« Rental Hell Slave Reveals Four Pet Peeves |
| Sunday RHU 2Fer: Nasty Ass Thieves and Sweet Old Ladies »
Sent in by Samsterzilla.
Posted by Freddy on Sunday, October 09, 2011 | Permalink
1. It's STILL a ten dollar item.
2. Yes, they make money this way because, SURPRISE, it's a BUSINESS!
3. If you have so much money to throw away by purchasing hundred of dollars worth of merchandise across the state (gas included) and then be able to file a civil lawsuit, I think you don't -need- to be using those coupons and should not be bitching about an extra $.30 you feel like you shouldn't have to pay. Ffs, it goes into your state!
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 09:55 AM
They're not doing anything against the law, technically. Sure, they most likely purposely don't link coupons, but that can't be forced either. Since they're not doing anything against the law how are they "doing it wrong"?
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 10:02 AM
I actually sort of agree with the custy on this. I mean it is kind of an underhanded practice.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Wal-mart's prices are usually cheaper than other stores. So if you don't like how you get charged tax on the original price, go elsewhere and pay more than .30c on the item.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 10:33 AM
I know at Petshart, on a lot of coupons we'd get, the fine print would say that the customer may be required to pay taxes on the full amount.
Fortunately for the customers, our computers are set up to where it deducts the coupon amount before it does anything with sales tax and then only taxes the reduced amount, but I've often wondered how many people would get pissed off if it didn't turn out that way -- or even how many people would notice.
Music Girl |
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 11:09 AM
At my store the customer is required to pay tax on the full price of an item if they're using a coupon. It's just the way our system works.
According to my supervisor, it's illegal to do it any other way (but I'm not sure I believe him, he's got a lot of fluff in his head...).
Generic Cashier |
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 11:19 AM
I've always viewed coupons as a form of currency in a way. That it doesn't reduce the price of the item, but pays for a portion of the item in leiu of other forms of payment. Therefore taxing the regular price makes sense and it follows that state's tax laws. I feel that it's a buncha big ol hype over something petty.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Sales tax depends on the state you live in. Basicallly there is no way going around it. Even if you do use a coupon, you will be taxed on the total of your portion. If you want to fight corporations on sales tax then you might as well fight all states who charge sales taxes. I don't see the custy winning on this one.
Queer Geek |
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Yeh. She's just a money-grubby custy. :/
The store can't exactly control how sales taxes work. There have been times I have been yelled at for a 2% state tax, that no one including us the cashiers, know what it's from.
Just suck it up! UGH! If really ties your knickers in a knot bring it up with the state government!
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 12:46 PM
I actually was wondering about this not too long ago and wrote to my state's department of revenue to get a straight answer. In my state (TN), the retailer has to pay tax on the amount that they will receive from the third-party company that is offering the coupon. They can choose whether or not to pass that amount on to the consumer. One large grocery chain in the area doesn't while most other retailers do. It's just a part of life, and she needs to deal with.
Versatile Vegetarian |
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 01:39 PM
Ok, so if she had a mail in rebate she would still have to pay the full tax amount. And guess what, tax laws are set by the state and not the corporations.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 02:48 PM
Oh WWWWAAAAA. Whatever lady. You are fighting the wrong people. Fight IRS and local/state/federal tax codes, not hellmart. Go cry me a river.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 03:22 PM
It's the new american dream, sue hellmart and try to get rich quick. People file because the sign says 2 cents lower then what a deli item rings up. They sue when they try to lift something and hurt themselves because slaves should psychically know custies are about to do something stupid and run to the rescue.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 03:52 PM
I'm actually against the practice of not linking coupons because it opens the door for the coupon fraud people who will use coupons of the same family code on the wrong, cheaper item. I think that if WM took a look at the numbers, they might find that they have a big problem on their hands. Also, it might not seem like a huge amount but when you are down to your last $10 of grocery money for the month and need to buy milk or whatever, a .30 cent difference could make or break your budget, especially if you are feeding a family.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 04:04 PM
When I go to Kroger, you can't even enter your coupon until AFTER taxes and totals, when you're going to pay, THEN you get your extra. So guess what, you are paying tax on the original amount, not the discount.
Same thing with most other stores I go to.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 05:29 PM
Yeah, it's skeevy as heck, but they're not doing anything illegal. And they guy for the revenue service flat out said the law will probably never be changed, because the state would loose money. It seriously sucks, but it's one of those instances where the consumer is just going to have to suck it up and deal with it.
But it still sucks.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 06:24 PM
Agreed with your post. I wasn't saying it was such a hardship, it was more of just the sneakiness of it that didn't sit well with me. Kind of like don't adopt policies that prove the paranoid custys right!
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 06:55 PM
Apparently she didn't read the coupon very well and missed the part that says "consumers must pay sales tax". I have had to point that out to a few customers, but most don't even pay attention to the sales tax.
Drug Store Diva |
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 07:16 PM
I'm wondering how many times will she sue Walmart before the company bans her for always sueing them.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 08:22 PM
Many of you are on the right track with this. The coupon is a form of payment, not an adjustment to the purchase price. If the cashier modifies the price of an item (incorrect price tag, etc.) THEN you pay tax on the new price. Coupons deduct from the final price of the order. A $5 coupon is the same as a $5 bill as far as the store is concerned.
Sunday, October 09, 2011 at 09:53 PM
It was pure sales-tax-shock when I moved from IN/CT with a 6% sales tax to AZ with a 9.5% sales tax. Lady, you wanna bitch about something? Bitch about those of us that have to pay sales tax near 10%, not the coupon. You only lost out on that ONCE. I get gouged EVERY! SINGLE! DAY! You won't get any sympathy from me. I've always read it as having to pay sales tax first and then having the coupon take it off. You're dense and you won't win. "Here's your sign."
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 12:52 AM
That's my local news. So that means this lady lives in my area. Awesome. I hope she never comes to MY store. "OH NOES, I PAID AN EXTRA THIRTY CENTS!" Really? Get a grip. I can MAYBE understand being irritated, but filing a lawsuit seems like an overreaction.
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 06:58 AM
@Humor_Me: 10%? Not so bad. Here in Ontario, tax is 13% - and that's lower than the 15% it was for a long time.
Then again, we get free healthcare. :)
Opera House Whore |
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 08:42 AM
@OHW: 12% here in Manitoba, but that's a combination of GST and PST (5% and 7%, respectively). I think in ontario you have HST, which combines both, right? Which seems silly to me, because some items either don't get PST or GST (can't remember) and then you end up paying that anyways because all the taxes are combined. So I've been told, anyways. I know Alberta has it... I think... ffffft
/so ignorant about her own country QuQ;;;
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 09:10 AM
Why would anyone want to defend Wal Mart? They don't need us to defend them.
Hellbound Alleee |
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 09:16 AM
I bet the woman paid tax when she used coupons in every other store. Of course,she only noticed that fact at WalMart!
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 10:33 AM
This woman also sued K-Mart over charging sales tax on Toilet paper. She also sued WalMart over charging $1 instead of 98 cents for a package of sausage. Those are the ones i know about. I believe she has sued a lot more times that that.
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 10:41 AM
"She also sued WalMart over charging $1 instead of 98 cents for a package of sausage."
Lawyer fees: $800
Time/travel/parking for court: $300
Winning your case: 2¢
AWESOME knowing you have made your money's worth.
Monday, October 10, 2011 at 10:53 PM
This is what class action lawsuits are for. The state is looking the other way because they are getting paid extra tax. But PA tax code, section 33, is actually very clear on this, and even has examples. Walmart charging this tax is wrong. Most of the other retailers get this correct and don't charge the tax. Understand that if you have 5 million customers in Pennsylvania nd clip each of them five extra dollars per year, that is $25 million per year, probably enough to build a new store.
Friday, August 24, 2012 at 11:28 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.