The state of Minnesota is still charging fees following new state transparency law
While many businesses have changed their systems to comply with the new state ban on so-called "junk fees," the Minnesota DNR is still tacking on reservation fees to campsite reservations.
Why it matters: The move to force businesses to display the full price of goods and services up front was touted as a consumer-friendly law that would allow Minnesotans to have the actual cost of something and compare prices.
What we found: The Minnesota DNR is still adding an $8 "reservation fee" to book a campsite, so a $25 campsite becomes $33 upon checkout.
The new law says it's a deceptive trade practice when someone offers a price for goods or services that doesn't include all mandatory fees and surcharges, while noting that these fees are allowed if they are "reasonably avoidable."
DNR spokesperson Gail Nosek said in an email that the agency is not profiting from the charges, which help cover the cost of its online reservation system.
What they're saying: The House author of the bill, Rep. Emma Greenman (DFL-Minneapolis), said it appears what the DNR is doing could be a problem — but it's possible the campsite fee is compliant if the agency makes it clear that it allows people to show up and book a campsite in-person without the $8 fee.
You don't have to pay the fee for same-day reservations, though that makes snagging a campsite in the summer virtually impossible because they are filled months in advance.
The DNR, along with several other state agencies, charges a 3% "internet fee" for things like fishing and hunting licenses, but those fees can be avoided if people buy the licenses in person.
Zoom out: Airbnb, VRBO and local hotels and resorts have ditched service and resort fees following the state ban, Axios discovered via searches on those platforms.
The Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board, as well as St. Paul Parks & Recreation, are no longer adding fees at the end of a transaction. Minneapolis is noting them as being part of the total price up-front, which is allowed.
Flowbird, the city of Minneapolis' mobile parking app, now bakes in service fees to the posted price after previously adding fees at the end.
The bottom line: The Minnesota Attorney General's office sent out guidance for businesses and individuals on the new law, saying it will first ask those continuing to charge the banned fees for voluntary compliance.
If they refuse, the office says it can investigate and pursue legal action that includes fines and restitution.
Asked about the DNR fees, the AG's office said it wouldn't comment on the legality of something like that without conducting a thorough investigation
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
20 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
What will happen to food assistance under Trump's tax cut plan? A look at the numbers
President Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food assistance for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food assistance program, by the numbers: The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law eliminated a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the country. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but the Trump administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion in federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come from shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come from expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. The House resolution containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts passed last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food assistance and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it. Lieb writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
An Open Letter to the President: Addressing our Debt
Donald J. TrumpThe Mar-a-Lago Club1100 South Ocean BoulevardPalm Beach, Florida Dear President Trump: I voted for you in all three of your presidential campaigns. The first time, I cast my vote with cautious optimism. The third time, with enthusiasm. And I contributed financially to your campaign. You have achieved what few thought possible - a triumphant return, driven by a deep-seated belief among millions of Americans that only you can effectively challenge the entrenched political establishment. Your first 100 days were extraordinary, but if your presidency is to be remembered not just as bold but also historic, one challenge must rise above all others: - the national debt. The national debt, currently $37 trillion, is the result of pervasive fiscal irresponsibility, accumulated over many decades. Our annual interest payments now exceed $1trillion - more than we spend on our national defense. This is not just a financial burden. It is a threat to the survival of our country as a democratic republic. Without immediate, decisive action, the consequences are predictable: more credit downgrades, more increases in interest rates, and crippling obligations to service the debt. What would happen to our great country if annual interest payments exceeded not just our defense budget but also Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare? Mr. President, if we are to remain a vibrant nation, this exploding national debt has to be attacked immediately and significantly. That will not happen without your leadership. Sadly, the Republican Party has shown that it is not a reliable ally. Even before Republicans regained control of the House, they held a secret vote. By a margin of 158 to 2 they brought back earmarks - the very same pork barrel spending practices that Speaker John Boehner put to bed. Since then, the Democratic Congress never dared to bring back earmarks. House Republicans did. The results were predictable, and immediate: $16 billion in earmarks. More than 7,500 pet projects. In the Senate, eight of the 12 largest earmarkers are Republicans. In the House, 48 of the top earmarkers are Republicans. Here are the largest earmarkers: Sen. Susan Collins of Maine (population 1.4 million) secured $870 million in earmarks. Sen. Lisa Murkowski grabbed $851.1 million in earmarks. Sen. Mitch McConnell took nearly $500 million in earmarks. My own congressman, Brian Mast, walked away with $437 million in earmarks. Obviously, eliminating pork barrel spending wont, by itself, address the structural problems in Washingtons budget process - or make the "big, beautiful bill" currently being debated in Congress deficit-neutral. But if members of Congress cant even control themselves, what kind of example do they set for the American people? How can politicians ask their fellow Americans to sacrifice when they wont do it themselves? Actions speak louder than words. Fiscal irresponsibility dominates the culture within Congress, within our government. That culture, obviously, will not change on its own. It can be changed. But only with your leadership. Mr. President, fortunately, today you have a tool to attack waste, fraud, duplication, and incompetence. Because of the cloud, Big Data, and the Freedom of Information Act, you can deliver every government expenditure to every citizens cell phone, iPad, and computer. You can bring a new era to government, i.e., transparency. Mr. President, you can be the launch pad for transparency. Imagine a government where every single taxpayer dollar that government spends is tracked and reported to the public. Imagine the cultural shift from secret votes, from wasteful spending to one where every government official knows their budgets will be scrutinized in detail. Mr. President, here are several all-encompassing, culture-changing, deficit-attacking actions you can announce tomorrow: Lead by example: Cut White House expenses by a defined percentage. Report the savings to the public every quarter. Challenge Congress: Ask every member to cut their office and committee budgets. Suggest at least 10%. Publish a quarterly report on every senator and representative. Eliminate pork-barrel projects: Call on Congress to abolish earmarks. Shine a light on every remaining earmarker until they fall in line. Mobilize the bureaucracy: Instruct all agencies to focus on rooting out waste, fraud, duplication, and incompetence, and report the progress quarterly. Say explicitly that you will monitor progress and report the bold and expose the complacent. Bringing transparency to government can do more than clean up wasted taxpayer dollars. It can rebuild trust. It can remind the American people that the government can still work for them. It will solidify your legacy as the chief executive who did not just talk about draining the swamp, you did it. Imagine our country if we did not have to spend $1 trillion each year on interest payments. That is the future Americans deserve. Mr. President, you have been given a historic mandate. You can leave office with a legacy as the president who did not just promise to "Make America Great Again," but who actually did it. America cannot be made great again without addressing the greatest threat to our countrys survival as a democratic republic - the exploding national debt. Respectfully, Thomas W. Smith Thomas W. Smith is the founder of Prescott Investors, Inc.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Florida's long-awaited budget cuts spending, saves money for future downturns
TALLAHASSEE — After weeks of infighting and stalled negotiations, Florida's legislative leaders released a slimmed-down budget for the next fiscal year on Friday. The $115.1 billion spending plan is supposed to limit what lawmakers say has been a trend of runaway spending in Tallahassee and counter uncertainty over federal funding from Washington. Lawmakers are slashing more than 1,700 vacant positions across state government and stashing millions of dollars for the state's rainy day fund, but are still funding priority projects with millions of dollars. 'We thought this day would never come, but it did,' Senate budget chairperson Ed Hooper said Friday. Lawmakers are set to vote on the budget Monday evening, ending one of the most contentious legislative sessions in recent memory and setting up a potential clash with Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. Unlike a typical year, where lawmakers produce a budget within Florida's usual 60-day session, lawmakers took 102 days to put together their final product. That's partly because legislators have been feuding with DeSantis since January, when he called lawmakers in for a special session to address immigration without any clear goals or proposed legislation. The three special sessions ate up critical time that would have been used to work on the budget. 'There were contributing factors that largely were out of the control of either chamber,' said Republican Rep. Lawrence McClure, the House budget chairperson. DeSantis, who has been ruthless in cutting lawmakers' projects in happy times, has until the end of this month to issue vetoes. Earlier this year, amid the feud with DeSantis, the House overrode some of his budget vetoes from last year. The Senate did not. Although lawmakers didn't give DeSantis everything he wanted in the amounts he wanted — including money for his priority Hope Florida program — they still gave him millions for the Florida State Guard and the Florida Job Growth Grant Fund. Millions also stayed with first lady Casey DeSantis' cancer research fund. The idea that 'the governor's priorities are being funded at a lower rate' is wrong, McClure said. Overall spending was smaller across the board, he said. Despite producing a smaller budget than the year prior, Florida's budget has still grown by more than 26% since DeSantis came into office in 2019. The budget's growth has outpaced population increases and often outpaced inflation. House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-Miami, pushed for a leaner budget this year, saying state government spending had swollen and run afoul of conservative values. 'We spend every new dime of recurring revenue while congratulating ourselves for giving easy-to-fund, non-recurring sales tax holidays,' Perez said on the opening day of the session in March. McClure blamed too much federal money in previous years for Florida's 'not sustainable' spending habits. About a third of the state's budget is federal money. But lawmakers are now facing a potentially abrupt reversal from the feds. Under President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress, federal lawmakers could pass major cuts to Medicaid, food assistance and other social programs. There are also discussions about ending the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Senate President Ben Albritton said that if the federal government cuts costs, he thinks Florida wouldn't be able to avoid shouldering some of the burden. State lawmakers are also preparing for a potential recession, socking away at least $750 million for the state's rainy day fund and proposing making the annual funding permanent through a constitutional amendment next year. The last time the fund was used was during the Great Recession, prompting lawmakers at the time to consider raising taxes. 'I never want a future Legislature to have to be in that position,' Perez said last week. But some Democrats have raised concerns about this year's budget tying the state's hands. 'I think that the state actually should be preparing to help carry its people through that tough time, not looking for ways to cut funding,' said House Democratic Leader Fentrice Driskell. House lawmakers this year took particular interest in DeSantis' spending habits and governance, focusing in part on the thousands of vacant positions across state agencies. To slim the budget, they're slashing many of those positions for the next year, including more than 1,000 in Florida's health care agencies, including the Department of Children and Families and the Department of Health. Lawmakers also set aside a smaller amount of money than usual for teacher and school employee raises — $100 million instead of previous years' roughly $250 million. And they're also not funding $2 million for DeSantis' Hope Florida program, which is supposed to steer constituents in need from state services to local churches and nonprofits. Lawmakers' scrutiny has caused DeSantis to rage against them in news conferences and online videos this year. But he's still getting much of what he requested. For the Florida Job Growth Grant Fund, lawmakers set aside $50 million, $25 million less than he wanted. A state cancer grant fund, backed by the first lady, got $60 million. And while the Legislature put more than $500 million toward the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, it fell short of the more than $600 million DeSantis wanted, with lawmakers pointing to how much of the prior funding remained unspent. Some of the ideas in the budget popped up in the final days of negotiations, including a $3 million fund to give grants to local jails that contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for immigration enforcement. The Florida Senate also put aside $23 million to fund the Florida State Guard, which DeSantis has used as a tool in his immigration enforcement and deportation plans. But Hooper, R-Clearwater, said that the funding had more to do with the possibility of FEMA being dissolved than it had to do with immigration enforcement. Both chambers together supported more than $100 million to increase the nursing home reimbursement rate. About $28 million will go toward a farmer food share program prioritized by Albritton, along with about $104 million for another priority of his: citrus research. Lawmakers this year are cutting taxes — but mostly for businesses. Legislative leaders are eliminating the business rent tax, saving companies across the state about $900 million per year. DeSantis also proposed eliminating it in his budget. They're not taking any action to reduce property taxes, however, and the House's plan for a sweeping sales tax cut has been whittled down to a limited sales tax reduction plan, which includes making the back-to-school sales tax holiday a permanent event every August and permanently exempting taxes on some items, like sunscreen and life jackets. Though lawmakers initially billed the tax package as being targeted to benefit Florida families, the final package exempts or reduces taxes on things like NASCAR tickets, card rooms and slot machine licensing fees. The final tax bill also sets aside $1 million for Florida's Office of Economic and Demographic Research to do a study on the state's property taxes. DeSantis has proposed cutting or eliminating property taxes, which could leave local governments without a critical revenue source. But he proposed no concrete ideas for how to do that. The governor in March offered a temporary plan to use $5 billion to give people a $1,000 homestead property tax rebate. But neither the House nor the Senate took up the idea. A month into the legislative session, Perez made a surprise announcement that the House wanted to cut the state's sales tax from 6% to 5.25%. It would have been the largest state tax cut in Florida's history, saving Floridians nearly $5 billion per year. But the Senate wouldn't go along with the plan. When asked why lawmakers decided to give businesses the largest tax break this year, Perez said the ultimate goal was to cut the amount of money lawmakers could spend. 'We have become accustomed to spending recurring dollars,' Perez said, adding: 'What we are trying to do is stop that from happening into the future.' Times reporter Jeffrey S. Solochek contributed to this report.
