During yesterday’s 2023 State of the Union Address, President Biden talked about his efforts to rein in airline and hotel fees. The framework behind this was first revealed in 2022, though we’re getting more details about what this will look like.
This is part of a larger Junk Fees Prevention Act, tackling everything from early termination fees for cable, to excessive overdraft fees. However, this is a travel blog, so I wanted to focus on the two travel-specific initiatives that will have the greatest impact on travelers.
In this post:
Ban surprise resort and destination fees
Resort and destination fees are among the most frustrating fees in the hotel industry. The concept of hotels charging these fees has become increasingly common in recent years, and this is frustrating for consumers:
- With this practice, hotels generally bundle some amenities for a fixed nightly fee, in order to generate more revenue
- One of the primary motivations for these fees is to initially make the rate seem lower than it actually is; some hotels have a bad habit of “drip pricing,” whereby the cost of a hotel stay increases as you go through the booking process
- There are some other motivations for these kinds of fees, including online travel agencies not getting commissions on that portion of the rate, and in some areas there are tax benefits to this as well
With the Junk Fees Prevention Act, hotels would be required to include any resort or destination fees in the price when initially comparison shopping hotels, so that consumers aren’t surprised. This way consumers will know which hotels are charging these fees, and can budget accordingly. Here’s how this is described by the White House:
When families set their budget for a vacation, they expect that the hotel price they see is the price they will pay. But many travelers encounter surprise “resort fees” or “destination fees” when they check out or at the end of a lengthy online reservation process. These fees harm consumers by preventing them from the seeing the true price when they pick out a hotel and by limiting their ability to comparison shop. Over the past decade, a growing number of hotels have imposed these fees on consumers, which can be $50 or more per night. More than one-third of hotel guests report having paid such fees. And the total costs for Americans are enormous: according to one report, hotels collected billions in these fees and surcharges in 2018.
Ban airline fees for family members to sit with young children
Nowadays many airlines monetize seat assignments. This means that if you’re not willing to pay for specific seats, you could end up being separated from your travel companions. If you’re traveling with small kids, this also means you could be separated from your kids.
With the Junk Fees Prevention Act, airlines would need to ensure that children 13 years of age or younger are seated next to an accompanying adult at no extra charge. Here’s how this is described by the White House:
Many airlines today charge a fee to select a seat in advance, including for those traveling with children. Parents can find themselves unexpectedly not seated with their young child on a flight or paying large fees to sit next to their children. The President believes no parent should have to pay extra to sit next to their child.
In July 2022, the DOT issued a notice stating that it is the Department’s policy that U.S. airlines ensure that children who are age 13 or younger are seated next to an accompanying adult with no extra charge, but still no airline guarantees fee-free family seating. DOT will publish a family seating fee dashboard and launch a rulemaking to ban the practice. The President is calling upon Congress to fast-track the ban on family seating fees so that the DOT can crack down on these practices more quickly than through a rulemaking.
My take on these changes to travel fees
Let’s start with resort and destination fees. Here in the travel world, I imagine this would be one rule change that has (near) full bipartisan support. No one is saying that hotels and resorts have to eliminate these fees, but rather that they have to display them when you initially search. Just as airlines are required to display all-in pricing, hotels should have to as well (or at least all-in pricing minus taxes and government fees). I’m curious — does anyone not support this concept?
Now, to be honest, I’m a little more conflicted about requiring airlines to seat families together at no cost, primarily due to the logistics. If you book your ticket last minute and only extra legroom seats are available, would families be entitled to those at no extra cost? Where would the line be drawn as to which seats can be assigned for free? On Southwest, would this mean that all families with children up to the age of 13 would be able to board early on, so that they can be sure they sit together?
Along similar lines, a large part of the ultra low cost carrier business model is that you’re supposed to pay to assign seats if you want to be seated together, regardless of who you’re with. Should that expectation not apply to families in the same way? Will airlines like Spirit have to raise fares in markets where there are lots of families, like to Orlando, since they’ll lose out on a big revenue source?
Bottom line
President Biden is tackling fees with the Junk Fees Prevention Act, and that includes some fees charged by hotels and airlines. With this, we could see hotels have to be more transparent about resort and destination fees, displaying them at the time that the initial search is performed. For airlines, we could see airlines have to seat families together at no extra cost.
I imagine that at least the first point will have very widespread support among consumers, and is long overdue.
What do you make of these potential changes to travel industry fees?
I don't live in the US, but what the US does matters to me because it sets the standard for bookings worldwide. Reading some comments, I find it utterly ridiculous that some people think just because it's a Biden initiative, then it's suddenly bad. So now they're against transparency? They're against making informed decisions? It's all starting to make sense to me. What has happened to some people in the US being anti-everything and not...
I don't live in the US, but what the US does matters to me because it sets the standard for bookings worldwide. Reading some comments, I find it utterly ridiculous that some people think just because it's a Biden initiative, then it's suddenly bad. So now they're against transparency? They're against making informed decisions? It's all starting to make sense to me. What has happened to some people in the US being anti-everything and not having the capacity to think for themselves?
This is incredible
If the Junk Fees refers specifically to Resort/Service Fees, I can see hotels immediately following the Airbnb example and charging cleaning fees. Several of the properties on Booking.com are already doing this.
I do not really care what fees they want to include, but when searching by price, they should all be included upfront. Booking.com is not including them and I have had to research to find another property with a better total price;...
If the Junk Fees refers specifically to Resort/Service Fees, I can see hotels immediately following the Airbnb example and charging cleaning fees. Several of the properties on Booking.com are already doing this.
I do not really care what fees they want to include, but when searching by price, they should all be included upfront. Booking.com is not including them and I have had to research to find another property with a better total price; some of the properties were charging upwards of $50 on a base price of less than $50.
The truth is why is the government even wasting their time with this. Any bill they come up will have enough loopholes to drive a semi-trailer through it. Better to provide consumer education.
If the government truly wants to save a group of people from being ripped off, they should start with the robocalls directed at the elderly who are being taken for their life savings.
I am basically there with you on the travel rules. I am a staunch free market advocate and I make no apologies for that. I completely oppose banning the add-ons hotel fees, but I firmly believe a free market works best when there is transparency for buyers so that competition can do its thing. Competition requires that the buyer have all the information on the cost of the good or service they are buying. I...
I am basically there with you on the travel rules. I am a staunch free market advocate and I make no apologies for that. I completely oppose banning the add-ons hotel fees, but I firmly believe a free market works best when there is transparency for buyers so that competition can do its thing. Competition requires that the buyer have all the information on the cost of the good or service they are buying. I don't like these fees any more than anyone else, but if I am willing to pay them to stay at a property or if they are just baked into the rate, as a market participant, I should be able to make my purchase decision either way. Because if they ban the fees, they won't go away, per-night rates will simply go up.
I also agree on where is the limit for seating children with their family. The airline is selling space and different spaces have difference values to customers. This is basic value pricing. The government is basically forcing them to sell these seats below market rate and causing the airline to suffer an economic loss versus their true value. And it only applies to children. I know discrimination laws get murky when kids are involved, but could this be discriminatory since it only applies to certain ages? Doubtful but I would imagine there will be a lawsuit to test that. Don't get me wrong. I am not in favor of making kids seat apart from their family - so many assume opposition to a bill means you are in favor of what it is attacking - I just don't agree with the solution (And compared to hotel fees, I am not sure this is an area that the government should even be wading into since it's not about transparency but eliminating choices.)
The same logic will apply to early termination fees. If you finance your phone or lease your cable router and end that lease early, if the carriers can't charge you a fee for the economic loss they are incurring as a result - and, yes, they are incurring a loss compared to the value of the deal over the full term - they will simply just make you pay for the device upfront. Hope everyone is ready to shell out $1000 for your next upgrade. Be sure to thank you friendly politicians who stepped in to "help" you.
Age discrimination is an acceptable discrimination because our generation isn't awoke about it yet.
Why can't 12 years old vote?
Why do seniors get more discount?
Should have thought about paying for seat fees before traveling.
Can't afford, then should have thought about it before having a child.
I don't think implementing the family-seating thing would be that complicated. You would still have to pay for seat assignments if you wanted to know ahead of time where you were going to sit. Behind the scenes, the system would flag if there were a child in the reservation to ensure assignment together. The only complication is if the flight starts to fill up with too many people who have paid for window/aisle, you would...
I don't think implementing the family-seating thing would be that complicated. You would still have to pay for seat assignments if you wanted to know ahead of time where you were going to sit. Behind the scenes, the system would flag if there were a child in the reservation to ensure assignment together. The only complication is if the flight starts to fill up with too many people who have paid for window/aisle, you would need logic to block sufficient numbers of seats together. The final regulation would almost certainly include escapes for irops or last-minute bookings. Like anything, airlines would adjust to the regs by boosting other fees or base fares to keep revenue the same.
If you don’t want to pay resort fees then perhaps you can find a more economical hotel that fits your budget to stay at. Hotels have overhead costs. Eliminating resort fees would be ineffective as hotels would just price it into the nightly rate. If you’re demanding resorts to start lowering how much they charge then expect a resort to offer you less amenities and a diminished guest experience.
If you pay for basic economy...
If you don’t want to pay resort fees then perhaps you can find a more economical hotel that fits your budget to stay at. Hotels have overhead costs. Eliminating resort fees would be ineffective as hotels would just price it into the nightly rate. If you’re demanding resorts to start lowering how much they charge then expect a resort to offer you less amenities and a diminished guest experience.
If you pay for basic economy don’t demand preferred seating and premium services on the day of travel. Families agree at the time of booking to pay less for not being able to choose seats together and shouldn’t demand it at the date of travel.
Finally , no one knows what Joe Biden is talking about. Even Joe Biden doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
D3 - I believe the material point is not whether the resort fees are warranted, it’s the fact that they ARE NOT DISCLOSED upfront and one is left with a nasty surprise upon checkout. No one wants to be tricked by hidden costs. Include these fees in the room rate and the problem is solved. No one is suggesting that resorts can’t charge what they want, but rather that they disclose all fees during the...
D3 - I believe the material point is not whether the resort fees are warranted, it’s the fact that they ARE NOT DISCLOSED upfront and one is left with a nasty surprise upon checkout. No one wants to be tricked by hidden costs. Include these fees in the room rate and the problem is solved. No one is suggesting that resorts can’t charge what they want, but rather that they disclose all fees during the booking process. Perhaps you’ve never been stung by hidden fees but for those of us who have had the ugly surprise at checkout, this matters, a lot. And, hard to understand why this isn’t a bipartisan issue??!!
@Donna
I’m having an off day. The OMAAT comment sections get fiery sometimes.
I am all for consumer protection sure.
I gave up my seat for a mother and daughter to sit together last week. I’m not saying families shouldn’t sit together. If possible then great but nothing to guarantee or delay a flight.
While well intentioned ; the president made some remarks during the SOTU that can’t be promised.
Like a wall? (Sorry you left one over the middle of the plate, I had to swing at it.)
I'm all for banning resort fees. I don't understand why anyone would be against deceptive pricing techniques.
Regarding seating families together, I think there's a simple solution that could work for everyone. Block the last 5-6 rows (maybe more for certain destinations) of the plane and put all the families with kids together there. Those families who want to pay for better seats closer to the front can do so. A win for the rest...
I'm all for banning resort fees. I don't understand why anyone would be against deceptive pricing techniques.
Regarding seating families together, I think there's a simple solution that could work for everyone. Block the last 5-6 rows (maybe more for certain destinations) of the plane and put all the families with kids together there. Those families who want to pay for better seats closer to the front can do so. A win for the rest of us that don't really want to sit by families with small kids either.
Who cares. This does not really say anything about what they are going to do about the fees and they just mention two specific types of fees. It is not like they are tackling all additional fees that hotels try to charge. Remember your other article about package fees? You don't think the hotels are preparing for something else if this comes through?!?! .......
I do not want to lose my ability to avoid paying resort fees when booking Hilton rooms with points as a result of this, but if that is preserved, it is OK with me.
When I plan my hotel visits and I see fees pop up at the pay button, if possible I go to a hotel that doesn't do that. I don't need the government stepping in to help. As for families sometimes things happen and you might have to swap seats. Other families act like its their right to have people move and I am sure they are gaming the system to avoid seat fees. Not my problem.
One thing I hate with these fees is how done hotels will barely mention the fee and it's not in your bill when you book it. But when you check out there it is. Every cent that you will have to pay should be listed up front and then the consumer can decide if they want to pay that price.
I have flatly refused to pay things that were not at least included in my reservation. Sue me if you want the extras you tagged on. Twice they tried and failed to scam me that way.
Biden sure made a fool out of himself last night. Kamala looked high af. Her husband French kissed jill Biden.
Destination and resort fees are needed to keep the riff raff out.
Seek help
What does he entail by airline fees? Does he mean bag and seat fees? Change fees (which were a real money maker) are mostly gone domestically. Sounds like he can forget about certain PAC donations for 2024.
READ the article. It specifically referred to fees for seating younger children near their parents. Anyone who's been stuck next to a child separated from their parents on a plane knows why this is a problem. ("should" parents have paid for them to sit together- sure, but many don't understand the system or won't pay- so then there
are insistent requests to move people from their seat to a worse (usually middle) seat elsewhere so the parent can be by the child).
Wow seems like the world has bigger issues to focus on than resort fees. Feels like overreaching regulation as a sport.
As for seat selection just raise everyone’s prices and have free seat selection first come first serve when booking. That way there’s no “unfair surprise costs” to anyone, instead of cherry-picking who gets a free ride.
Would US contributors please, please do non-US residents a favour and find another website on which to post your political comments? Those of us who haven't fallen off the edge of the earth would very much appreciate it.
You portray your country as being more ridiculous than it really is, which admittedly is high benchmark.
Ben, thank you for your commentaries and please keep up the good work.
I could not agree with you more! I'm an American and have political viewpoints, but there is a time and place for those discussions. It's really sad how some people can no longer engage in normal conversation without allowing their political opinions and bias to infect their every thought and word. This is a travel blog--let's talk about travel!
In general I'd agree with you, but this article is explicitly about something President Biden promised in the State of the Union address last night. Politics is fair game on this thread.
Consider politics have embedded into almost every aspect of our lives, Politics is fair game on everything.
The advantage of freedom is being heard.
The problem of freedom is being heard.
You can't have it both ways. But if you really want to avoid it, China is a good place to get every thing censored.
As a global citizen living under the watchful 5 eyed world police, we discuss global politics everywhere.
Thank you for choosing our hotel. Your room rate is $5.
There is a compulsory resort fee of $40
There is a compulsory destination fee of $50
There is a compulsory check in fee of $20
There is an compulsory elevator fee of $10
There is a compulsory tv fee of $10
There is a compulsory electricity fee of $30
There is a compulsory water fee of $10
Thank you for choosing our hotel. Your room rate is $5.
There is a compulsory resort fee of $40
There is a compulsory destination fee of $50
There is a compulsory check in fee of $20
There is an compulsory elevator fee of $10
There is a compulsory tv fee of $10
There is a compulsory electricity fee of $30
There is a compulsory water fee of $10
There is a compulsory waste fee of $10
There is a compulsory bed fee of $20
There is compulsory linen fee of $10
There is a compulsory cleaning fee of $10
That will be $225 please
And please, enjoy your $5 room!
Resort fees are a way for the hotel to not pay commissions.
Simple.
And it allows them to look less like expensive on search engine results.
ALL the fees should be eliminated. Behind the scenes hotels/resorts/airlines/etc can do whatever they want - just tell me the price. Showing me taxes/fees/etc is just ways to confuse people. The price is $X. Do you want it yes or no? Any additional information is irrelevant.
Perhaps obvious, but nobody seems to have explicitly said it:
"Resort fees" if not optional, are exactly the same as YQ on air fares.
Imagine an airline selling you a ticket, but insisting that you pay extra for the fuel to power it, or ATC to process the flight.
It's *sort of* OK for a hotel to charge extra for things you don't have to use (E.g. a swimming pool) just as...
Perhaps obvious, but nobody seems to have explicitly said it:
"Resort fees" if not optional, are exactly the same as YQ on air fares.
Imagine an airline selling you a ticket, but insisting that you pay extra for the fuel to power it, or ATC to process the flight.
It's *sort of* OK for a hotel to charge extra for things you don't have to use (E.g. a swimming pool) just as it's sort of OK for an airline to charge extra for baggage or choosing seat.
Friction comes when a provider, or a whole industry, stops including the main offering something which most customers consider has always been included.
But if it's compulsory, it's part of the price.
It took me a while to understand comments about "all inclusive pricing" being standard on airlines.
You don't mean seats, baggage etc, just airport fees, municipal arrival taxes etc.
Now, news for those of you who live in North America - in the rest of the world the advertised price in a shop is the amount you have to pay.
I understand the obsession with showing how much is going to the...
It took me a while to understand comments about "all inclusive pricing" being standard on airlines.
You don't mean seats, baggage etc, just airport fees, municipal arrival taxes etc.
Now, news for those of you who live in North America - in the rest of the world the advertised price in a shop is the amount you have to pay.
I understand the obsession with showing how much is going to the relevant layer of government as sales taxes, but we find it annoying and weird that you don't show the amount you have to pay as the price on the shelf.
Perhaps this is something you should learn from the rest of the world.
Seriously, I bought tickets on three european airlines and I got hit on fees by all three of them.
European airlines have been required to sit children near adults for years.
Resort fees are a total scam. If they want the money, show it on the headline price.
Plus, anything that weakens ticketmaster is a good thing.
They need to reel in phone carriers as well. When I left AT&T after ten years of being gouged with outrageous prices, five years ago, they wanted $200 to terminate my account which was not tied to a contract. I refused to pay and they never came after me. One has to wonder how many paid a termination fee.
So will we see the (noisy) "family sections" on aircraft that The Economist (perhaps tongue in cheek) argued for years ago to replace smoking sections as the undesirable sections on an aircraft?!
Those with kids get to sit next among those with screaming babies so the rest of us can have some peace.
I think of hotel charges more like concert tickets, etc. And I honestly think it should go further where the fees are per transaction vs. per night or per ticket. Therefore, if you're staying 1 night or 4 nights the destination fee (I find it odd you pay to arrive at your destination - they should give a credit to you) or resort fee is $50 total, not $50/night. Especially since hotels charging for WiFi...
I think of hotel charges more like concert tickets, etc. And I honestly think it should go further where the fees are per transaction vs. per night or per ticket. Therefore, if you're staying 1 night or 4 nights the destination fee (I find it odd you pay to arrive at your destination - they should give a credit to you) or resort fee is $50 total, not $50/night. Especially since hotels charging for WiFi as part of this fee is so little per room per night (other businesses would call this a cost of doing business and would absorb it). Same with entertainment tickets, whether I buy 1 concert/play/sporting event ticket or 4 tickets it should be based on the transaction, not per ticket.
As the old saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
I also hate the car rental "etoll convenience fees" which are often higher than the toll itself. Hope that is included in this reg
One positive thing from various airline fees and resort/destination fee is, if I buy a non-refundable fare and end up not taking, I lose less than an all inclusive fare.
I love how the comments section is full of two types of triggered conservatives. The first type thinks Biden is an idiot for pushing for pricing transparency even though that won't lower total booking prices. The second type thinks Biden is an idiot for thinking that transparency will beget lower total booking prices. Both types seem to be so wrapped up in their perpetual grievance mindsets that they're attributing different motivations to Biden than the...
I love how the comments section is full of two types of triggered conservatives. The first type thinks Biden is an idiot for pushing for pricing transparency even though that won't lower total booking prices. The second type thinks Biden is an idiot for thinking that transparency will beget lower total booking prices. Both types seem to be so wrapped up in their perpetual grievance mindsets that they're attributing different motivations to Biden than the ones the President explained pretty clearly.
I propose we lock these two groups in a room so they can work out their confusion and anger before rejoining the rest of us out here in Reality.
Give them hammers before you lock the door…
Seriously You ever hear liberals? they are just as bad.
“This is part of a larger Junk Fees Prevention Act”
There is no such thing as the Junk Fees Prevention Act. Only a rough outline for a hypothetical one linked in this article. No act has been drafted, named, or officially discussed by congress.
This is part of a larger SUGGESTED Junk Fees Prevention Act, proposed by the President.
That being said, F resort fees and I hope this somehow works!
With all the issues going on in the world right now - Chinese spy balloons, high energy prices, highest inflation in 40 years, high crime rates and a border out of control - this seems like nothing more than a distraction from Sleepy Joe. And yes, all of the above are direct results of his Administration's policies.
-Chinese balloon? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Global inflation? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Global energy prices and price gouging by big oil? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Non-existent high crime rates? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Republic party fee-fees being hurt by drag queens? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Triggered snowflakes? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
-Republic party ultra-MAGA acolytes afraid of anything not white? DAMN YOU JOE BIDEN!
I'd take you more seriously if you used the actual name of the party - it's the Republican party not the Republic party.
Anything’s better than the previous buffoon.
I'd rather have a mean tweet or two then what we got now!
You are truly an idiot. Try educating yourself about the causes of these. Inflation? 100% a result of the Trump years. Massive tax breaks for the rich. Spending out of control. Nothing to shore up the supply chain issues caused by Covid which he ignored leading to the deaths of millions. He's actually fixed the economy from the downward spiral it was heading in. You see - you've been brainwashed to not understand even the...
You are truly an idiot. Try educating yourself about the causes of these. Inflation? 100% a result of the Trump years. Massive tax breaks for the rich. Spending out of control. Nothing to shore up the supply chain issues caused by Covid which he ignored leading to the deaths of millions. He's actually fixed the economy from the downward spiral it was heading in. You see - you've been brainwashed to not understand even the basics of how the economy works. If you did you'd understand how the actions of Republican administrations historically have taken actions which cause artificial peaks which then start to come crashing down for Democratic administrations to fix. And Biden actually found and shot down the spy balloon unlike the three that Trump had no idea about. Border? You may wish to stop drinking the Kool-Ade. And the stupidest thing - you can't even understand that governments can actually address multiple things at once.
You can tell when liberals have no arguments when they have to resort to name calling.
I don't even know where to start. There was no inflation during the Trump years, it started during Biden administration when he started paying people not to work and increasing the cost of energy. Biden inherited a strong economy which he has trashed. There were no massive tax cuts for the rich, another liberal Democrat lie. Biden didn't...
You can tell when liberals have no arguments when they have to resort to name calling.
I don't even know where to start. There was no inflation during the Trump years, it started during Biden administration when he started paying people not to work and increasing the cost of energy. Biden inherited a strong economy which he has trashed. There were no massive tax cuts for the rich, another liberal Democrat lie. Biden didn't find the spy balloon it was there for all to see. And then he failed to shoot it down as he is China's poodle. And it's a fact the border is out of control because he stopped Trump's common sense policy. There's so much more to rebut but I have to work to pay for all the massive spending under Biden so I don't have time.
Say her name. Joan Navy Biden. Mommies a striper and grandpa is president of the United States.
Such flawless argument.
If you drink cancer causing chemicals for 10 years, was fine, and got cancer in the 11th year, are you also going to jump out to say: it has nothing to do with my cancer! I survived ten years just fine without cancer, so it must be Biden's fault!
Inflation was caused by both morons printing trillions of dollars.
Another issue with the families sitting together for free is the potential affect on other travelers where other travelers could find themselves seated in middle seats or other undesirable seats to accommodate families with kids.
13 is also a late cutoff in my opinion. If a 12 year old can't sit on a plane not immediately next to their parents I'm not sure what to say. More to the point though, are you really gonna...
Another issue with the families sitting together for free is the potential affect on other travelers where other travelers could find themselves seated in middle seats or other undesirable seats to accommodate families with kids.
13 is also a late cutoff in my opinion. If a 12 year old can't sit on a plane not immediately next to their parents I'm not sure what to say. More to the point though, are you really gonna start shuffling other passengers around so a 12 year old can sit next to their parents?
Surely the fact that they need to be seated "together" makes it more likely that at least one of them is in a middle seat.
I find 13 rather young, especially regarding girls.
I once got moved (on BA) because as a single man I was next to a teenage girl.
Frankly thank you - I know it's to deal with perverts, but it's not personal - I'd much rather be moved...
Surely the fact that they need to be seated "together" makes it more likely that at least one of them is in a middle seat.
I find 13 rather young, especially regarding girls.
I once got moved (on BA) because as a single man I was next to a teenage girl.
Frankly thank you - I know it's to deal with perverts, but it's not personal - I'd much rather be moved (so long as not to a worse seat) than later accused of doing something inappropriate with no witnesses to disprove.
Children seating together with family is already implemented in Canada. You can select regular seats for free in advance when travelling with children in Canada even when seat selection is otherwise paid, or the airline will select seats together for you. Good idea.
Hotel pricing should be mandated all-in, just like airline pricing. Not just resort fees, taxes too.
Biden thinks hotel operators are stupid?
I can think of so many ways to get around this.
The two thing it will do is raise the price, and bury the fees deeper.
That's the whole point. They can't "hide" the fee, and would have to embed it in the room price.
Hence the price TRANSPARENCY.,
Like many things, this seems like an awesome idea - no more resort fees! On a fifth-grade intellectual level (which means Joe is really trying), this is awesome. I detest these junk fees for the brazen and misleading pick-pocketing that they are. But, as most of us know, the devil ends up being in the details. And I can see this idea backfiring big time, because it will be implemented in such a way that...
Like many things, this seems like an awesome idea - no more resort fees! On a fifth-grade intellectual level (which means Joe is really trying), this is awesome. I detest these junk fees for the brazen and misleading pick-pocketing that they are. But, as most of us know, the devil ends up being in the details. And I can see this idea backfiring big time, because it will be implemented in such a way that everything will end up costing more than it does now. Not sure how it will all go south, I'm only sure that it wlll.
How?
I mean, are you saying that right now hotels are *not* charging the maximum the amount they can? What world are you living in?
Yes, businesses *will* try to maximize their revenue. That's the due course. And in fact, we *want* them to (that's how people save for retirement; also how hotels _might_ pay livable wage). However, we want them to maximize revenues in a transparent way. We want them to sell, not lie and steal.
@magice
Many readers here have reading comprehension issues.
From this article:
"There are some other motivations for these kinds of fees, including online travel agencies not getting commissions on that portion of the rate, and in some areas there are tax benefits to this as well"
More parties need to get paid. Resort fees right now are at the expense of government and OTAs.
So now YOU will have to pay what the...
@magice
Many readers here have reading comprehension issues.
From this article:
"There are some other motivations for these kinds of fees, including online travel agencies not getting commissions on that portion of the rate, and in some areas there are tax benefits to this as well"
More parties need to get paid. Resort fees right now are at the expense of government and OTAs.
So now YOU will have to pay what the hotels previously shorted.
You fail to realize one problem, even right now hotels *are* charging the maximum the amount they can. But you assume that a change in the regulations doesn't change the *maximum* itself.
If the proposed policy change is fifth-grade level thinking, then your post is perhaps third-grade level. You've clearly missed the point. Everyone understands hotels aren't going to just drop these fees and not seek to recoup them by increasing their standard rates. The point is that people will see the full cost of their booking when the prices are advertised, rather than having surprise charges sprung on them on the final screen before confirming the booking.
Came here to say basically the same thing td1986 said. The thrust of this bill is pricing transparency, not price reductions. A lot of our conservative friends in the comments section seem to be so triggered by the very mention of the President's name that they're struggling to understand the post and the comments.
Biden tackling is hilarious. Tackle a nap maybe.
I agree that the rich should pay their fair share. Frequent flyer miles should be taxed and taken away from the elite. Of course, not all their miles, just about 35% of them. Give them to the working class.
Watch how fast Ben would become a conservative
For that allegory to work correctly, you have to have a few people starting off with either billions or hundreds of millions of miles, through no effort/merit of their own, and constantly using them in ways that cause detrimental outcomes for the people in Basic Economy.
....thennnn we'd be hitting a bit closer to home.
He does realize they will just eliminate these "fees" and raise their price by an equal amount right?
He's trying to eliminate a $25 fee on a $100 price tag. The price tag will become $125 and he'll claim success.
Yes! That's the idea! If it's going to cost me $125, I'd like to know that up front. As it stands, the price tag is $100, and I don't learn about that extra $25 until right before check-out. It would absolutely be a success if the upfront price tag increased to reflect the true actual cost. That's just what we all want.
That's fine, as long as the person knows the price of $125 up front they can choose to stay somewhere else. If they don't know until it's too late then it's deceptive which is why they exist.
I think that is the exact intention.
The most frustrating thing about hotel pricing is that what you see is far from what you will eventually have to pay. As the blurb points out, you might be on the hook for *mandatory* $50/nt. That's anywhere from 10-50% hike! And you cannot avoid it. Different from, says, exorbitant parking fee, even if you just arrive with nothing else, you still have to pay $50. Some "resort...
I think that is the exact intention.
The most frustrating thing about hotel pricing is that what you see is far from what you will eventually have to pay. As the blurb points out, you might be on the hook for *mandatory* $50/nt. That's anywhere from 10-50% hike! And you cannot avoid it. Different from, says, exorbitant parking fee, even if you just arrive with nothing else, you still have to pay $50. Some "resort fee" would say things like "for internet," but even if you don't access internet, you *still have to pay*.
So yes, the intention is to make the price clear. I can see 2 likely end results:
1. Yes, prices will be higher, but then you know what you will pay (and you can compare intelligently). I think cleaning fee for AirBnB and the likes should also be included.
2. Resorts/hotels will unbundle and charge fee for important, but not necessarily vital services previously bundled in resort fee, e.g. internet access fee. However, this can be mitigated by, you know, don't be on the internet (or use your 5G).
Either way, it's a net win. Again, it's not like you pay extra. In fact, price competition may even help lower the prices. In any event, you *don't* pay extra. You just learn about it earlier (at searching rather than checking in time).
This, my friend, is how we make market competition work.
That way, it's clear when ones goes on OTA that they will be paying 125 USD, not 100 USD +++++++ during check out.
He's not trying to lower the price. He's trying to improve transparency. Please try to pay attention to things before you spout off.
Lol.. yes... that is the exact intention of the Act......... Id rather pay $125 vs... "its $100, no just kidding, its $125"
I’d also like to see parking fees added to the rate. I’ve seen hotels with flat, uncovered parking lots charge $50/night for the joy of self-parking outside.
I don't think so.
Most exorbitant parking fees are in downtown (or near downtown) areas, where you can just Uber/taxi or bus/train in. About 60-80% of the time (depends on city), you can probably avoid it, or lower it by park nearby.
Furthermore, they (the hotels) do provide a service for the fees (you know, parking). "Resort fee" is essentially room charge but not displayed.
I think many people (including me) will strongly disagree with you, as this would just cause hotels to increase all hotel rooms rather than appropriately placing the cost of parking on those who actually use parking.
No, parking has to be separate fee. Not everybody needs parking, specially in downtown hotels you can use Uber/Lyft or public transportation. Resort fee, there is no option to opt out everybody has to pay.
Agree with others here, parking should be kept separate as not everyone drives in - meanwhile everyone uses the wifi or drinks water.
Given the political environment, Biden calling on Congress to do something is a guarantee that Congress will do nothing.
To be fair, it has more to do with the Republic party’s intransigence (and fealty to big business, who are apparently people) than it does with President Biden.
But Biden shot down the balloon.
Only because public attention forced him to. And only after letting it fly over the US (including several sensitive military bases) for several days.
It has very little to do with GOP intransigence. If there were Trump, and either (or both) house of Congress was controlled by Democrats, the outcome would still be the same. That's the way politics is these days, it's more about stopping the other guy from doing anything than doing something yourself.
For the hotel resort fees, how about much discussed mandate to provide a straightforward way of opting out of it?
Of course, one of the most popular thing to be covered by resort fee is wifi and losing it will not be good - but for 35-50 per day, I can tether...
We should give Biden credit for pointing out that "hotels that aren't even resorts" try to get away with these resort fees.
I do not think the plan is to mandate ENTIRE family seating together. Just one adult per kid.
And that is already working on KLM, Turkish and some other non-US airlines. KLM tells you during booking that even though the fare does not include free seat assignment, they will guarantee the child will be together with at least one parent.
Turkish does not make such statement - but in our case 2 seats...
I do not think the plan is to mandate ENTIRE family seating together. Just one adult per kid.
And that is already working on KLM, Turkish and some other non-US airlines. KLM tells you during booking that even though the fare does not include free seat assignment, they will guarantee the child will be together with at least one parent.
Turkish does not make such statement - but in our case 2 seats were assigned couple days before the flight - and one of the 2 adults in our family did end up sitting separately.
Also do not think "only premium seats remaining"situation will come up often on airlines charging for seat assignment - and they can also block couple rows until check in just for that reason. And if an airline wants to be particularly nasty, they can also put adult+child in the middle 2 seats of 3-4-3 row on 777
The two airlines you cited are not ultra-low-cost carriers. If you want to be guaranteed to sit next to anyone, including your child on a flight, book assigned seats. I think it's outrageous to suggest that people with kids should get "free" assigned seats while others in the same fare class are not extended the same "right".
In practice, it may be simpler to seat families together on an ULCC since a large portion of the passengers don't pay for seats ahead of time. The algorithm has large swaths of open seats available to place them into.
I cannot see anyone disagreeing with the principle of including resort fees in the advertised price. As a principle, I believe that anything that is non-optional (therefore also taxes) should be included in the advertised price.
As far as airlines allowing families to sit together free of charge, I support the idea, but it should be unbundled from the ability to "select seats". The airline should guarantee that families with children should be sat...
I cannot see anyone disagreeing with the principle of including resort fees in the advertised price. As a principle, I believe that anything that is non-optional (therefore also taxes) should be included in the advertised price.
As far as airlines allowing families to sit together free of charge, I support the idea, but it should be unbundled from the ability to "select seats". The airline should guarantee that families with children should be sat together, but they should not allow those families to select WHERE they sit on the plane. If they want to choose where they sit, then standard seat selection fees should apply.
This may require some "tetris" at check-in or boarding, and it should be possible to re-seat passengers who have selected their seat by refunding their seat selection payment, but it should be doable.
Sleepy Joe isn't attacking anything but a pillow. People want to see an elimination of hotel/resort related fees. But let's be honest, hotels would just tack them on somewhere else. Much like restaurants across the country are tacking on mandatory 23% service fees that apparently have nothing to do with gratuity. The "fee" economy is a booming, multi billion dollar industry and no president is going to stop that locomotive. Fees reign supreme.
Nobody gives a shit about resort fees.
What they’re saying is MAKE THEM PART OF THE BASE ADVERTISED ROOM RATE. Because a “mandatory resort fee” isn’t an option, it’s…part of the rate.
Was that difficult?
Idk what idiot besides you wants them apart of the base room rate. Most sensible folks want them eliminated and not added to the base room rate. In Vegas, yeah people do care about resort fees. No idea why you think you speak for "they" lmao.
You seem to have missed the entire point. TravelinWilly is saying people don't care if it's called the "base rate" or "resort fee," what people care about is the total cost they have to pay. Labels don't matter: if it's a mandatory cost, people should see that as part of the price advertised. Anything else is misleading. This proposal would fix that problem.
(Everyone recognizes your point that banning "resort fees" would just cause...
You seem to have missed the entire point. TravelinWilly is saying people don't care if it's called the "base rate" or "resort fee," what people care about is the total cost they have to pay. Labels don't matter: if it's a mandatory cost, people should see that as part of the price advertised. Anything else is misleading. This proposal would fix that problem.
(Everyone recognizes your point that banning "resort fees" would just cause hotels to add those charges to the base rate.)
You're correct, it would eliminate the transparency issue. But that is not the only issue with resort fees that folks have. If that was the case, hotels wouldn't care to mention it all during checkout when you pay for your stay. Average people don't want to be nickel and dimed. Adding the resort fee to the base rate does nothing to change that. It's just pushing paper around.
Alonzo, you should go argue with the other conservatives in the comments section who somehow believe that Biden's rationale for doing this is to reduce hotel prices. Biden, like you, understands that the overall cost to the consumer isn't going to change, it will just be presented differently during booking.
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
You are an idiot Alonzo. Your own argument makes no sense
I think the distinction from the ULCC example is that sitting with a young child is less "wanting" to sit together than *needing* to sit together, for reasons both of safety and eliminating disruptions. By analogy, I don't think a customer should need to pay two seat-assignment fees for a caregiver to sit adjacent to a disabled passenger.
You say: "hotels should have to as well (or at least all-in pricing minus taxes and government fees)".
But why minus taxes and gov fees? There is no reasoning for not displaying those taxes as well from the get go and the actual full in price during search/booking. That's what airlines do, and that's how it works in many countries in the world as well. Destination fees are for sure an issue but when you...
You say: "hotels should have to as well (or at least all-in pricing minus taxes and government fees)".
But why minus taxes and gov fees? There is no reasoning for not displaying those taxes as well from the get go and the actual full in price during search/booking. That's what airlines do, and that's how it works in many countries in the world as well. Destination fees are for sure an issue but when you try to book something only to be hit with 20%+ taxes on the last screen, the issue is the same as far as I'm concerned.
@ Clem -- Oh I agree they should have to include taxes & fees, and that would be great. I'm just trying to set the absolute minimum change I'd like to see, as baby steps are better than nothing. In other words, I don't want to say that this bill isn't good enough because it doesn't mandate also including taxes.
Also - taxes and true mandatory government fees are generally with hotels going to be uniform in a market so it should have minimal bearing on the ability to comparison shop. Not that I have any objection to showing those - might as well - but the emphasis should rightly be on the fees that are designed to make one hotel appear cheaper in the initial listing when it is really more expensive. Much in...
Also - taxes and true mandatory government fees are generally with hotels going to be uniform in a market so it should have minimal bearing on the ability to comparison shop. Not that I have any objection to showing those - might as well - but the emphasis should rightly be on the fees that are designed to make one hotel appear cheaper in the initial listing when it is really more expensive. Much in the same way I don't care if supermarket ads don't include sales tax - I'll give a pass to hotels that don't show costs they are mandated to add. I'd prefer it be there - but that's not the part that pisses me off.
@ David - for the purpose of comparison shopping, I agree with you although it could still get tricky if you're trying to pick a destination between different countries with different gov taxes. But where I'm getting at is also the fact that people have a budget when they plan a vacation and not knowing the all in price is a big problem, which both destination fees and taxes participate in. And I never understood...
@ David - for the purpose of comparison shopping, I agree with you although it could still get tricky if you're trying to pick a destination between different countries with different gov taxes. But where I'm getting at is also the fact that people have a budget when they plan a vacation and not knowing the all in price is a big problem, which both destination fees and taxes participate in. And I never understood why supermarkets or restaurants (or any store in the US really) won't display the price with taxes, it's not like you can't pay them anyway and it makes budgeting difficult - but I digress :).
There are 50 states, each with different laws.
Each state has different local taxes.
Just look at restaurants in CA, there are probably 8-9 different criteria to charge tax.
If a government is stupid enough to force it. Small business couldn't compete with national brands as it would cost more for the business to keep and manage separate price for the same SKU.
You know there are fines for under and over...
There are 50 states, each with different laws.
Each state has different local taxes.
Just look at restaurants in CA, there are probably 8-9 different criteria to charge tax.
If a government is stupid enough to force it. Small business couldn't compete with national brands as it would cost more for the business to keep and manage separate price for the same SKU.
You know there are fines for under and over collecting tax.
Then the psychological toll of having different price.
Not that I don't prefer all in Pricing.
What exactly is your complaint? Small businesses generally have to charge/collect taxes to the same degree as national brands. Since they have to calculate those taxes to charge/collect them, why can't they display those prices to consumers before purchasing?
First of all, the wording of this Act focuses on allowing families to better budget for their vacations, and taxes can add a substantial amount to the final bill for a hotel, so for this reason I would suggest taxes should be included in the scope of the Act.
Furthermore, I would argue that not showing taxes does affect comparison shopping to a certain degree: taxes can vary quite considerably from place to place,...
First of all, the wording of this Act focuses on allowing families to better budget for their vacations, and taxes can add a substantial amount to the final bill for a hotel, so for this reason I would suggest taxes should be included in the scope of the Act.
Furthermore, I would argue that not showing taxes does affect comparison shopping to a certain degree: taxes can vary quite considerably from place to place, even from one county to the neighboring one, and when comparing two hotels (maybe unknowingly) located in two different counties that can actually make a difference. Not to mention the fact that when shopping for vacations it's not unusual to compare accommodation solutions quite far away from each other: to a family looking for a Florida break, it's not unusual to compare a resort in Sarasota to another one in Fort Lauderdale or Palm Beach, so, in that case, taxes can move the needle in one direction or another.
Sure, the reason is that those are imposed by the gov't not the private sector. We don't advertise the gov't piece of anything in the US until you get to check-out. It drives people crazy who visit the US and come from countries where they use VAT and the tax IS included in every price you see.
I think it makes sense for when you are searching for hotels.
For example, if you search for hotels in Chicago, *all* of them are subjected to the same (rates of) taxes and fees. So if hotel A is displayed as cheaper than hotel B, you *will* end up paying less for hotel A than hotel B.
The problem with fees is that you don't know. It's hidden. If hotel A says its rate is...
I think it makes sense for when you are searching for hotels.
For example, if you search for hotels in Chicago, *all* of them are subjected to the same (rates of) taxes and fees. So if hotel A is displayed as cheaper than hotel B, you *will* end up paying less for hotel A than hotel B.
The problem with fees is that you don't know. It's hidden. If hotel A says its rate is $100/nt and hotel B says its rate is $110/nt, you might have to pay $130/nt for hotel A and $120/nt for hotel B, because hotel A has higher "resort and destination fees," which are not displayed. Tax and governmental fees stay the same.
I think the worst offender of this of late is AirBnB cleaning fee. Some of them have literally $150-$250 cleaning fee (between 1-4 nights). It's beyond ridiculous.
The taxes are not necessarily the same. Many times when you search for hotels in a city, it will include options in nearby cities as well. This can even cross state lines. Therefore, it can significantly change the final price you pay.
Those taxes are universal. Sales/hotel tax varies based on the location. Thus it is considered to not appropriate to include in US since those are determined by government not business. Most countries where they're included have one universal rate through out country.
Strong disagree. Taxes and fees vary by airport as well, but airlines show all in pricing. If I’m comparing whether to take a vacation to Tampa or Miami, I want to comparison shop on price and care about whether the taxes are different. Just show the all in price. There is no excuse not to.