A Chinese cuisine serving restaurant in Singapore’s Chinatown has removed controversial signs claiming a “104 per cent surcharge” on American diners, following widespread attention online.
The messages on two pieces of paper pasted on the front door of “Xie Lao Song” restaurant on Pagoda Street began circulating on social media earlier this week, a Channel News Asia report said.
Also Read: Chinese meme frenzy erupts as new AI video shows Trump, Elon Musk as factory workers
Written in both English and Chinese, the signs said: “Starting from April 9, Americans will be charged a 104 per cent surcharge when dining at this restaurant.”
It was signed off “Xie Lao Song, Singapore”.
Also Read: AI imagines Americans ‘slaving away’ in Nike, Tesla, Apple factories amid Donald Trump’s tariff row
The signs appeared shortly after US President Donald Trump announced a 104 per cent tariff on Chinese goods on Wednesday, said the report.
The report said the notices were no longer on display and the owner as well as staff members declined to speak on record.
Also Read: UN body warns of ‘catastrophic’ impact of US-China trade war on developing countries
The restaurant’s move sparked widespread discussion online, with a TikTok post shared by user ‘sgwhatsup’, showing the notices, garnering over 400,000 views and over 1,700 comments.
SG is usually a commonly used abbreviation for Singapore, where 74 per cent of the six million plus population is of Chinese descent.
Singapore, which currently imposes zero tariffs on US imports, is being subjected to the 10 per cent tariff, reports said.
While many online media users condemned the signs put up by the restaurant as discriminatory, others questioned whether Singapore law prohibited such practices.
On Reddit, a post on the issue garnered over 2,800 upvotes, with some users speculating whether the move was a publicity stunt.
There does not appear to be a law in Singapore that specifically pertains to discriminatory pricing based on nationality, the report said.
“Generally (it is) ‘willing buyer, willing seller’ in private transactions,” said Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan.
“I don’t (think) it’s illegal, but it clearly raises ethical questions,” the Channel quoted Tan as saying.
Singapore’s Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act states that it is an unfair practice for a supplier to take advantage of a customer who is not in a position to protect his or her interests.
It is also an unfair practice if information is withheld that could lead to a customer being deceived, or if a false claim is made.
However, the law does not explicitly state that discrimination by nationality is an unfair practice.
