Slashdot Mirror
California Law Banning Paper Receipts Clears First Hurdle In State Legislature (latimes.com)
In January, California Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) introduced a law barring retailers from printing paper receipts unless a customer requests one. Otherwise they'd be required to provide proof-of-purchase receipts "only in electronic form." The bill has cleared its first hurdle in the sate Legislature on Monday as it passed the Nature Resources Committee in a 6-3 vote, despite concerns from some industry groups that say the switch should be driven by the market, not a government mandate. The Los Angeles Times reports: Assembly Bill 161 by Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) said his bill is an easy way to reduce paper waste in the state while addressing consumers' frustrations with excessively long receipts. Customers have taken to social media for years to complain and poke fun at the size of their receipts, particularly at CVS drugstore, posting pictures of the coupon-packed printouts measuring taller than a refrigerator. The paper that receipts are printed on is generally too thin to be made from recycled material, according to a legislative analysis of the bill. Once they are thrown away, the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, or CalRecycle, said the use of chemicals on paper receipts makes them undesirable to recyclers.
The American Forest and Paper Assn., a paper industry group that opposes the bill, estimates that the United States generates 180,000 tons of paper receipts each year. That, the group points out, is a small percentage of total paper waste. The bill would give businesses until 2022 to provide customers electronic receipts, or a paper printout available on request. Violators would receive two warnings before being levied a $25-per-day fine. The maximum annual fine would be $300. The bill exempts cash-only and smaller businesses with gross receipts under $1 million a year from the electronic receipt requirement.
The American Forest and Paper Assn., a paper industry group that opposes the bill, estimates that the United States generates 180,000 tons of paper receipts each year. That, the group points out, is a small percentage of total paper waste. The bill would give businesses until 2022 to provide customers electronic receipts, or a paper printout available on request. Violators would receive two warnings before being levied a $25-per-day fine. The maximum annual fine would be $300. The bill exempts cash-only and smaller businesses with gross receipts under $1 million a year from the electronic receipt requirement.
Okay, I don't live in CA, but ... this mean you'd have to give every retailer you buy from your email address, so no thanks. I'll always be asking for a paper receipt.
[ Contact info is not the new "plastic". ]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
This can be done via QR codes or NFC to a phone without the need for them to have any of your information.
It's a good thing. I've been scanning receipts for years and sometimes retailers don't like copies, but you also can't realistically keep paper receipts for 10+ years either. Aside from anything the thermal printed ones degrade and become illegible.
Someone was moaning about it in the thread on LED lightbulbs with 10 year warranties yesterday. Digital copies are much easier to keep and organize.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
One needs the receipts longer than my height filled with coupons, right? What will we do if we lose those $2 discounts on the shampoo, and buy one get one offers on vitamins?
(jk)
This law is just going to benefit retailers who will make it harder to return merchandise with fewer customers having receipts. It's also going to erode privacy further by herding people into giving stores their phone numbers or email addresses.
Instead, make a summary receipt the default. Date, store, cashier, total price, tax. Wouldn't need to be more than a couple inches.
Paper receipts give buyers a proof of purchase which isn't tied to an email address, a phone number, or an account.
I'll keep my paper receipts, thanks. The less personal information I have to give out, the better.
If I needed a retail proof of purchase, and the merchant was digital only, I would shop somewhere else.
Sorry Phil Ting, you're a well meaning idiot but fucking clueless.
I'm not providing most business I deal with my email, my phone number, or any other suitable information for getting a receipt "only in electronic form".
I don't trust businesses not to be assholes, and I don't trust them to be remotely fucking competent to keep this stuff secure. Therefore any information to send me this receipt I refuse to give them.
The privacy and security implications of companies you deal with being able to provide you with an electronic receipt are staggering -- and no way in hell I'd ever do that.
They'll get told what everyone else gets told when they ask for my email address ... not fucking way.
We have enough privacy breaches happening without giving even more fucking companies that information.
This is a terrible idea which will cause new problems. And it will start to create the really broken situation like cashless stores where they will not sell you something unless you hand over your fucking email address.
No, just no.
"Where's your tattoo? Why come you don't have a tattoo?"
Many major retailers will let you return the item using the credit/debit card you purchased it with. Cash / giftcard purchases might be problematic though...
"There are people who do not love their fellow human being, and I _hate_ people like that!" - Tom Lehrer
I'm not giving everyone I do business with my email address or phone number. They don't need a way to track me and send me ads. Paper receipts give me some privacy. I am fine with non-returnable purchases like gas and fast food not giving a receipt by default though.
Another well meaning politician wasting time making laws without looking at the full implications. He can feel good about it while ignoring real issues that really should be worked out.
What makes our California overlords think that all the world's problems can be solved by banning something...
You can buy something and walk out without a receipt. I do it all the time with small purchases.
When one of your "small purchases" turns out defective, what steps do you typically need to take to prove to the retail clerk that you bought the product at that store within the return window (such as 14 or 30 days)?
OK, so, business that bring in less than $1 million per year don't have to comply. Businesses that bring in more than $1 million per year can pay... $300 per year in fines, and then just ignore it? How is this actually going to work?
If they REALLY want to do something useful, how about banning disappearing-ink receipts?
I've had SO many receipts from California merchants where the blue ink faded completely by tax-filing time, leaving me with a mysterious piece of blank paper in my "deduct this" collection. B-b
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
This can be done via QR codes or NFC to a phone without the need for them to have any of your information.
So... I'd have to have a smartphone (or have it with me) with a QR app and/or NFC enabled -- or give out my email address -- to buy something.
Good thing this law doesn't *ban* paper receipts (yet).
I imagine you're assuming using the phone for the purchase too, and I'm not discounting your solution, just pointing out that it's a little elitist.
On the other end of this spectrum, buying with cash and getting a paper receipt is anonymous and works for rich and poor people.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
My understanding is that this proposal makes the paper receipt *optional* if you give them an e-mail. First, I don't want to be on their list. Secondly, I sometimes want a paper receipt for a variety of reasons, such as eating at the grocery store and not wanting to get accused of shoplifting.
What they need to do is regulate the width and length of the receipt, and the number of items per unit length. They also need to phase out thermal paper, perhaps tax the thermal paper to fund a program for replacing it with plain paper. Why? Because thermal paper is plastics, and plastic pollution is a huge problem. Require the receipt to tell us if it's plain or thermal so we can dispose of it properly. Finally, no coupons or promotions printing out of the register unless we hit OK on the terminal.
Of course that's a lot, and lobbyists are going to push HARD against that but IMHO it's really the direction we need to go. I'm not sure how we get there.
Maybe then we can get rid of the stinkin' "club cards" and games they want you to play at the store, but first things first.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
CVS always asks for my email when I buy a $0.50 tube of chapstick, then they print out a 3 foot long receipt. Do you really think they won't spam the hell out of any email address I give them?
CVS is the current bad guy, but as soon as $BigBoxRetailer gets their hands on my email address do you really think they won't spam the hell out of it?
One of my brothers want to CVS, bought three items, and ended up with a receipt that was almost 6 feet in length. Perhaps all we need to do is limit the length of CVS receipts.
It's not so much the paper that bothers me, it's the bisphenol A.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Ban paper receipts? No thanks. It's official documentation of the transaction.
Allow the status quo? No thanks. Stores are needlessly printing too much paper with information I do not need.
How about we compromise? Let's -reduce- the amount of waste, mandating that consumer receipts contain a maximum amount of information, say a list of purchased items, prices, and quantities, name & contact info of business, and date of transaction? Then only print all the extra QR codes, coupons, promos, etc. if a customer asks for it.
lawÂbarring retailers from printing paper receiptsÂunless a customer requests one.Â
Which means they will not be purchasing more receipt paper or ink once it runs out and you won't be able to request a paper receipt after that. As soon as the printer breaks it won't get fixed either. Not that it matters, because after this goes into effect within two years no one will know how to push the "Print Receipt" button either.
It is unbelievable that CA has nothing better to do than meddle with things like this. This type of action is almost completely meaningless other than appearance. I get more paper in junk mail that I don't want (despite being on anti-marketing lists) in any single day than the amount of paper on receipts for over a month, which I DO want.
It can also be EXTREMELY expensive for small businesses to comply with such ridiculous laws. Why? Because if all they can produce is a paper receipt, now they somehow have to come up with some complex scheme to collect and enter private info be able to send an "electronic" version. Entire point of sale systems would have to be replaced, even if the retailer KNOWS that almost none of their customers want the option. It would also cost more in labor as they try to collect such info... which also slows down checkout lanes. Great!
Plus, if the customer doesn't get the "promised" receipt, they may have no return/exchange recourse at all and the business will have to spend labor/time/money dealing with all those issues, too.
That California DEMOCRATS, because they've run the place for years, have less common sense than you'd find in a cheeseburger.
Not to say the Republicans would be any better, but...
Maybe it's an opportunity- create a zillion fake receipts for expenses etc. The state would have no chance or way to challenge their legitimacy. PROFIT!
California has REAL problems and they prioritize paper receipts?
That vast State Water Project was designed for a population not much greater than 25 million. Today, on any one day, California verges on nearly 40 million people within its borders and is projected to reach 50 million if not higher.
According to a January 2017 study, “California state and local governments owe $1.3 trillion as of June 30, 2015.” The study was based on “a review of federal, state and local financial disclosures.”
When you consider the California legal system and its regulatory system, inclusive of the world’s most comprehensive global warming law, California is likely the most regulated state in the Country.
California also is among the highest taxed states in the nation. California has the highest income tax rates. The top rate is 13.3%. The next highest is Oregon, but they don't have a sales tax.
The middle class is leaving in droves because of the above plus the high cost of housing.
But paper receipts must be addresses first.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...
Humour? One hopes...
California is a cautionary tale of what happens when the far left is left to their own devices without supervision.
California is what republicans point to as an example of the disaster democratic policies bring to this country and frankly it's impossible to argue they are wrong.
Democrats fall all over themselves talking about equality and safety nets. When in reality their policies are directly responsible for alarming rates of homelessness in this state.
"The environment" has been weaponized as a means of accumulating power and spending that power in the most racist and unaccountable manner possible.
When we get to the text of the bill itself it comes apparent the real reason for it is lobbying efforts by companies offering systems to provide digital receipts. From text of the bill itself:
"Data from Square, a company that provides mobile payment services, services shows that their sellers send over 10 million 10,000,000 digital receipts each month."
Why is the name of a company that offers the very services being mandated by this bill in the text of the bill? What is even the point of this sentence in the text of the legislation?
That anyone thinks the government should be legislating crap like this scares the shit out of me. People are fucking losing their minds. If your contention is that receipt printers cause cancer you can do something to fix that.
Unfortunately thanks to irrational California behavior "everything" is known to cause cancer therefore everyone ignores such warnings even in cases where they may be worth heeding.
This can be done via QR codes
QR codes get you what all of a half k of data max? The receipt in form of QR code could not provide purchasing history by itself. It would have to be a pointer to a system that will track you when you access it.
NFC to a phone
Yea I want all of my purchases everywhere to be linked to me, aggregated and sold to the highest bidder to be used by retailers against me. Great idea.
It's a good thing. I've been scanning receipts for years and sometimes retailers don't like copies, but you also can't realistically keep paper receipts for 10+ years either. Aside from anything the thermal printed ones degrade and become illegible.
Who scans receipts? You have issues.
Someone was moaning about it in the thread on LED lightbulbs with 10 year warranties yesterday. Digital copies are much easier to keep and organize.
Wake me up when there is a global universal standard for digital receipts in the first place and then talk to me about ease of keeping organized.
just pointing out that it's a little elitist.
There is nothing "elitist" about cell phones.
95% of American adults have a cell phone.
87% of adults in Bangladesh have a cell phone, twice as many as have a toilet in their home.
For the few people that don't have a phone or email, they can still ask for a paper receipt.
Create a new email alias each month/year/... ex: receipt2019@mydomain.com, receipt201903@mydomain.com... At the end of each month/year, archive your emails and delete your alias. This way, you will not have to share your "real" email to every store and spam will bounce when you delete the alias.
Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
but you also can't realistically keep paper receipts for 10+ years either
That's sort of a false issue. Most people who make use of paper receipts to return something do it within 30 days or so. Brushing the issue off by tossing out 'Ten years' sounds like a rationalization.
Until retailers, because no-paper is pushed so hard, stop keeping the facility to print receipts. I would like it better if this was a double-edged-sword kind of law. One that says:
1. Retailers can only print a receipt if the buyer requests.
2. Retailers MUST maintain the capability and print a receipt if a buyer requests.
Does Costco still have people at the exit to check your things to make sure that you have only the stuff that you paid for? If so then everyone is going to have to ask for a receipt with this silly law. There are better things that could be done for the environment than trying to ban receipts.
Start printing out highly-polluting plastic receipts! That'll teach those idiots in legislature what for!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Many return / rebate / warranty processes require presenting the original receipt. It is these requirements that make systems like Neat Receipts suspect -- a retailer won't accept a scanned copy of the receipt. I hope this triggers a change in that thinking.
One thought I had is that $1M in gross receipts, in California, is relatively nothing. A plumber running his own business would probably be able to clear that, running on hand written receipts done on carbon paper out of a clipbook.
Remember, "gross income" isn't profit. It's literally how much money they pull in before paying ANYTHING. It's before they pay for supplies, wages, rent, utilities, etc...
Somebody running a coffee shack that sells a little under 500 $6 coffees a day would bust the limit.
I don't read AC A human right
So, 174% of Bangladeshi adults have toilets?
That seems a bit high, but I'll take your word for it.
You are welcome on my lawn.
but you also can't realistically keep paper receipts for 10+ years either
That's sort of a false issue. Most people who make use of paper receipts to return something do it within 30 days or so. Brushing the issue off by tossing out 'Ten years' sounds like a rationalization.
Uh.. Ever heard of tax records? The IRS can demand receipts for shit you claimed for up to 7 years in the past. So take your "30 days to return shit" and stuff it.
As a bonus, the Bangladeshis can use their paper receipts as toilet paper. It's a win-win.
great idea, most of the time i don't want a receipt, i'm sure a lot of people don't really need one. but if you do, you can ask and still get it.
but after seeing those twitter posts and having a good laugh, there should also be some limit put on the size of receipts as well. even just one printed CVS receipt is 99% waste.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
There was an article on NPR several years back talking with the head of the U.S. Printing Office, now called the U.S. Publishing Office.
The guy talked about all the efficiencies that had taken place over the previous twenty years or so, how they had reduced head count while still doing their service. One of the points he mentioned was the change from paper forms (IRS and the budget in particular) and how much money the taxpayers were being saved because of the reduced spending on paper.
Guess who whined about this saving and reduced waste. Exactly. The paper industry was "concerned" citizens wouldn't be served if they didn't have a paper form, that the government was moving too fast to go digital.
Same thing here. While I don't own a "smart" phone, the only time I really want a paper receipt is when I'm grocery shopping so I can verify what I was charged for each item. It doesn't happen often, but there have been times the charges are wrong so by having the receipt I can get my money back.
For everything else, when I'm buying one item on credit card, it's easy to see the cost and know it's correct.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
I really wish there was an electronic solution to receipts. I get them with every purchase I make and they just tend to pile up until I throw them all out. Some retailers will e-mail me receipts, which is better, but obviously I don't want to give every merchant my e-mail address. I get enough junk mail without being signed up for every corporate newsletter they have just because I once bought one item in their store. I wish there was a way for the retailer to send me a PDF of the receipt in such a way that the retailer wouldn't know my e-mail address and wouldn't be able to use this to send additional mailings. Additional points if it could search my receipts and find "that shirt that I bought from Boscov's three weeks ago." I'd use a system like this in a heartbeat.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Many seniors rely on paper receipts. They often do not have internet access or any intention of using modern technology. Banning paper receipts is bad.
... back-door attack by the cashless society people? You be the judge.
There is nothing "elitist" about cell phones.
95% of American adults have a cell phone.
But only somewhere from 30-50% of younger Americans do (not counting single-digit children.) A system which required cellphones would be prejudiced against the young. They make purchases, too.
For the few people that don't have a phone or email, they can still ask for a paper receipt.
For now...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Isn't printing paper receipts and storing them in landfills, requiring us to grow more trees to print more paper receipts a form on carbon sequestration?
Would those be smart phones? Because not all cell phones are smart phones.
Here's a though genius, make the receipt smaller. Shock I know. Because:
"The American Forest and Paper Assn., a paper industry group that opposes the bill, estimates that the United States generates 180,000 tons of paper receipts each year. That, the group points out, is a small percentage of total paper waste."
So not really a problem is it Potsy....
This is waste of fucking time and does nothing about climate change. Jesus fucking Christ you could actually go after the real drivers instead of the insignificant piddly bull shit.
This Law Sponsored by Google, which of course will get to see all of those e-receipts and use them in its data mining against you.
Oh gosh. I'd had enough to drink to post shit, but not enough to get my usual clarity.
Thanks for the correction, brother.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Until retailers, because no-paper is pushed so hard, stop keeping the facility to print receipts. I would like it better if this was a double-edged-sword kind of law. One that says:
1. Retailers can only print a receipt if the buyer requests.
2. Retailers MUST maintain the capability and print a receipt if a buyer requests.
I would be mostly on board with this as a solution. It is a very fair compromise that addresses most concerns.
I do want my receipts to have dynamic content.
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
So I can see this being an issue when you tell the cashier your email address and they enter it in wrong. Then when you need to return the defective product, you suddenly realize you never got the receipt. Now, you could hold up the line until you see it show in your inbox, but I've had mail be delayed 30+ minutes when there are issues in the pipes I can't be aware of. This is just going to lead to abuse from criminals and legitimate grievances from non-tech customers.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
Dimwits will continue buying unneeded toys and electronic gadgets from Amazon not realizing that 1 Amazon box + the fuel to get it to your door is way more than 500 paper receipts.
Your logic seems to be based on me getting paid all the time, or that me doing anything but work is taking time away from work.
Someone who works from home might have to take time off work to make a trip into town.
If you have to take time off from a job that pays hourly, then you can make a case for losing money to use the time.
I work two jobs, one of them from home. Taking the bus to the shopping center to return something takes roughly two and a half hours away from time I could spend on billable projects: a 45 minute ride there transferring downtown, a 10 minute return, a 50 minute wait for the next bus (which runs hourly in my city), and a 45 minute ride home transferring downtown.
/. Is showing its age. Receipts suck and are super inefficient for small business owners who buy things retail. Stop thinking about all the negatives. Iâ(TM)m sure someone can think of a non tracking way to get an electronic receipt on your phone in a standardized way.
But but but... Here in the Boston area, there is an effort underway to FORCE small businesses to accept cash. The theory is that not everybody has a phone, online pay, etc. and have to use cash. So when those laws meet up, you'll be able to use cash but won't be able to get a paper receipt?
Some old person trying to give their email address to the cashier. As aol@www.www. Or someone with folks behind them loudly spelling out lickmyjizz69@gmail.com. Lol. Yeah this seems âoelike a good ideaâ. Instead cashiers will just type in some bullshit and that person will not get the email. But donâ(TM)t let that stop you CA from putting everyone through a lot of trouble to implement YET ONE MORE RULE.