As we all know, invoices, a small piece of paper that is often ignored in daily consumption, are actually the guardian saint of consumer rights and interests, and the witness of the transparency of market transactions.
In an economy governed by the rule of law, invoices are not only proof of payment, but also the cornerstone of national taxation and the legal basis for consumers to claim their rights when there is a problem with goods or services. Asking for invoices is a legitimate safeguard of every citizen's rights and interests, and it is also a contribution to social fairness and justice.
When we shop in stores and dine in restaurants, asking for invoices from merchants is not only our legitimate rights and interests, but also a small force to promote the standardized operation of the market.
Recently, a man in Taiyuan, Shanxi Province was beaten to the head because of the matter of asking for an invoice, what is going on?
According to reports, Mr. Xue, a man from Taiyuan, reported to the tax authorities in anger because he was rejected because he asked for an invoice after consuming at an Internet celebrity braised meat shop called "Brother X". Unexpectedly, this move attracted a violent response from the shopkeeper, and Mr. Xue was beaten to the point that his head was bleeding and the head wound required several stitches.
The shopkeeper also yelled at Mr. Xue: If you are fined 10,000 yuan for reporting, you must die. He also said that he knew about Mr. Xue's family situation, knew that his children were going to school at home, etc., and threatened: Do you really think I have nothing to do with the tax bureau? Believe it or not, kill your daughter tonight.
After the incident was exposed, it attracted widespread attention from the society. However, the owner of the shop gave another statement in an interview: he did beat Mr. Xue, but it was not because of the conflict over the invoice, but that Mr. Xue "touched the porcelain" on the grounds that the braised meat was not delicious, and only after the claim was not successful did he report to the tax department on the grounds of not issuing invoices, resulting in the braised meat shop being fined 10,000 yuan.
Such rhetoric is like throwing ice cubes into boiling water, instantly blurring the originally clear line between justice and injustice. The public began to wonder, which side of the truth is? Is it the legitimate rights protection of consumers, or the innocent victimization of merchants?
From the consumer's point of view, Mr. Xue's request for invoices is out of the protection of his own rights and interests, and also the supervision of the merchant's tax payment in accordance with the law. Invoices are not only consumption vouchers, but also an important basis for the tax department to supervise the market and crack down on tax evasion. Therefore, Mr. Xue's actions are undoubtedly just and reasonable.
However, from a merchant's point of view, they may think that as an influencer store, business is thriving and customers are busy, and occasionally not issuing invoices will not have much impact on the business. Once an invoice is issued, it will not only increase costs, but also expose some unknown business problems. As a result, when faced with a consumer's request for an invoice, they may choose to refuse or delay. But in any case, this cannot be a reason for merchants to commit violence against consumers.
The shopkeeper's claim that Mr. Xue had failed to make a claim on the grounds of food quality and instead reported that he would not issue an invoice was only a one-sided statement until it was proven. In the era of information explosion, the public should remain rational and wait for the results of the investigation of authoritative institutions, so as to avoid public opinion taking precedence and causing unnecessary misunderstandings.
Whatever the reason, merchants should not engage in personal attacks on consumers. This not only violates laws and regulations, but also seriously damages the image and reputation of the business.
Of course, we can't ignore the problem of "touching porcelain" as the shopkeeper said. In real life, there are indeed cases where some consumers take advantage of the merchant's negligence or loopholes to make malicious claims. This kind of behavior not only harms the interests of merchants, but also disrupts the market order. However, just because there is such an individual phenomenon, we cannot deny the legitimacy of consumers to protect their own rights and interests.