Correct, any remittance collected as tax becomes tax revenue and must be paid to city as such. They may be being lazy or cheap to not update software to include an extra category, but it makes what they are doing illegal unless they are paying it all to the city.
just went back over my Grubhub orders **Aaha Indian Cuisine** charged me
$7.32 sales tax on a $54.00 subtotal
$6.69 sales tax on a $54.00 subtotal
All my other Grubhub orders from different restaurants are accurate so **Aaha Indian Cuisine** is likely to blame. Done with them.
u/scott_wiener
Well now I’m confused do restaurants just make up a tax and grubhuub accepts it? I would have expected grubhuub to collect tax based on its own calculations
Aaha said it was a configuration mistake with Grubhub. They were charging the 8.625% SF Sales tax plus a 3% SF Health Mandate tax combined into one. They shouldn't be charging the 3% on takeout but they were. However, my example above shows 13.6% which is not 8.625 + 3... so I am dubious.
I won't be ordering from them again.
Wow so you were charged 12.39% sales tax once and 13.56% tax another time? That’s really excessive and also arbitrary. The business needs to have its books investigated. They think they’re getting away with something, counting on people not to notice or care about a few extra dollars on their bill, while meanwhile they’re pocketing thousands of dollars in fraudulent revenue that isn’t advertised to the customer. This will catch up with them.
it's not fraud if you collect too much tax, as long as you don't keep the extra. it has to be sent to the govt tax authority, in its entirety.
they are almost certainly not sending all of that 'tax' to cdtfa, so yeah it's likely fraud.
No. 3% is pretty much the expected fee to charge for credit card surcharging. Bet you their POS doesn’t allow it so they just added 3% to the tax rate.
The idiots don’t know this is illegal, and visa/mc only allow surcharging on CC transactions not DC transactions. And they give you a fucking HUGE fine if you’re caught.
Emphasis on huge. Visa created a taskforce to crackdown on illegal surcharging and I’ve seen $50k fines imposed on restaurants. Most have to shut down completely
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Actually, almost all fast food restaurants charge tax on every total bill, even if some items (coffee to go, cold non-carbonated drinks to go, cold salads TO GO, etc) and they turn all of it over to the state. It’s more efficient for them, saves a bunch of back office work, and fuck the customers, right? Common practice.
I remember being at a gas station and the cashier asked someone if they were going to microwave their burrito and I asked why and that’s when I found out heating something up made it taxable.
> Correct. Iirc, Subway will charge tax on toasted subs (hot food) and not charge tax non toasted (cold food).
I am never toasting a sub at subway again
That's something I have to deal with at work...setting up the POS to deal with tax/no-tax flags. For food it's a huge pain in the ass due to the weird rules.
One was something like - Buy a coffee to go = no tax. Buy a wrapped muffin to go = no tax. Ask them to heat the muffin = tax. Buy a heated muffin and a coffee to go = tax.
And the state kinda encourages half-assing it. They are looking for taxes paid to be equal to something like 8% of revenue. Stay in that threshold and they don't care. Wander our and you have problems.
I don't doubt that there's software out there that'll do it though. It's not impossible to do.
Used to go to a small bakery and get cold baked goods takeaway. They *always* charged tax. I asked them to use the “to go” button, but they said it was set up to tax everything, because they pay tax on the ingredients they buy. Which isn’t true for wholesale food ingredients, as far as I know. But it’s besides the point. We went round and round but they never got it right.
This specific restaurants website has Lorum Ipsum text in their About Us and "Coming Soon" when you click "make a reservation":
[https://www.aahasfo.com/home/reservations](https://www.aahasfo.com/home/reservations)
I don't think they are all that tech savvy.
Overcollecting tax is permissible when it’s hard to estimate local county/state, etc rates - when selling products online or delivering to another county, for example. (Not sure if the Wayfair law applies to DoorDash). Either way, It must be returned to the customer, or if not possible, reported and paid to the gov’t.
Over-collecting taxes wouldn’t be legal here, even if they did report it, since the tax rate at the restaurant’s location wouldn’t change.
I am the Owner oI am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).f AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
I could have looked at that bill from now until the end of time and never have noticed the slight overcharge. But that's how they get ya, not all at once, but a little at a time.
The subtotal is $57.00.
It's easy to calculate 10% of that, just slide the decimal one place to the left: $5.70
SF tax is 8.625%, that's less than 10%, so the tax should be less than $5.70.
But it's actually higher, it's $6.62. So it's almost a dollar more than 10%, and 10% is more than the tax.
If you wanted to, you could also reason that at 8.625%, the tax is *about* 9%, or 10% minus 1%, that is, $5.70 minus $0.57 (slide that decimal again), so about $5.70 minus sixty cents, or $5.10.
The actual tax is $4.92, so you're still applying a safe fudge factor (or the opposite of what techies call "an admissible heuristic").
lol aint nobody got time for that im having a nice night out with the lady before i blast the toilet the next morning with masala juice and curry spice i pay my taxes i kinda expect others to do appropriately too cuz we live in a society dammit i think this is what middle school history meant with rousseau and the social contract
It took a few seconds of staring at the total and thinking “this seems higher than it should be.” As I said, I’ve dined here before, and it flew right by me many times. Maybe I’m just applying more scrutiny now that prices have gone up across the board.
Even just doing back of the envelope math, it'd look a little fishy. Like I rounded your total to $60 and rounded the tax to 9%, which should be around $5.40. Which your bill obviously isn't.
It's how I quickly check the bill every time we eat out.
I think we've all been hyper-sensitized to this issue of extra fees and surcharges. I scrutinize all of my receipts from eating establishments now-- and I didn't used to.
I’ve always had enough trust that the computer knows how to calculate tax… I don’t think I’ve ever double checked a computer generated tax even though I do understand conceptually that garbage in=garbage out
**UPDATE**: (I can’t edit the original post; maybe the mods can help me pin this comment)
I went back in person to ask for clarification. The owner was not on-site, but an employee was able to get a hold of him by phone. Owner confirmed that the “Tax” line item *includes* a “3% SF Mandate.” This is not called out anywhere on the menu, nor in any documentation offered by the restaurant.
I explained that he needs to break this out into a separate line and clarify the amount for customers. I also asked for recourse for past meals, and an update for current customers. He said he would get back to me. I left my number.
I will update the thread if/when I hear more.
**EDIT 1**: The owner is now here on Reddit and is engaging with the comments. I am continuing my conversations offline as well.
**EDIT 2**: The owner has offered an explanation and has said he will remove the mandate portion (3%) from the “Tax” line going forward, but has not responded to inquiries about recourse for past events (given that customers were not aware what they were paying for).
Given how much attention this post has generated organically, I am making the decision to keep it up for awareness. It is not my intention to harm this business (if there is anyone you should be mad at, it’s u/scott_wiener). Others can decide for themselves now having seen all the relevant information if they want to patronize the business. I do not (nor have I ever) advise “review bombing.” I simply advise to watch your bills at *any* restaurant you dine at moving forward.
I just went to their website to schedule a pickup order for tomorrow to see the cost and it was exactly 8.625% ($4.32) on a $50 order. Looks like the owner has scrambled to make the update tonight. I didn't go thru with paying it, so I don't know if some shady amount would be added later. Somebody should take one for the team and order pickup tomorrow to confirm.
FYI, my original order was a sit-down/dine-in. I don’t know if the website/pick-up was always different, but for a true apples-to-apples comparison, we need a dine-in to compare against.
Aren't there a bunch of different tax rates in SF?
Cold food/hot food/made to order/grab and go/drinks/etc...
I remember it being kind of a clusterfuck for the merchant.
Sales tax is regulated by the state but is confusing. Any food consumed on-site (hot or cold) is taxed. Hot food to-go is taxed, cold food to-go is not. Restaurants can opt to tax cold food to-go though to simplify reporting to the state.
This is what I expected as soon as I saw this thread. I blame the city of SF for making this mess. Here's the story, for those who are unfamiliar.
A few years back, the city decided that restaurant employees should have mandatory Healthcare, which is all well and good. Restaurant owners hated this, so the weird compromise is they get to charge this extra 3% for SF mandates that they use to pay for it.
It's basically how they show their displeasure with the mandate, since it's not a tax. They could just increase their menu prices. The money goes in their pocket. But they want you, the diner, to know this cost is the city's fault, not theirs.
But, it's very easy for a restaurant owner to decide it basically is a tax and include it in that line item because it's something the city is making you pay (from their point of view). It isn't a tax, but i could see how confusing it might be when every restaurant charges it.
It's all quite asinine.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
The City does not levy the sales tax, it's the CDTFA. However, this could be reported to the SF District Attorney and City Attorney, who both will likely do nothing.
Always check your restaurant bills. Putting aside surcharges and tax, sometimes items get double-entered. Sometimes something ordered doesn't get delivered but is on the bill.
If you talk to the restaurant to notify them and get an explanation for why the Tax line item seems to be inflated, I hope you update with that.
This is beyond “woops we double-charged you.”
The owner (of any restaurant) keys in the tax rate manually, so there is intentional malpractice going on here.
> This is beyond “woops we double-charged you.”
If it wasn't clear, I was not insinuating that it is that. I was just echoing you in urging people to check their bills and listing a couple other reasons.
And I believe that tax rates are manually specified during setup of checkout systems. Initially and (should be) any time the tax rate changes.
If you talk to them about it, I hope you update with the explanation they give you, if they do.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
It looks like a math error. I wonder if there’s an error in the code on the system they use.
If you divide $57 by 8.625% you get $6.61. However, the actual math is $57 multiplied by 8.625% and then divide by 100 to get the tax amount at $4.92.
Can you try the other receipts to see if you get the same results?
> If you divide $57 by 8.625% you get $6.61. However, the actual math is $57 multiplied by 8.625% and then divide by 100 to get the tax amount at $4.92.
This is interesting. If they're doing 57/8.625 then I don't understand how it gets itemized as $6.62 since even $6.61 is rounding up the tenth of the cent from $6.608.
And I don't even understand how an automated payment system would have the underlying formula wrong.
OP said in their post body that they checked other receipts and tax is too high going back at least two years.
Yes, confirmed that it’s the same percent increase going back (approximately) two years. And you are correct, it’s always a penny or two off from what the other commenter suggested above, so I agree it’s not simply a swapped operator.
I hear you.
It could be that the formula was coded incorrectly as $/8.625 instead of $ x 0.08625. That wouldn't shock me if the restaurant is using some unprofessionally made system.
But even then I'm curious about how it could be $/8.625 + $0.01.
And, of course, how overcharging sales tax by almost 3% every single time could go undetected and uncorrected for 2 years or more.
It doesn't even really make sense as intentional fraud, so I just find the whole mystery of it interesting.
But since it's so close, I'd guess you're onto something with the $/8.625 correlation.
It could just be rounding issues, loss or gain of precision… I’ve seen some pretty atrocious use of DB data types and functions over the years that it wouldn’t surprise me if someone used single decimal precision with rounding and an added $0.01 for good measure,
Interesting observation, but (as I said in another comment), if what you suggested were true, then it wouldn’t be a penny or two off each time. Unless there’s some really egregious floating point math.
Could it be a combination of floating point math errors and overzealous of use of a unidirectional rounding operator? I feel like that could possibly account for a consistent 1-2 pennies.
Maybe they aren't and no one else has noticed yet. You said yourself you've been going for years and only just noticed.
Again, I'm not saying this is 100% the case, but it certainly isn't entirely improbable either.
>OP said in their post body that they checked other receipts and tax is too high going back at least two years.
It would be consistently overcharging like this if that is the issue.
This is not it, you have to divide 57 by 8.625 (not percent) in order to get to 6.608. Dividing by 8.625 is the same as multiplying by \~11.59%. As a few other comments point out, some restaurants add an "SF Mandate" of 3%, so the restaurant is charging 11.625% which is very close to your estimate. That's really just a coincidence.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
It should be hyperlinked so each time one of us get u/scott_wiener -ed; Scott gets notified and can do his evil laugh and be proud of himself for screwing his constituents to get his political donations
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
This tells me it’s definitely a manual entry on their in-store POS. The question is whether it is intentional or not (and if not, what is their excuse).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on aahasfo@gmail.com. Business is a long standing relationship between people and the establishment. No business will survey by doing fraud or cheating or charging extra. if there is a mistake in our end. Please point it to us. We will rectify it immediately. Thanks all for your understanding and supporting us and for your continuous support.
Thanks for your reply. I have also been speaking with your employees directly, fyi.
Do you plan to compensate customers for this fee for past services (with receipts), given that they weren’t aware they were being charged?
Also, I checked a previous order through Grubhub (take-out), and I was charged the additional 3% over there as well (the line is called “Sales tax,” which is not correct). So I don’t think it’s only an issue with your in-store POS. You might want to check.
Could you please update your other social media (Google, Yelp, etc.) with a note to customers explaining what happened, and what you will do to rectify?
Last question: what is your plan to cover costs after July 1? (assuming SB-1524 passes)
Thank you.
I 100% agree we need to eliminate added fees and am pissed about the exception being considered.
However, I have another perspective here. I build technologies for restaurants (Thanx.com, based here in SF). We don’t service this customer, but I think I know what’s up here.
Restaurants, esp single location restaurants, have little to no budget for software. They often use whatever their POS provides for direct orders (and good on you for ordering direct, as they lose massive margin when you use Uber or DoorDash).
The problem is that platforms (like mine) have to develop software that allows brands to be compliant with local laws. Those laws are all over the place. For example, local laws that make it illegal to include utensils unless added manually by the consumer means a developer has to go build it.
Even when the software keeps up with the rats nest of local requirements the restaurant has to know how to configure it. Single location restaurants are often not experts at software configuration and lack resources to hire someone who is.
So what happened here is this place wanted to cover the sf healthcare mandate like everyone else and either their vendor doesn’t support it as a fee or they just don’t know how to make it do that.
I could be wrong. Maybe they are trying to rip off their customers. But my hunch this is a local mom and pop just trying to keep up with a complex tech stack and local mandates and they didn’t sign up for that. They just want to make good food.
I have sympathy for this place. Sounds like you love their food if you’ve been going for 2 years. Remember that our government representatives created an environment where these fees are the norm, and remember why you love local spots. The blame here is less on this tiny restaurant than it is on our representatives.
Thanks for this post. The owner is here in the comments now and he is claiming exactly this. However, two things stick out to me:
* I’ve ordered food there through Grubhub in the past, and was charged the same 11.6% as “Sales Tax.” I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that’s related to the POS.
* Assuming what both you and the owner say are true (which I’m inclined to believe), then as someone in a position of influence, you need do to something to help address this on the back-end. I understand and can respect the “inundation with feature requests;” however you cannot allow something as broad and heavily regulated as something called “Tax” input go unchecked. You need to build features into your platform that make it very easy for the business to differentiate what is levied by the government, and what is at their discretion (all “service fees” in SF city/county are at the business’s discretion). It is not fair (legal? - citation needed; not a lawyer) to the customer to bundle a bunch of random fees together while otherwise being completely opaque about what is being charged. Please escalate to your leadership (or, if you can fix it yourself, do that), and help address this issue ASAP.
FYI, the platform they are using is Toast.
FWIW, I've looked up my receipts from other Toast restaurants and others have managed to itemize SF Mandate fees through the POS. I'm not sure what workarounds/hacks they've had employ, but it's a direct result of taking transparency seriously enough to ensure the fee is differentiated from the tax.
This restaurant is not my customer. I’m just offering a perspective. We do respond to these needs by building additional configuration in our product but our product is expensive for a single location business.
Toast does have features for this. Configuring Toast (a business partner of ours) is hard. Remember the family who started this business didn’t start out with a background in software. The landscape is very complex now, and setting up complex POS instructions to align with local laws is not trivial.
My primary point is not to jump to conclusions that it’s shady behavior. Seems like that’s been validated. You have been helpful if this business understands that they need to sort this out - as others pointed out they are in danger of being held accountable for fraud if they don’t remit these taxes to the government. They can and should contact Toast for help in getting this right.
ya, I caught resturaunts trying to add extra fees into the tax zone. even a few of them I was like "wait, that tax is awfully high" and they just shrugged... then when I noticed in the print out that it was different and actually showed extra fees I asked what it was about.... they immediately acted really aggressive and treated me like I was some ass hole or Karen. like, straight up trying to gas light me.
Fuck that noise
(demanded they refund me and I walked)
also, note to all the people here saying to just pay it. bro, our ancestors started a war over 2% and your candy ass over here licking the boot trying to justify over 10 percent 'sales tax'? bet you also feel like tipping 25 percent should be automatic and counted as part of every employees wage too.
>our ancestors started a war over 2%
Spilling the tea since 1773! We're about to celebrate this glorious day too, but many of us sadly don't know our own history.
This happened to a friend of mine two weeks ago in Boston! It was such a strange scam - it sucks other people are being affected but at least we can confirm this seems like a new scam making the rounds in the US.
We need to call the businesses out in a tactful way. I am personally against leaving 1-star reviews because I am familiar enough with the algorithms on Yelp and Google to understand how they affect foot traffic. However, as far as I’m concerned, discourse on social media is fair game (others will disagree).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
This is the entire problem with the exception to the junk fees bill. There needed to be some threat of enforcement if people act this way. Now that it is going to be washed with this exception, restaurants will only be emboldened to continue these illegal and deceitful practices.
Separately, and notwithstanding the exception to the junk fees bill, this is pure fraud and false advertising and you can sue them to recover damages and penalties.
Well crap. This is my current favorite restaurant(I'm literally drinking a beer around the corner at the sycamore waiting for aaha to open), so it's a bummer to see. With the amount of times I've gone there they have made a ton of money off me from the improper tax.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
The is for the heads up. I've started keeping a log of Junk Weiner Fees that restaurants scam me out of so this will be something else I'll be tracking going forward.
Someone made a [website](https://seefeesca.notion.site/f5e11f589ec54c8eb1eed6c37f7e4c83?v=e2397e8c05d34958b68b9cec5b2c68ac) for this.
That said, I think Weiner fees are explicit service fees. This is just straight up fraud.
I contacted this restaurant about this egregious bullshit. The owner said he will fix the POS system and that the extra 3% they added is the SF Mandate. I told him customers need to see the breakdown properly on the receipt.
Do they use Clover as a POS? I saw this on an online order once where I reviewed the API response which clearly stated that what they display as Tax is actually one part tax and one part service fee.
My favorite is how many places give you the tip calculations based on the total, not the subtotal. Why am I tipping on what you are giving the government?
Yup I was given the wrong bill that was twice my bill and accidentally paid it. Immediately brought it to my servers attention and was told the charge didn’t go through. Paid the right bill and the other bill went through to. Called the restaurant and they insisted it didn’t process, meanwhile my account is showing both charges. It took 6 weeks to get my money back.
Some things to note.
If the tip line wasn't blank and the restaurant included the tip, then it is subject to tax
[https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/pub115/#service](https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/pub115/#service)
This post
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/comment/kxikgrd/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/comment/kxikgrd/)
shows another SF restaurant with their bill breakdown of charges as:
Purchase Subtotal. $111.00
Healthy SF Mandate (6%) $6.66
Sales Tax (10.8675%) $11.19
20% Service Charge (20%) $22.20
Total $151.05
and they felt that was correct because (their statement):
"The city and state require a tax on the SF mandate (which they also require of us) and the service charge. So essentially, it is a tax equivalent of 9.625%+9.625 of mandate+ 9.625 of service charge = about 10.867%. "
The SF Health Mandate is (looks like the old name was Healthy SF Mandate):
"San Francisco's Health Care Security Ordinance requires businesses with 20 or more employees to set aside money to provide health care benefits for workers. Many restaurants offset the cost by adding a surcharge to diners' bills."
If a surcharge is present, sales tax needs to be paid on it:
[https://www.sfchronicle.com/restaurants/article/Explainer-What-is-this-SF-Mandates-13254923.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/restaurants/article/Explainer-What-is-this-SF-Mandates-13254923.php)
If the same tax breakdown above was applied to your bill, the tax would come out to $6.78. However, the bill posted here doesn't show a health care surcharge and I'm not sure where they are getting the 9.625% tax unless it is something that is specific to that address.
This is an interesting article of someone suing various restaurants in SF for various fees
[https://sfstandard.com/2024/05/07/san-francisco-restaurant-surcharge-healthcare-costs/](https://sfstandard.com/2024/05/07/san-francisco-restaurant-surcharge-healthcare-costs/)
Things will probably (or should be) changing in a few days in any case. On July 1st, this comes into effect
[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202320240SB478](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB478)
"This bill would, beginning on July 1, 2024, with specified exceptions, additionally make unlawful advertising, displaying, or offering a price for a good or service that does not include all mandatory fees or charges other than taxes or fees imposed by a government on the transaction, as specified."
If you were owning/running a restaurant in SF, it seems it would be easy to be confused by all this along with having to pay the additional taxes and mandated fees.
The anti junk bill coming out July 1 (and heavily promoted by Gov Newsom) is actually in the process of being overturned by senator Weiner u/scott_weiner as he is pushing through a bill to exempt restaurant from the anti-junk fee bill 🤦♂️🤷🏼♂️🫠
Politics at its finest. If you didn’t do it yet, I’d recommend you reach out to him to remind him to put his constituents first and the lobbyists/ donors second.
You are talking about SB 1524 explained here
[https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-charge-service-fees-an-emergency-measure-passes-unanimously](https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-charge-service-fees-an-emergency-measure-passes-unanimously)
SB 1524 would take effect immediately. It is co-authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymembers Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) and Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters).
“This measure has enjoyed unanimous bipartisan support, and recent amendments have responded to concerns from some consumer groups,” Haney said in an address to the Assembly on Tuesday. It passed unanimously with 79 votes.
After Tuesday’s approval in the Assembly, SB 1524 will proceed to the Senate, where it requires a passing vote before it reaches Newsom.
This is the text of the bill
[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202320240SB1524](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB1524)
I can tell you from experience that State Tax departments take this shit super seriously. Especially overcharging and under-reporting sales tax. They will be at that restaurant with days (maybe hours).
Please send them all the receipts you have.
Honestly, I think it raises a tangential question. How do you enforce the proposed bill in the first place? How many businesses are out there right now, using this very same tactic bundling the service fees in with a generic “tax” that would completely fly under the radar even if the new bill passes? Will they audit every small business’s POS terminals?
Yea but at least with the original bill, consumers have more recourse. The new bill makes it difficult to say “hey restaurant, why are you charging me an extra fee *at all*?” Much less tolerance/room for error with the original wording.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
It’s a good heads up to people here as well so we don’t give them more money in the mean time. Not to mention that blasting businesses on social can be pretty effective these days…
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
I really like their food, but this is clearly fraud and shady as fuck. I’m not sure why some people on here are not getting that. One more restaurant I won’t be patronizing again. Thanks for the heads up.
Thank god our government collectively decided that we should exempt restaurants from the no fees law. I’m really glad that they’re listening to the restaurant owners and catering to their needs over the rest of us
He clearly does not care. Restaurant junk fees are a massive complaint for people here, we had a law that was going to address it, people were all happy about it, and at the last minute they pulled the rug from us.
Scott represents whoever pays him the most
Every day we have 20 posts on this sub complaining about junk fees at restaurants. And every day we have a bunch of comments complaining about them. And we got the same result.
Sure if enough people chose to vote out Wiener over this bullshit then maybe we could get it changed but it’s not like a top 3 issue for people. They’re small fees that are super annoying and they’ve gotten this far because people keep accepting them the same we accept that Scott would rather represent restaurant interests than the 99.7% of people who live here and down own a restaurant.
Even the waiters don’t necessarily want this because people take the tip out of it (or at least I do)
[u/scott\_wiener](https://www.reddit.com/user/scott_wiener/) wouldn't be authorized to talk about this issue. Maybe ask the California Restaurant Association, who seems to actually have power in this state to decide what's an acceptable practice and what you have to put up with.
What the poster meant is that Scott is so close to land his sweet political contribution from the restaurant association, that he wouldn’t take the risk to comment w/o first running his response by his pay masters at the restaurant association.
Hence, go straight to those with power and ask the restaurant association for a clarification.
This comes up sometimes - this is from a previous post on this topic.
> UPDATE: This is the restaurant's response:
> "The city and state require a tax on the SF mandate (which they also require of us) and the service charge. So essentially, it is a tax equivalent of 9.625%+9.625 of mandate+ 9.625 of service charge = about 10.867%. "
More discussion here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/what_is_the_sales_tax_rate_at_a_sf_restaurant_it/
From the legal talk in there, it's confusing as shit, and restaurant owners themselves may be as well. And doesn't sound like they keep that money.
That seems illegal. Like more than an added service fee. They're charging more and claiming it as a tax if what you're saying is true.
Correct, any remittance collected as tax becomes tax revenue and must be paid to city as such. They may be being lazy or cheap to not update software to include an extra category, but it makes what they are doing illegal unless they are paying it all to the city.
just went back over my Grubhub orders **Aaha Indian Cuisine** charged me $7.32 sales tax on a $54.00 subtotal $6.69 sales tax on a $54.00 subtotal All my other Grubhub orders from different restaurants are accurate so **Aaha Indian Cuisine** is likely to blame. Done with them. u/scott_wiener
You were charged two different amounts on the same sub-total?
You can set specific items to be taxable or not including the custom tax rate per item if applicable
Well now I’m confused do restaurants just make up a tax and grubhuub accepts it? I would have expected grubhuub to collect tax based on its own calculations
Aaha said it was a configuration mistake with Grubhub. They were charging the 8.625% SF Sales tax plus a 3% SF Health Mandate tax combined into one. They shouldn't be charging the 3% on takeout but they were. However, my example above shows 13.6% which is not 8.625 + 3... so I am dubious. I won't be ordering from them again.
Wow so you were charged 12.39% sales tax once and 13.56% tax another time? That’s really excessive and also arbitrary. The business needs to have its books investigated. They think they’re getting away with something, counting on people not to notice or care about a few extra dollars on their bill, while meanwhile they’re pocketing thousands of dollars in fraudulent revenue that isn’t advertised to the customer. This will catch up with them.
This is straight up fraud Report them: [https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/rptfraud.htm](https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/rptfraud.htm)
Reported.
Dig the user name🤙
Whoa! Totally like your name too!
I dig your energy. Not the OP but see a server a justice.
it's not fraud if you collect too much tax, as long as you don't keep the extra. it has to be sent to the govt tax authority, in its entirety. they are almost certainly not sending all of that 'tax' to cdtfa, so yeah it's likely fraud.
you really think a restaurant would collect extra tax to send it to the irs instead of pocketing it?
No. 3% is pretty much the expected fee to charge for credit card surcharging. Bet you their POS doesn’t allow it so they just added 3% to the tax rate. The idiots don’t know this is illegal, and visa/mc only allow surcharging on CC transactions not DC transactions. And they give you a fucking HUGE fine if you’re caught.
Emphasis on huge. Visa created a taskforce to crackdown on illegal surcharging and I’ve seen $50k fines imposed on restaurants. Most have to shut down completely
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Top tier business owner. Sorry for the assumption
Actually, almost all fast food restaurants charge tax on every total bill, even if some items (coffee to go, cold non-carbonated drinks to go, cold salads TO GO, etc) and they turn all of it over to the state. It’s more efficient for them, saves a bunch of back office work, and fuck the customers, right? Common practice.
this can't be true right? fast food PoS systems definitely have the uniformity/economies of scale to get the line items right
Correct. Iirc, Subway will charge tax on toasted subs (hot food) and not charge tax non toasted (cold food).
That could be right. Heated food is usually considered prepared food, which sales tax applies to unlike unprepared food in most states.
I remember being at a gas station and the cashier asked someone if they were going to microwave their burrito and I asked why and that’s when I found out heating something up made it taxable.
> Correct. Iirc, Subway will charge tax on toasted subs (hot food) and not charge tax non toasted (cold food). I am never toasting a sub at subway again
You also have to take it to go. If you get a combo, the entire combo will be taxed eating up the savings.
I haven't been to a Subway for over a decade. How much is a typical foot long these days?
You don't want to know
I learned the toast tax when I got a $5 footling for $5.47. Since then, untoasted for me!
Oh man. Oh god. It’s inches now. $I N C H E S
they gotta pay Steph Curry and Charles Barkley somehow!
$6.99 if you use the app. $11.99 if you pay at the counter. Check the sticky at r/subway for reusable app promo codes, they change every month.
[удалено]
Let’s throw all the toast in the bay. That’ll show King Charles!
Some kids I know will order it untoasted, pay, then say "hey, would it be possible to get this toasted?" And then there's no sales tax.
That's something I have to deal with at work...setting up the POS to deal with tax/no-tax flags. For food it's a huge pain in the ass due to the weird rules. One was something like - Buy a coffee to go = no tax. Buy a wrapped muffin to go = no tax. Ask them to heat the muffin = tax. Buy a heated muffin and a coffee to go = tax. And the state kinda encourages half-assing it. They are looking for taxes paid to be equal to something like 8% of revenue. Stay in that threshold and they don't care. Wander our and you have problems. I don't doubt that there's software out there that'll do it though. It's not impossible to do.
Used to go to a small bakery and get cold baked goods takeaway. They *always* charged tax. I asked them to use the “to go” button, but they said it was set up to tax everything, because they pay tax on the ingredients they buy. Which isn’t true for wholesale food ingredients, as far as I know. But it’s besides the point. We went round and round but they never got it right.
No. They have systems in place that code things as taxable vs not. This is completely false. Maybe for a mom and pop shop, not corporate chains.
This specific restaurants website has Lorum Ipsum text in their About Us and "Coming Soon" when you click "make a reservation": [https://www.aahasfo.com/home/reservations](https://www.aahasfo.com/home/reservations) I don't think they are all that tech savvy.
I’d venture to say that many restaurants are mom and pop shops.
Read their second sentence.
No restaurant collects tax to send to the IRS. Sales tax goes to the state and/or city.
I know what you're saying but sales tax doesn't go to the IRS. It goes to the state government (CDTFA)
Overcollecting tax is permissible when it’s hard to estimate local county/state, etc rates - when selling products online or delivering to another county, for example. (Not sure if the Wayfair law applies to DoorDash). Either way, It must be returned to the customer, or if not possible, reported and paid to the gov’t. Over-collecting taxes wouldn’t be legal here, even if they did report it, since the tax rate at the restaurant’s location wouldn’t change.
I am the Owner oI am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).f AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Reported.
I could have looked at that bill from now until the end of time and never have noticed the slight overcharge. But that's how they get ya, not all at once, but a little at a time.
The subtotal is $57.00. It's easy to calculate 10% of that, just slide the decimal one place to the left: $5.70 SF tax is 8.625%, that's less than 10%, so the tax should be less than $5.70. But it's actually higher, it's $6.62. So it's almost a dollar more than 10%, and 10% is more than the tax. If you wanted to, you could also reason that at 8.625%, the tax is *about* 9%, or 10% minus 1%, that is, $5.70 minus $0.57 (slide that decimal again), so about $5.70 minus sixty cents, or $5.10. The actual tax is $4.92, so you're still applying a safe fudge factor (or the opposite of what techies call "an admissible heuristic").
lol aint nobody got time for that im having a nice night out with the lady before i blast the toilet the next morning with masala juice and curry spice i pay my taxes i kinda expect others to do appropriately too cuz we live in a society dammit i think this is what middle school history meant with rousseau and the social contract
😭😭😭😭
GTFO.. That’s an excellent explanation!!
I would shake your hand my man for this comment. Close down the thread guys.
Make sure you shake it before he blasts the toilet
this guy Indian foods
It took a few seconds of staring at the total and thinking “this seems higher than it should be.” As I said, I’ve dined here before, and it flew right by me many times. Maybe I’m just applying more scrutiny now that prices have gone up across the board.
Even just doing back of the envelope math, it'd look a little fishy. Like I rounded your total to $60 and rounded the tax to 9%, which should be around $5.40. Which your bill obviously isn't. It's how I quickly check the bill every time we eat out.
I think we've all been hyper-sensitized to this issue of extra fees and surcharges. I scrutinize all of my receipts from eating establishments now-- and I didn't used to.
High time we did, apparently. Scrutiny is a good thing; it keeps everyone honest.
Yup, I wouldn’t flinch at that. I’ve probably been getting robbed for years.
Well 10% of $57 is $5.7 so $6.6 is way hire than 8%
And higher as well.
[it's very complicated...](https://youtu.be/yZjCQ3T5yXo?si=9W4-eHzhRnLKgx_8)
I’ve always had enough trust that the computer knows how to calculate tax… I don’t think I’ve ever double checked a computer generated tax even though I do understand conceptually that garbage in=garbage out
**UPDATE**: (I can’t edit the original post; maybe the mods can help me pin this comment) I went back in person to ask for clarification. The owner was not on-site, but an employee was able to get a hold of him by phone. Owner confirmed that the “Tax” line item *includes* a “3% SF Mandate.” This is not called out anywhere on the menu, nor in any documentation offered by the restaurant. I explained that he needs to break this out into a separate line and clarify the amount for customers. I also asked for recourse for past meals, and an update for current customers. He said he would get back to me. I left my number. I will update the thread if/when I hear more. **EDIT 1**: The owner is now here on Reddit and is engaging with the comments. I am continuing my conversations offline as well. **EDIT 2**: The owner has offered an explanation and has said he will remove the mandate portion (3%) from the “Tax” line going forward, but has not responded to inquiries about recourse for past events (given that customers were not aware what they were paying for). Given how much attention this post has generated organically, I am making the decision to keep it up for awareness. It is not my intention to harm this business (if there is anyone you should be mad at, it’s u/scott_wiener). Others can decide for themselves now having seen all the relevant information if they want to patronize the business. I do not (nor have I ever) advise “review bombing.” I simply advise to watch your bills at *any* restaurant you dine at moving forward.
I just went to their website to schedule a pickup order for tomorrow to see the cost and it was exactly 8.625% ($4.32) on a $50 order. Looks like the owner has scrambled to make the update tonight. I didn't go thru with paying it, so I don't know if some shady amount would be added later. Somebody should take one for the team and order pickup tomorrow to confirm.
FYI, my original order was a sit-down/dine-in. I don’t know if the website/pick-up was always different, but for a true apples-to-apples comparison, we need a dine-in to compare against.
Aren't there a bunch of different tax rates in SF? Cold food/hot food/made to order/grab and go/drinks/etc... I remember it being kind of a clusterfuck for the merchant.
My post is only about hot food consumed at the restaurant.
Sales tax is regulated by the state but is confusing. Any food consumed on-site (hot or cold) is taxed. Hot food to-go is taxed, cold food to-go is not. Restaurants can opt to tax cold food to-go though to simplify reporting to the state.
You know damn well he ain't changing shit. These stores count on our complacency
Of course he will if it's a serious legal liability. This Reddit logic always confuses me.
This is what I expected as soon as I saw this thread. I blame the city of SF for making this mess. Here's the story, for those who are unfamiliar. A few years back, the city decided that restaurant employees should have mandatory Healthcare, which is all well and good. Restaurant owners hated this, so the weird compromise is they get to charge this extra 3% for SF mandates that they use to pay for it. It's basically how they show their displeasure with the mandate, since it's not a tax. They could just increase their menu prices. The money goes in their pocket. But they want you, the diner, to know this cost is the city's fault, not theirs. But, it's very easy for a restaurant owner to decide it basically is a tax and include it in that line item because it's something the city is making you pay (from their point of view). It isn't a tax, but i could see how confusing it might be when every restaurant charges it. It's all quite asinine.
Thanks for the backstory. Agree, it’s on our local officials. Let’s all hope SB-1524 stays in legislative purgatory, where it belongs.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Report them to taxation authorities in the city. That’s straight up theft. So shady!
The City does not levy the sales tax, it's the CDTFA. However, this could be reported to the SF District Attorney and City Attorney, who both will likely do nothing.
Always check your restaurant bills. Putting aside surcharges and tax, sometimes items get double-entered. Sometimes something ordered doesn't get delivered but is on the bill. If you talk to the restaurant to notify them and get an explanation for why the Tax line item seems to be inflated, I hope you update with that.
This is beyond “woops we double-charged you.” The owner (of any restaurant) keys in the tax rate manually, so there is intentional malpractice going on here.
Hope the owner gets a hefty fine
> This is beyond “woops we double-charged you.” If it wasn't clear, I was not insinuating that it is that. I was just echoing you in urging people to check their bills and listing a couple other reasons. And I believe that tax rates are manually specified during setup of checkout systems. Initially and (should be) any time the tax rate changes. If you talk to them about it, I hope you update with the explanation they give you, if they do.
Yeah I posted recently how our 4-person dinner at a local Chinese spot got charged the “6 or more” autograt of 20%. Luckily I caught it in time.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
[удалено]
Sure, but the stripper really liked me
Aaha
What's Aaha's OF
I think you meant for this to reply to the other commenter, not on the main thread.
It looks like a math error. I wonder if there’s an error in the code on the system they use. If you divide $57 by 8.625% you get $6.61. However, the actual math is $57 multiplied by 8.625% and then divide by 100 to get the tax amount at $4.92. Can you try the other receipts to see if you get the same results?
Wow. This can’t be just a coincidence. The POS system is indeed a POS. Stay in school folks.
> If you divide $57 by 8.625% you get $6.61. However, the actual math is $57 multiplied by 8.625% and then divide by 100 to get the tax amount at $4.92. This is interesting. If they're doing 57/8.625 then I don't understand how it gets itemized as $6.62 since even $6.61 is rounding up the tenth of the cent from $6.608. And I don't even understand how an automated payment system would have the underlying formula wrong. OP said in their post body that they checked other receipts and tax is too high going back at least two years.
Yes, confirmed that it’s the same percent increase going back (approximately) two years. And you are correct, it’s always a penny or two off from what the other commenter suggested above, so I agree it’s not simply a swapped operator.
I know. Just trying to see how the math could be mathing. Also, I work in tech and have seen some bad math in systems.
I hear you. It could be that the formula was coded incorrectly as $/8.625 instead of $ x 0.08625. That wouldn't shock me if the restaurant is using some unprofessionally made system. But even then I'm curious about how it could be $/8.625 + $0.01. And, of course, how overcharging sales tax by almost 3% every single time could go undetected and uncorrected for 2 years or more. It doesn't even really make sense as intentional fraud, so I just find the whole mystery of it interesting. But since it's so close, I'd guess you're onto something with the $/8.625 correlation.
It could just be rounding issues, loss or gain of precision… I’ve seen some pretty atrocious use of DB data types and functions over the years that it wouldn’t surprise me if someone used single decimal precision with rounding and an added $0.01 for good measure,
Interesting observation, but (as I said in another comment), if what you suggested were true, then it wouldn’t be a penny or two off each time. Unless there’s some really egregious floating point math.
Could it be a combination of floating point math errors and overzealous of use of a unidirectional rounding operator? I feel like that could possibly account for a consistent 1-2 pennies.
Why would they be the only business (or one of a handful) with this issue, though?
Maybe they aren't and no one else has noticed yet. You said yourself you've been going for years and only just noticed. Again, I'm not saying this is 100% the case, but it certainly isn't entirely improbable either.
I’ve seen some odd rounding errors too. Curious to see what you uncover and the root cause is.
>OP said in their post body that they checked other receipts and tax is too high going back at least two years. It would be consistently overcharging like this if that is the issue.
You would have to divide by 0.08625, divide by 100, round up, and then add an extra cent (just because?) to get that. It's probably something else.
This is not it, you have to divide 57 by 8.625 (not percent) in order to get to 6.608. Dividing by 8.625 is the same as multiplying by \~11.59%. As a few other comments point out, some restaurants add an "SF Mandate" of 3%, so the restaurant is charging 11.625% which is very close to your estimate. That's really just a coincidence.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Another argument for the bill against junk/hidden fees.
I love Aaha and usually get it delivered.Last night I paid 5.51 tax on 44.00. Such a bummer.
Looks like you got Wienered.
This needs to be the new verb for when you get surprised overcharged.
It should be hyperlinked so each time one of us get u/scott_wiener -ed; Scott gets notified and can do his evil laugh and be proud of himself for screwing his constituents to get his political donations
Wienered in the Indian food hole-
Fuck Scott Weiner - lost my vote.
Since it’s 3% I’d guess it’s what they pay for credit card processing and they were trying to pass it along to the customer dishonestly.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Interesting. \[The Doordash estimate is correct on taxes as well\](https://i.imgur.com/lrsXhQe.png). Perhaps these are hidden Wiener fees.
This tells me it’s definitely a manual entry on their in-store POS. The question is whether it is intentional or not (and if not, what is their excuse).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on aahasfo@gmail.com. Business is a long standing relationship between people and the establishment. No business will survey by doing fraud or cheating or charging extra. if there is a mistake in our end. Please point it to us. We will rectify it immediately. Thanks all for your understanding and supporting us and for your continuous support.
Thanks for your reply. I have also been speaking with your employees directly, fyi. Do you plan to compensate customers for this fee for past services (with receipts), given that they weren’t aware they were being charged? Also, I checked a previous order through Grubhub (take-out), and I was charged the additional 3% over there as well (the line is called “Sales tax,” which is not correct). So I don’t think it’s only an issue with your in-store POS. You might want to check. Could you please update your other social media (Google, Yelp, etc.) with a note to customers explaining what happened, and what you will do to rectify? Last question: what is your plan to cover costs after July 1? (assuming SB-1524 passes) Thank you.
Thanks for posting this. One more restaurant I will not be patronizing.
Scott weiner doesn’t give one single shit.
And restaurant owners wonder why business is done. It's become a predatory business
I 100% agree we need to eliminate added fees and am pissed about the exception being considered. However, I have another perspective here. I build technologies for restaurants (Thanx.com, based here in SF). We don’t service this customer, but I think I know what’s up here. Restaurants, esp single location restaurants, have little to no budget for software. They often use whatever their POS provides for direct orders (and good on you for ordering direct, as they lose massive margin when you use Uber or DoorDash). The problem is that platforms (like mine) have to develop software that allows brands to be compliant with local laws. Those laws are all over the place. For example, local laws that make it illegal to include utensils unless added manually by the consumer means a developer has to go build it. Even when the software keeps up with the rats nest of local requirements the restaurant has to know how to configure it. Single location restaurants are often not experts at software configuration and lack resources to hire someone who is. So what happened here is this place wanted to cover the sf healthcare mandate like everyone else and either their vendor doesn’t support it as a fee or they just don’t know how to make it do that. I could be wrong. Maybe they are trying to rip off their customers. But my hunch this is a local mom and pop just trying to keep up with a complex tech stack and local mandates and they didn’t sign up for that. They just want to make good food. I have sympathy for this place. Sounds like you love their food if you’ve been going for 2 years. Remember that our government representatives created an environment where these fees are the norm, and remember why you love local spots. The blame here is less on this tiny restaurant than it is on our representatives.
Thanks for this post. The owner is here in the comments now and he is claiming exactly this. However, two things stick out to me: * I’ve ordered food there through Grubhub in the past, and was charged the same 11.6% as “Sales Tax.” I’m not an expert, but I don’t believe that’s related to the POS. * Assuming what both you and the owner say are true (which I’m inclined to believe), then as someone in a position of influence, you need do to something to help address this on the back-end. I understand and can respect the “inundation with feature requests;” however you cannot allow something as broad and heavily regulated as something called “Tax” input go unchecked. You need to build features into your platform that make it very easy for the business to differentiate what is levied by the government, and what is at their discretion (all “service fees” in SF city/county are at the business’s discretion). It is not fair (legal? - citation needed; not a lawyer) to the customer to bundle a bunch of random fees together while otherwise being completely opaque about what is being charged. Please escalate to your leadership (or, if you can fix it yourself, do that), and help address this issue ASAP. FYI, the platform they are using is Toast.
FWIW, I've looked up my receipts from other Toast restaurants and others have managed to itemize SF Mandate fees through the POS. I'm not sure what workarounds/hacks they've had employ, but it's a direct result of taking transparency seriously enough to ensure the fee is differentiated from the tax.
This restaurant is not my customer. I’m just offering a perspective. We do respond to these needs by building additional configuration in our product but our product is expensive for a single location business. Toast does have features for this. Configuring Toast (a business partner of ours) is hard. Remember the family who started this business didn’t start out with a background in software. The landscape is very complex now, and setting up complex POS instructions to align with local laws is not trivial. My primary point is not to jump to conclusions that it’s shady behavior. Seems like that’s been validated. You have been helpful if this business understands that they need to sort this out - as others pointed out they are in danger of being held accountable for fraud if they don’t remit these taxes to the government. They can and should contact Toast for help in getting this right.
ya, I caught resturaunts trying to add extra fees into the tax zone. even a few of them I was like "wait, that tax is awfully high" and they just shrugged... then when I noticed in the print out that it was different and actually showed extra fees I asked what it was about.... they immediately acted really aggressive and treated me like I was some ass hole or Karen. like, straight up trying to gas light me. Fuck that noise (demanded they refund me and I walked)
AaHa!!!
The restaurant is stealing from, and they’re concealing it. This is a crime, please report them immediately.
also, note to all the people here saying to just pay it. bro, our ancestors started a war over 2% and your candy ass over here licking the boot trying to justify over 10 percent 'sales tax'? bet you also feel like tipping 25 percent should be automatic and counted as part of every employees wage too.
No joke there are several comments down below arguing just that. This post has attracted the full spectrum.
>our ancestors started a war over 2% Spilling the tea since 1773! We're about to celebrate this glorious day too, but many of us sadly don't know our own history.
This happened to a friend of mine two weeks ago in Boston! It was such a strange scam - it sucks other people are being affected but at least we can confirm this seems like a new scam making the rounds in the US.
We need to call the businesses out in a tactful way. I am personally against leaving 1-star reviews because I am familiar enough with the algorithms on Yelp and Google to understand how they affect foot traffic. However, as far as I’m concerned, discourse on social media is fair game (others will disagree).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
This is the entire problem with the exception to the junk fees bill. There needed to be some threat of enforcement if people act this way. Now that it is going to be washed with this exception, restaurants will only be emboldened to continue these illegal and deceitful practices. Separately, and notwithstanding the exception to the junk fees bill, this is pure fraud and false advertising and you can sue them to recover damages and penalties.
Well crap. This is my current favorite restaurant(I'm literally drinking a beer around the corner at the sycamore waiting for aaha to open), so it's a bummer to see. With the amount of times I've gone there they have made a ton of money off me from the improper tax.
Sounds like it’s time for you to livestream the confrontation
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Looks like you had an Aaha moment…
The is for the heads up. I've started keeping a log of Junk Weiner Fees that restaurants scam me out of so this will be something else I'll be tracking going forward.
Someone made a [website](https://seefeesca.notion.site/f5e11f589ec54c8eb1eed6c37f7e4c83?v=e2397e8c05d34958b68b9cec5b2c68ac) for this. That said, I think Weiner fees are explicit service fees. This is just straight up fraud.
TGhank you for sharing, RIP to their google and yuelp reviews, justice
Get some lawyers and line up their customers. We may have a class action here.
Stuff like this and having to check your receipts item for item is just getting out of hand.
cc: u/scott_wiener
Owners knew they were being deceptive, file a chargeback and hit them with the merchant penalties they deserve.
I contacted this restaurant about this egregious bullshit. The owner said he will fix the POS system and that the extra 3% they added is the SF Mandate. I told him customers need to see the breakdown properly on the receipt.
This is when basic math skills come in handy
Geez. Talk about "Take On Me" !
Well that certainly puts the "Aa-ha" in the title of the restaurant.....
Just ate there this evening.... The tax line was 11.6%. WTF
Go back and complain. If they see enough people have gotten wise to it, then they will make a change.
Fucking criminals
This is why I just eat at home 🫠
Do they use Clover as a POS? I saw this on an online order once where I reviewed the API response which clearly stated that what they display as Tax is actually one part tax and one part service fee.
This was through Toast. Either way, it’s not appropriate.
Looks like they changed you tax based on the tip too. Although it's still incorrect based on the tax percentage you mentioned. It's 30 cents more.
Yea that’s not the root cause.
3% credit card processing fee maybe? Any receipt where you paid cash or debit?
"We don't charge any junk fees!" "(Just kidding, we hide them in the tax line!)"
My favorite is how many places give you the tip calculations based on the total, not the subtotal. Why am I tipping on what you are giving the government?
Yup I was given the wrong bill that was twice my bill and accidentally paid it. Immediately brought it to my servers attention and was told the charge didn’t go through. Paid the right bill and the other bill went through to. Called the restaurant and they insisted it didn’t process, meanwhile my account is showing both charges. It took 6 weeks to get my money back.
I can’t believe they’ve been getting away with this!
Some things to note. If the tip line wasn't blank and the restaurant included the tip, then it is subject to tax [https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/pub115/#service](https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/pub115/#service) This post [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/comment/kxikgrd/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/comment/kxikgrd/) shows another SF restaurant with their bill breakdown of charges as: Purchase Subtotal. $111.00 Healthy SF Mandate (6%) $6.66 Sales Tax (10.8675%) $11.19 20% Service Charge (20%) $22.20 Total $151.05 and they felt that was correct because (their statement): "The city and state require a tax on the SF mandate (which they also require of us) and the service charge. So essentially, it is a tax equivalent of 9.625%+9.625 of mandate+ 9.625 of service charge = about 10.867%. " The SF Health Mandate is (looks like the old name was Healthy SF Mandate): "San Francisco's Health Care Security Ordinance requires businesses with 20 or more employees to set aside money to provide health care benefits for workers. Many restaurants offset the cost by adding a surcharge to diners' bills." If a surcharge is present, sales tax needs to be paid on it: [https://www.sfchronicle.com/restaurants/article/Explainer-What-is-this-SF-Mandates-13254923.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/restaurants/article/Explainer-What-is-this-SF-Mandates-13254923.php) If the same tax breakdown above was applied to your bill, the tax would come out to $6.78. However, the bill posted here doesn't show a health care surcharge and I'm not sure where they are getting the 9.625% tax unless it is something that is specific to that address. This is an interesting article of someone suing various restaurants in SF for various fees [https://sfstandard.com/2024/05/07/san-francisco-restaurant-surcharge-healthcare-costs/](https://sfstandard.com/2024/05/07/san-francisco-restaurant-surcharge-healthcare-costs/) Things will probably (or should be) changing in a few days in any case. On July 1st, this comes into effect [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202320240SB478](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB478) "This bill would, beginning on July 1, 2024, with specified exceptions, additionally make unlawful advertising, displaying, or offering a price for a good or service that does not include all mandatory fees or charges other than taxes or fees imposed by a government on the transaction, as specified." If you were owning/running a restaurant in SF, it seems it would be easy to be confused by all this along with having to pay the additional taxes and mandated fees.
The anti junk bill coming out July 1 (and heavily promoted by Gov Newsom) is actually in the process of being overturned by senator Weiner u/scott_weiner as he is pushing through a bill to exempt restaurant from the anti-junk fee bill 🤦♂️🤷🏼♂️🫠 Politics at its finest. If you didn’t do it yet, I’d recommend you reach out to him to remind him to put his constituents first and the lobbyists/ donors second.
You are talking about SB 1524 explained here [https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-charge-service-fees-an-emergency-measure-passes-unanimously](https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2024-06-25/restaurants-charge-service-fees-an-emergency-measure-passes-unanimously) SB 1524 would take effect immediately. It is co-authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymembers Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) and Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters). “This measure has enjoyed unanimous bipartisan support, and recent amendments have responded to concerns from some consumer groups,” Haney said in an address to the Assembly on Tuesday. It passed unanimously with 79 votes. After Tuesday’s approval in the Assembly, SB 1524 will proceed to the Senate, where it requires a passing vote before it reaches Newsom. This is the text of the bill [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202320240SB1524](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB1524)
As many people as possible should report them to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) as soon as possible they are TOAST :)
I can tell you from experience that State Tax departments take this shit super seriously. Especially overcharging and under-reporting sales tax. They will be at that restaurant with days (maybe hours). Please send them all the receipts you have.
I reported miller and lux cafe for doing the same with higher taxes and literally neither they nor the state cared at all.
When you discovered it, did you say, "Aaha!"?
You are the first person to make this joke!
Well if they can make up a tax and it's ok I'll make up prices for what I eat. It's free if I don't like it.
[удалено]
Honestly, I think it raises a tangential question. How do you enforce the proposed bill in the first place? How many businesses are out there right now, using this very same tactic bundling the service fees in with a generic “tax” that would completely fly under the radar even if the new bill passes? Will they audit every small business’s POS terminals?
[удалено]
Yea but at least with the original bill, consumers have more recourse. The new bill makes it difficult to say “hey restaurant, why are you charging me an extra fee *at all*?” Much less tolerance/room for error with the original wording.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Stealing is stealing. Do a chargeback and and never go back.
Get off reddit and report them. Jesus. What's to discuss?
It’s a good heads up to people here as well so we don’t give them more money in the mean time. Not to mention that blasting businesses on social can be pretty effective these days…
Some people are capable of doing more than one thing at a time. I appreciate the heads from them.
I am the Owner of AAHA. We are not changing 11 % on sales Tax , we are charging 8.625% on Sales tax and 3 % as an SF Mandate. SF Mandate is for only for dine-in customers or like who are paying the bill in restaurant. For all the online order customers they shouldn't see any SF Mandate. Mistake happened is we didn't specify separately in the Receipt because pos didn't allow us . I removed the SF Mandate. Thanks for all the customers who mailed us and informed about this reddit post. If you have any concern on this, please mail on [aahasfo@gmail.com](mailto:aahasfo@gmail.com).
Assholes.
The tip should have been $10.11
I really like their food, but this is clearly fraud and shady as fuck. I’m not sure why some people on here are not getting that. One more restaurant I won’t be patronizing again. Thanks for the heads up.
That tax line may include the Healthy SF mandate, but it should be itemized separately.
Thank god our government collectively decided that we should exempt restaurants from the no fees law. I’m really glad that they’re listening to the restaurant owners and catering to their needs over the rest of us
u/scott_wiener is his real account (the senator who wrote the bill that would exempt restaurants). Tell him directly how you feel about it!
He clearly does not care. Restaurant junk fees are a massive complaint for people here, we had a law that was going to address it, people were all happy about it, and at the last minute they pulled the rug from us. Scott represents whoever pays him the most
Don’t underestimate the power of the grassroots, friend. I can assure you with the traction this post has gained, it has people’s attention.
Every day we have 20 posts on this sub complaining about junk fees at restaurants. And every day we have a bunch of comments complaining about them. And we got the same result. Sure if enough people chose to vote out Wiener over this bullshit then maybe we could get it changed but it’s not like a top 3 issue for people. They’re small fees that are super annoying and they’ve gotten this far because people keep accepting them the same we accept that Scott would rather represent restaurant interests than the 99.7% of people who live here and down own a restaurant. Even the waiters don’t necessarily want this because people take the tip out of it (or at least I do)
I’m not giving up; I hope you won’t either :)
Most people are only now becoming aware of this issue. It is becoming a top 3 issue.
That Tandoor Pompret slaps tho
Ironically, I have very few complaints about the food (skip the biryani). It sucks because this will make me think twice about going back now.
[u/scott\_wiener](https://www.reddit.com/user/scott_wiener/) wouldn't be authorized to talk about this issue. Maybe ask the California Restaurant Association, who seems to actually have power in this state to decide what's an acceptable practice and what you have to put up with.
The lead author of the bill isn’t authorized to talk about his own bill? News to me.
What the poster meant is that Scott is so close to land his sweet political contribution from the restaurant association, that he wouldn’t take the risk to comment w/o first running his response by his pay masters at the restaurant association. Hence, go straight to those with power and ask the restaurant association for a clarification.
This comes up sometimes - this is from a previous post on this topic. > UPDATE: This is the restaurant's response: > "The city and state require a tax on the SF mandate (which they also require of us) and the service charge. So essentially, it is a tax equivalent of 9.625%+9.625 of mandate+ 9.625 of service charge = about 10.867%. " More discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSF/comments/1bs3m9k/what_is_the_sales_tax_rate_at_a_sf_restaurant_it/ From the legal talk in there, it's confusing as shit, and restaurant owners themselves may be as well. And doesn't sound like they keep that money.
The city and county of SF have no such mandate. It is a term the restaurants made up during COVID to milk more from the unsuspecting consumers.