This article is written almost entirely from the seller's point of view, of course seller does not want to pay any fees. Some of the claims that buyer get same level of protection without chargeback is hilarious, it might be true that the author get special treatment as a foreigner in China from the government (the 12315 statement), but that's far from a typical customer experience.
"Chinese consumer law also gives buyers stronger remedies when a merchant knowingly commits fraud, including damages above the purchase price."
There is no small claim court or equivalent in China, 12315 is likely the closest but they can only provide recommendations, they cannot freeze assets or issue demands like a court. In absence of chargeback, the buyer owns the burden of gather evidence and proof, which usually includes paid test reports from trusted government agencies that the item is defect. In practice, a seller ships junk or nothing often get to keep the money and close the shop before you can get the money back.
Visa actually charges a smaller fee than pix, however its payments (almost all) require the ability to charge back. Banks processing American payments charge a few percent "for" chargeback etc. insurance, but the infrastructure could be used for similar digital cash (without any reversals), though I doubt it'll change any time soon.
This article is written almost entirely from the seller's point of view, of course seller does not want to pay any fees. Some of the claims that buyer get same level of protection without chargeback is hilarious, it might be true that the author get special treatment as a foreigner in China from the government (the 12315 statement), but that's far from a typical customer experience.
"Chinese consumer law also gives buyers stronger remedies when a merchant knowingly commits fraud, including damages above the purchase price."
There is no small claim court or equivalent in China, 12315 is likely the closest but they can only provide recommendations, they cannot freeze assets or issue demands like a court. In absence of chargeback, the buyer owns the burden of gather evidence and proof, which usually includes paid test reports from trusted government agencies that the item is defect. In practice, a seller ships junk or nothing often get to keep the money and close the shop before you can get the money back.
The US was the only example given where you can reverse a transaction later.
If you use systems in the US that do not allow chargebacks you can do so for no fee. And a 5 minute delay.
Visa actually charges a smaller fee than pix, however its payments (almost all) require the ability to charge back. Banks processing American payments charge a few percent "for" chargeback etc. insurance, but the infrastructure could be used for similar digital cash (without any reversals), though I doubt it'll change any time soon.
You should include India’s UPI (Unified Payments Interface). It is interesting and should fit in your comparison/references.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface
That, and the emerging pan EU payment proposals which will possibly die on "mine is better" competitive tensions.
When does the USA catch up?