Why banning surcharges may hike prices for all
'Because what will happen is the business is still going to incur that cost. So, if they haven't been able to absorb it up till now, then I don't see that they're going to be able to absorb it. What they will have to do is build it into their cost structure and, therefore, into their prices.
'Rather than individual customers paying, we will all end up paying higher prices. So, it's not like it gets rid of the cost to the business; it just changes who pays for it.
'Even if you're paying with cash, you're going to end up paying a higher price because some consumers are paying via PayWave or credit card. So there's a question as to whether that's fair,' she said.
Matthews thinks the Government would be better placed to make sure businesses are only passing on the actual cost of fees to consumers.
'I believe that the Commerce Commission was doing some work in this regard to make sure that, for example, if a business is being charged 50c, then that's the charge they're passing on to the customer. They weren't taking the opportunity to say, surcharge you a dollar and make an extra 50c.
'The Government could also be looking at costs that the credit card companies and the banks are charging businesses to make sure that those are reasonable and that the costs they're passing on, again, reflect the costs to them for those transactions,' she said.
Theoretically, society could return to cash to avoid such fees, but Matthews said it's become increasingly difficult to even get cash.
'There aren't the number of ATMs around, certainly not bank ATMs, anymore. And if you go to a non-bank ATM, there are fees associated with those, quite large fees actually.
'The reality is that businesses don't actually want you to deal with cash because if they're collecting cash, then they've got to do something with it, and that becomes a hassle, particularly in smaller communities because they don't have access to bank services to be able to offload it easily,' she said.
'There's a justification for arguing that if businesses are going to accept cash that they should be able to surcharge for that because it's actually quite expensive for them to manage it.'
Listen to the full episode to hear more about what would happen if the Government banned all charges.
The Front Page is a daily news podcast from the New Zealand Herald, available to listen to every weekday from 5am. The podcast is presented by Chelsea Daniels, an Auckland-based journalist with a background in world news and crime/justice reporting who joined NZME in 2016.
You can follow the podcast at iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
The NZ economy is still sick, doubts are growing about the Govt prescription
Are these the right antibiotics? Are the antibiotics making me feel sick? I do feel a little better I think. But it's taking longer than I expected. Maybe I should see the doctor again. Or am I just being impatient? Ugh, so much uncertainty. Hopefully, those who've tuned in for a fresh read on the state of the economy can see where this is going. Never let a metaphor go by, I say! Anyway, here's me and the New Zealand economy, both sick in the midst of a miserable wet winter and worrying about whether our recoveries have stalled. A run of negative data has knocked the wind out of the nation's sails. The bad vibes are being pushed along by a strong political current. Both the left and right are telling us that the Government has prescribed the wrong medicine. The left blames the Government for cutting spending into a downturn. The logic is pretty simple. Any good Keynesian will tell you, when demand in the private sector falls, that's the time for the Government to come to the party. Borrow a bit more, don't slash and burn civil service, hire more teachers and nurses, build more stuff ... it won't be inflationary because it won't be crowding out private sector competition, which is in recession. The trouble is, we're still in the aftermath of the last big spend-up, which went on too long. Labour's stimulus, once we got through the initial Covid shock, did clash with a private sector boom and exacerbated inflation. That muddied the political narrative. It made it inevitable that the incoming centre-right coalition would cut back despite the extra damage that would do to economic growth. In the context of using fiscal policy to drive economic prosperity, you can make a good case that successive governments have got things completely arse about face. You'd expect this argument from the left. But Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis are being savaged even more aggressively from their right flank. The monetarists, the supply-side guys, the neo-liberals, (whatever you want to call them) are berating the Government for not dealing with the national debt and Crown deficit by administering a Rogernomics-style reboot of the whole economy. I doubt that would make the current downturn any more pleasant, but they argue it couldn't be much worse. And the payoff would be longer-term gains as the economy found a more productive and financially secure baseline. Both arguments can be compelling and, if nothing else, add to the concern that the current strategy of subtle market-oriented tweaks risks underdelivering on all sides. But through all of this gloom, one thing we need to remember is that most economists still believe the foundations of recovery are in place. Step back a bit from the mess of ugly recent economic data – the second quarter sucked, we get it! What are we actually experiencing? The labour market is tough. Unemployment is rising, and new job creation is almost non-existent. But this is not a surprise. In fact, while economists do get things wrong, they've been forecasting unemployment to be about where it is now for more than a year. We know it's one of the last pieces of data to turn in any recovery. Unfortunately, it is now overlapping with an unwanted and unexpected spike in inflation. Like a jump scare in the final scene of a horror movie, food prices (with rates and power, and insurance) have conspired to pause Reserve Bank rate cuts and rattled our faith in the recovery. Then there are tariffs and global unrest and all of that. It's not really surprising that it all feels bleak. So it's a bit ironic to be writing an optimistic take on the economy, especially given the rough week stuck at home that I've just had. My view wouldn't have been so upbeat if I hadn't been woken from my sick bed on Friday morning by a text from investment bank HSBC's Australian head of communications. He was asking how far away I was from my scheduled meeting with their global chief economist, Janet Henry and and Australia-New Zealand chief economist Paul Bloxham. Oops ... I was a long way away. But they kindly let me Zoom in later, and I'm very glad I did. As anyone with Australian cousins will know, sometimes it's healthy to be slapped in the face with a slightly condescending, external view of the New Zealand condition. Bloxham told me his forecasts currently make him one of the gloomiest economists on Australian growth. However, he's one of the most positive on New Zealand growth. Last year, New Zealand had the single largest contraction of any economy in the developed world, Bloxham points out. That inevitably comes with a hangover. But if you believe in the fundamentals of the New Zealand economy, which he does, there is no reason to assume the cycle won't turn. 'I suspect why I'm a little bit more upbeat than others is I sit in Sydney and watch it from the outside and go: hey, you've got two big forces at work that are set to continue to lift growth and give you a recovery.' No prizes for guessing those two forces – falling interest rates and booming agricultural commodity prices. The money flowing into the rural economy must eventually flow through to the cities and lift growth, Bloxham says. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen (my words, not his). We've had a big downswing, which means we're due a pretty big upswing to get back to trend, he says. And we've got monetary policy and the terms of trade in place to drive that cyclical upswing. 'All cycles look different. We always ask the same question going through: oh, it's not quite happening as quickly as we thought. 'The question you ask yourself is: is that because it's not working? Is it that interest rates aren't going to have the same effect? That a positive-terms-of-trade shock won't have the same effect? Or are things just a bit different this time around?' Great question. And look, the sun's finally out and I think my head's clearing. Time to go for a walk and ponder it all. Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Heather du Plessis-Allan: Is the Govt so desperate they announce any half-baked idea?
Of all of the above, it's the ban that's going to give them ongoing headaches. On the face of it, it's great retail politics. Everyone hates being stung 2% for using the credit card at the sushi shop. But there will be consequences. The surcharge is there because it costs to use your credit card. Someone has to pay for it. Either you or the retailer. Currently, it's you in the form of the surcharge. After the ban, it'll be the retailer. And we're talking a lot of money. Interchange fees alone – the fees Visa and Mastercard charge – suck nearly $1 billion out of NZ businesses a year. Add what retail banks charge on top of that and we're talking several billion apparently. One retailer reckons they were paying $2500 a month just in merchant fees. That's $30,000 a year. They realised they were basically subsidising everyone's credit card loyalty schemes. So, they introduced the surcharge. No savvy small or medium-sized retailer will suck up a cost like that. If they can't get that back through a surcharge, they'll get it back by upping the price on products. So, while the Government can sell the story that they're saving consumers money through the ban, they're not. Pity the poor travel agents especially. Let's say they book flights to London for a family of four at the cost of $15,000. If the family put it on the credit card, which most of us would do, there is a $225 merchant fee. Once the ban kicks in, the travel agent will essentially be helping the family pay for their holiday. So, you can see why retailers are up in arms. They're so angry they've managed to mobilise the country's chambers of commerce into banding together in a statement criticising the ban. Their point is a fair one: the Government should really be dealing with the source of the problem, which is banks and credit card companies charging too much for a basic service. Ministers choosing to beat up on Kiwi retailers instead of sorting out big foreign bankers is bizarre. Even more so because SME owners are traditionally National Party and right-leaning voters. The Government is burning its own support base here. Which brings us to the weirdness of this. It should have been entirely predictable that this would blow back badly. So, why did they do it? Are they so desperate to get good coverage that they take any half-baked idea pitched at them by a minister at the weekend to announce the following Monday? Did they run out of time to interrogate the idea before announcing it? Or did they anticipate all the problems but ignore them in their desperation to get a cost-of-living announcement out? It also begs the question, why are they so panicked? The answer is probably that it's not just the Government's vibe that has shifted. It's the country's vibe too. It's the middle of this Government's term and the middle of winter and the tail end of a very long and hard recession. The goodwill towards the coalition Government is suddenly depleting. It's possibly recoverable. Summer and an economic recovery should improve things again. But even when we're warm and flush, it won't stop the Government stuffing things up itself if it keeps making weird announcements like this. Watch now for how they get out of this. And they'll have to. They can't be doing this to their own voter base just months out from next year's election.
Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
Taxpayers' Union Launches Campaign Against Dirty Deal Between Big Banks, ANZ, ASB, And The National Party
The New Zealand Taxpayers' Union has today launched a major campaign targeting Scott Simpson's Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Amendment Bill, which includes retrospective provisions that would extinguish a live class action brought by tens of thousands of bank customers against ANZ and ASB banks. The campaign has been launched with National Party's annual conference attendees being delivered love letters from the Big Banks to recognise their special relationship and bank bailout. In the coming days, a digital advertising, billboard, and grassroots mobilisation campaign demanding that Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Minister of Consumer Affairs Scott Simpson drop the retrospective clauses from the Bill will be launched. Taxpayers' Union Executive Director Jordan Williams said: 'This is a disgraceful case of retrospective lawmaking that undermines the rule of law and destroys trust in New Zealand as a stable place to do business." "Last month the NZ Herald reported that the Bill is a result of backroom discussions between the Government and the Aussie-owned big banks which excluded the consumer-side parties of the very class action litigation the Bill is intended to extinguish." "Across the Tasman, the Aussie banks were hauled over the coals for misconduct and dishonest practises. But in Wellington, they are doing deals with the Beehive to be bailed out and 'protected' from consumer class actions. It's perverting the course of justice for tens of thousands." "Not only does the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Amendment Bill run roughshod over the rule of law, it is specifically designed to bail out the powerful at the expense of ordinary Kiwis.' 'Tens of thousands of Kiwis are part of a live class action over alleged unfair fees. Instead of letting the courts do their job, Nicola Willis and Scott Simpson are stepping in to shut it down with the stroke of a pen. That's not justice — that's Parliament playing defence for its mates.' The Union says the Bill makes a mockery of the Government's own rhetoric about restoring New Zealand's reputation as a safe, rules-based place to invest and do business. 'The same Ministers pushing the so-called Regulatory Standards Bill – which rightly warns against retrospective legislation – are now ramming through a bill that does exactly that. That's usually called hypocrisy.' 'When governments change the rules mid-litigation to protect the well connected, it sends a chilling message to investors, consumers, and taxpayers alike: the law in New Zealand is only as stable as the political connections of the people you're up against.' Williams concluded: 'This campaign isn't just focused at the Government. It's to hold to account and expose the disgraceful behaviour of ANZ and ASB banks to undermine their own customers' rights. This is about not just honesty and integrity and customer disclosures, but New Zealanders having the ability to enforce consumer protection law against the big end of town.' 'Either the Government walks the talk on stable, principled lawmaking, or they admit they're no better than the last lot. Kiwis deserve better than this grubby stitch-up.' The social media, digital and advertising campaign launches next week along with some more creative plans to ensure this bill gets the public scrutiny it deserves. 'Watch this space.'
