rules as the rest of us. it's that simple. the only way for the fees to be fair is for them to be uniformely applied - ie: agree and stick to one system and have everyone use that system, in this case it is a seller pays the fee system.

it's more important for us as individuals to do this as that treats the buyer with more respect than the cheap ass sellers who want to break the agreement to save a few bucks. i don't get why you can stomache the ebay fees, but this seems unfair? come on, if you use the service than play by the rules. it seems like the only reason to foist those fees on to the buyer is to be selfish and cheap.

and yes, the expectation of those fees should be in the asking price that same way that the ebay fees are in auction sales. you don't win an auction on ebay and then pay 3% more than your winning bid, you pay your winning bid. that's how it is.

i truly dislike that so many gearslutz folks try to foist off the fee to buyers, and i will not buy from them as a result. so i do vote with my money in that regard. it seems rude and unfair to ignore the user agreement and try to make the buyer pay a fee on top of the agreed upon price for gear.

Finally a kindred soul. Welcome brother Pounce!

I also refuse to buy anything where the ad demands I pay the seller's fees. I pay my own Paypal fees when selling, you pay yours. I don't care how you "recover" the costs, that is your business.

I've even seen ads saying things like "add 3% so I don't have to pay those horrible Paypal charges" -- but it's ok for me to pay them?? You poor thing...

Steve

me two.
and i report then to ebay sorry if i have so do they.

I do the same. Winning an eBay auction should result in an amount equal to the bid plus shipping (and parallel - I hate when people overcharge excessively on shipping - unless the sum total equals an amount less than what I can get elsewhere).

However, in a non-eBay free market, I still contend (theoretically speaking as I'm aware of Paypal Stipulations) that (1) the seller can do what they want as I dont have to buy and (2) I personally don't mind paying a sum total of many parts (which may explicitly include Paypal fees) if its a lesser amount than the fixed single price that has hidden parts. I also contend that seller sometimes DO offer Paypal as a service to the buyer, and that it is not JUST a tool to help the seller.

Once again, I personally have no issues or disagreements with any posts above detailing people's wishes in that they abhor being charged the Paypal fee on the buying end (that is their right, just as they can say no to that type of selling structure - and this is what I advocate one should do if they don't like it), but I do disagree that the seller who tells a buyer that they will bear paypal fees, to which the buyer accepts, should be deemed "a thief". In addition, I will also remain firm in my belief that someone who boycotts 3+1 but is fine with 4 has issues beyond my understanding.

This is the wrong math. Unless it is a buy it now offer, then the math is right. In the auction, 3+1 is me offering $3 and the sellers upping the cost to $4. I offered $3 for an item, not $4. I don't see how people miss this. I guess I should be adding $150 on to the end of every auction cause I think all my stuff sells for less than what I'd like it to. So long as you guys are buying this add on additional money, I think I may sell to you guys.
What these sellers are doing when they add those costs on to the end is the same thing the people who sell empty X-boxes. They have a small line that says this is an empty box, but they are hoping people will not fully read the auction and buy the empty fox for a few hundred dollars.

Oh, I have a few metallica guitar picks I might sell. only 25 cents (plus an additional 384.99 selling fee)

Note the following

And

Even so -
If someone posts an ad/auction/etc. for a package of pencils, that states "Buyer owes winning bid plus $0.50 shipping" - do you not pay shipping? Of course you do. If an ad says "Buyer owes winning bid plus $0.50 shipping plus $400 Selling Fees", would you bid on it? I'd hope not. I would ask, "What if you had?"

Well, barring rules in the marketplace (e.g. eBay, Paypal, etc.) that prohibited such a thing, you'd be agreeing to these extra fees by placing a bid - in essence - you are agreeing that you want to pay your bid, the shipping, and the sellers fees. Hence you are agreeing to pay the proverbial $4 - you know about the Bid and Shipping ($3) and you know the sellers fees ($1). The question is, if you knew that attached to the item was a shipping fee and sellers fees, how is that any different from buying the item for $4 straight up with no sellers fees and no shipping?

We all agree that Paypal fees shouldn't be sprung on a buyer after the agreement is made for the Winning Bid plus $0.50 shipping (in fact, doing so would be a breach of contract or a counteroffer - both of which the buyer wouldn't need to accept). That isn't being debated. What is being debated is - does a seller (outside of User Agreements and the such, just theoretically speaking) have the right to set their own terms? And does a buyer have the right to agree to those terms, before being seperated from their money? I contend the answer to both of these is, "Absolutely!".

I'm not talking about eBay auctions. eBay has (or used to anyway) a policy to forbid adding Paypal surcharges in the auction terms. They used to pull those auctions, don't know if they still do.

And as already mentioned, in any transaction whether eBay or private sale, you are explicitly voiding your Paypal user policy by advertising that you require the Paypal fees in addition to the sale price. Paypal plainly states that you will not have recourse to their seller security programs if you do this.

The ones I am talking about that bug me are regular GS ads, where the seller is offering a product for a fixed price, but hopes to "polish it up" and make it look cheaper by separating the extra fees.

Steve

responding to one post above:

i suppose a person can break the paypal agreement to do do, but while i understand the spirit of your argument, it is based on the idea that someone is entitled to break the rules. sure it happens, but i don't treat doing so as an entitlement.

the way i tend to think of it is quite simply what is the motivation for me as a buyer to pay a fee that i'd paid as already when i was a seller. it's my turn at bat, and i want to have the right to buy without the fee since i'd absorbed it as a seller. do folks who always charge the fee back on top of asking price also always pay when -they- are the buyers, or do they get out of the fee both times while others are aksed to pay the fee both times? i'd suggest that i think they are skirting the fees as often as possible, not offering to pay them when they are buyers, and therefore placing an undue financial burden on those who are trying to play by the rules. and playing by those rules is the only way to keep things fair, by having a consistently applied transaction model. otherwise, some folks never pay the fee and others pay twice as often as they should. it makes the burden unfair.

so while we are speaking of a "free market", if you are using paypal in this transaction then both parties have -already- agreed to use a seller pays the fee system via the paypal user agreement. it shouldn't even be a matter of debate.

the convictions i have about this come strictly from the perspective of someone who pays the fee as a seller. therefore, i resent being asked again as a buyer to do it all over again. even in a "free market". there is cost associated with lots of aspects of transacting things, could be auction fees, advertising fees, shipping fees, or paypal fees, etc. it's a cost of doing business, even for us as individuals. and while i don't call those who try to charge the paypal fee directly to the buyers "theifs", i do call them cheapskates who are unwilling to play by the rules. and i do think it speaks to their character.

I understand that you dont want to pay a seller's fee on both ends of the deal. However, if I offered to sell you something for $4, free shipping, no fees, you are fine with this, because you are not, explicitly, paying my Paypal fee.

If I offered to sell you something for $3 plus a $1 sellers fee, you'd balk at this, because you refuse to pay my sellers fee.

However, in the end of it, in both situations I would have walked away with $4 and you would have parted with $4. What I am asking, and trying to understand is, "Why does it matter if you know what you are paying for or not?" Shouldn't the main driver be - "What is my final cost?"

In the first part, yes - they still do pull auctions where the seller wants the buyer to pay the paypal charge. (Note that eBay and PayPal are the same company)

In the second thought process - if they do the adding for you and give you a final price, or you have to do the adding yourself cause they itemize it, why does it matter?

if you go to wall-mart and buy something the cost is the for cash as it is for a credit card the seller incurs that charge for the privilege of accepting the card.
if you do not want to pay it then simply do not accept the card.
it is illegal to pas that charge onto the purchaser, period.
pay pal is legally viewed as a credit card and falls under the same usury laws.

I look at it both ways... Some people want to buy at a lower price than I asked to begin with. Then they ask if they can pay with paypal when I would be glad to accept a check. If they want to pay the fees go ahead and use paypal, if not send me a check! If someone only accepts paypal I think they should pay the
fee.

Funny thing. Not only is H&R Block being looked into for errors on their own tax filings (isn't that exactly what they do? How'd they screw up their own taxes?)
They are also being investigated for charging excessive fees. Sort of along the lines of this discussion

It is a lot of money. Keep in mind ebay owns Pay Pal. The reason why it's "illegal" is it turns away potential buyers. Less buyers means less people selling stuff on ebay since there's no buyers. Basically, Ebay Inc. loses money. Ebay makes money on the listing fee, the designer options, the picture options, etc. They make money if it's a Reserve auction, etc. Then, once the item is sold they take a final value fee. If the buyer pays with Pay Pal, they take yet another 3 %. Now, I understand you have to make money but greed is another thing. In this modern digital age - storage isn't that expensive. I do remember september 11th. One of the ebay staff members donated their load Porshe Boxster (...brand new of course, California tags) up for auction for charity. I did think that was a nice gesture, but then I realized - I couldn't give my car away for charity no matter how bad I did feel about it. Point is, they can just give away Porshe's is they feel like it (..nor do I pay California sized rates for property/expenses). Kind of like, "no big deal - I'll just buy another..." kind of thing. Yes, this is America and success is something we all aspire for. Glutney/greed is not the definition of success...

One reason is because their "price" they are advertising is misleading and takes advantage of others who might be advertising the same thing.

Say someone is selling a GML preamp and they advertise it for $4000. Then they say in the fine print, "for the privilege of buying this from me, you must also pay an additional 3%".

I might have the same GML for sale and advertise it at $4120. So a shopper sees both and says hmmm, $4000 is less than $4120, I'll buy that one.

And now the market value perceptions are set based on the "advertised sale price", not the total with the hidden costs.

It's analogous to advertising that GML without the power supply, I'm sure we've all seen marketing tricks like that.

Just say you want $4120 for it.

Another reason I don't like it is what I mentioned before -- someone saying outright in their ad "I do not deserve to have to pay this awful extra PayPal fee -- you pay it instead". As if I'm so desperate that I'll gladly save them from the indignity.

Steve