DRMasterChief

ok scheint also besser zu werden... schaue unbedingt die Länder durch etc. und "ändere" vielleicht einen vorhandenen Mwst.-Satz, statt neu anzulegen, das musst du einfach mal probieren. Wie gesagt hatte ich da nie Probleme bei tb. Suche dir auch mal "alte" Forumsbeiträge (auch von Prestashop) über das Modul Europäische Rechtssicherheit, das war am Anfang recht kompliziert und fehlerhaft bzw. musste man eine Reihenfolge beachten für die Mwst., sonst hat das nicht funktioniert wie es sein sollte. Das für tb sollte nun aber fehlerfrei sein. Zum Thema Installation: ich hatte testweise ein einziges mal versucht, tb über so einen Softwaredienst aufs Hosting zu installieren (Softaculous) - nie wieder, war total buggy.

Lokalisierung > Steuersätze und Steuerregeln einstellen, alles nicht benötigte rausschmeissen bzw. einfach abändern zu 7 und 19% oder was bei dir eben zutrifft. Wenn du an Endkunden im Shop verkaufst, darf da nicht "zzgl. MwSt." stehen, die Preise müssen INKL. MwSt. angegeben werden, das ist dir sicher bekannt. Es scheint auch das Modul Europäische Rechtssicherheit nicht aktiv zu sein. Das brauchst du, teilweise wegen der MwSt.-Einstellung und auch daß der Hinweis "zzgl. Versandkosten" (oder eben was anderes) angezeigt wird, was auch vorgeschrieben ist. Handelst du hauptsächlich in Deutschland? !! vorher aber ggf. die Länder richtig erstellen wohin du liefern magst bzw. Gebiete daraus erstellen (EU, Schweiz, USA bspw., das wird dann jeweils anders behandelt und du kannst auch einstellen ob du bspw. für USA die deutsche USt. erheben willst auch wenn netto geliefert werden würde, denn da gilt kein USt-OSS). Die USA sieht also dann die Preise brutto wie in DE. Die richtigen Ländereinstellungen sind extrem wichtig.

hast du mal einen Screenshot o.ä.? ich verstehe das nicht ganz und konnte auch keinen derartigen Fehler feststellen, auch in anderen Versionen nicht. Hast du das EU-Modul aktiv?

Thanks for your contribution. I don't want to discuss here whether a particular approach is the right one. Only time will tell, and then the next few weeks when the law is in effect. However, all the statements I've found so far point in this direction: The cancellation function must be accessible even without logging in. We must also not forget that we are viewing this strongly from the perspective of a shop owner... So it wouldn't be as most people here seem to think. It remains a nonsensical approach, and of course, it annoys the shop owner to varying degrees 🙂

@Yabber You don't need to explain it to me; I think all shop owners here know the procedure. But you should understand what's required and implement it—that's just how it is. Whether it makes sense at the moment or not. If you ever get prosecuted for such a violation (e.g. GDPR, Withdrawal button or anything similar), you'll have to explain it to the authorities, and maybe then they'll understand and take notice. Excuse my language, but this isn't getting us any closer to a solution.

Here's a statement from the trade association (a specialized lawyer provided information on this). I'm including the German text here so you can use a translation yourself. I think this conveys the information most accurately. I'm really having doubts about the login issue. Durch den Widerrufsbutton soll sichergestellt werden, dass Verbraucher einen Vertrag ebenso leicht widerrufen können, wie sie den Vertrag abschließen konnten. Die Ausübung des Widerrufsrechts soll nicht aufwendiger sein als das Verfahren für den Vertragsabschluss. Der Widerrufsbutton muss für registrierte Kunden und nicht registrierte Gastbesteller bereitgestellt werden. Die Widerrufsfunktion muss grundsätzlich auch ohne Login erreichbar sein. Die gesetzlich vorgeschriebene vierzehntägige Widerrufsfrist läuft jedoch erst ab Erhalt der Ware und somit kundenindividuell. Laut dem Gesetzentwurf reicht es aus, wenn die Widerrufsfunktion ohne Rücksicht auf die individuellen Widerrufsfristen pauschal angezeigt wird. Ist das Widerrufsrecht des Verbrauchers für einen bestimmten Vertragsgegenstand erloschen, wird es durch die Bereitstellung eines Widerrufsbuttons durch den Unternehmer auf seiner Website nicht wieder aktiv. In der Regel wird den Vorgaben dadurch entsprochen, dass der Widerrufsbutton deutlich beschriftet wird, beispielsweise mit „Vertrag widerrufen". Der Button ist optisch hervorzuheben (z. B. Farbwahl, Kontraste) und muss auf der Hauptinternetseite verfügbar sein. Dabei ist er eindeutig von anderen Informationen wie den AGB, dem Impressum oder der Datenschutzerklärung abzugrenzen. Nach dem Klick auf den Button (auf der Hauptseite) ist der Verbraucher zunächst auf eine separate Seite weiterzuleiten, auf der er bestimmte Vertragsinformationen eingeben und dann eine weitere Schaltfläche, z.B. „Widerruf bestätigen“, anklicken muss, um den Widerruf zu erklären. Bei den Vertragsinformationen (damit der Widerruf dem richtigen Vertrag zugeordnet werden kann) ist folgendes abzufragen: Name des Verbrauchers Daten zur Identifizierung des Vertrags (z. B. Bestell-, Auftrags- oder Vertragsnummer) Angaben dazu, wie der Eingang des Widerrufs bestätigt werden soll (in der Regel per automatisierter E-Mail). Der Widerruf ist also samt Inhalt der Widerrufserklärung sowie Datum und Uhrzeit des Eingangs zu bestätigen. Wurden mehrere Verträge abgeschlossen oder umfasst der zu widerrufende Vertrag mehrere Waren oder Dienstleistungen, so muss der zu widerrufende Vertrag oder Vertragsteil vom Verbraucher konkret benannt werden.

Hi, "Länder" > MwSt. anzeigen und seit dem Modul "Europäische Rechtssicherheit" funktioniert doch eigentlich ganz gut?! Mehr Infos bitte... auch wenn die MwSt. enthalten ist musst du ja für Endverbraucher den Hinweis geben. Ich habe im o.g. Modul aber auch eine Anpassung machen müssen, war aber eher optischer Natur fürs Theme. Ist es bei dir ggf. auch fest im Theme inkludiert? Dann kannst du es auch per Übersetzung lösen, aber Warenkorbmodul usw. muss dann auch dazu passen.

Okay, I also think that's an exaggeration just because you haven't seen any activity for x weeks. A project like this isn't so short-lived that it needs an update every week. Many developments certainly require several weeks of work or even longer, especially if you're not doing ThirtyBees programming full-time. The internet and everything connected to it is fast-paced, that's clear. But the rule still applies: if you're in a hurry, go slowly. It's nice to get an update from Acer, even if it doesn't bring anything new.

Hi, I understand your concerns. Generally, I still see great potential in Thirtybees. It's just perhaps not being fully realized. It's also difficult to break into such an environment. Either you have good programmers or you have good salespeople. It seems you don't have both, or, as is so often the case, the team fails. But I also understand your concerns, and of course, Thirtybees currently carries a lot of baggage at its core. We know where it comes from... and yes, to lead it into the future, a thorough overhaul would be necessary. But please, no symfony-style strategy 😞

Oh dear, good grief! There's no need to send an email to the shop using an email program. The regulation specifies a button that may link to a form. The form can be pre-filled or not; there are no further regulations regarding this. And yes, when the "confirm cancellation" button is clicked, the shop receives a notification in the background. The regulation, effective from June, simply aims to prevent customers from having to use an email program, a letter, a fax, or even a carrier pigeon. That's the basic idea. The customer simply fills out a form or checks a box, and then submits the declaration that they wish to cancel the order. Why is so much more being read into the regulation than it actually stipulates? Thanks @vir for your post before.

I've also come to the conclusion that we're talking about different things. On the one hand, there's the simple cancellation "I don't want the goods / I want to return them," and on the other hand, there's an automated process with a possible automatic refund. These are indeed different things, and the EU regulation doesn't require any refund function. The conditions for a refund are fully and clearly regulated elsewhere, and have been for a long time; there won't be any changes to that in June 2026. And we certainly don't use a shop system for this, but rather an inventory management system, which undoubtedly operates on a different level. But thank you for the hint to keep our business going. Now nothing can go wrong. 🤙 🤠

@vir and @Yabber: The simplest form has three lines: name, email address, order number, and a text field for free-form comments if the customer wishes to provide them. And nothing is automatically pulled from the shop data in the simplest version. Submit button – done. Does it really take an hour to fill it out? Is there anything about it that isn't GDPR-compliant? I completely understand the need for a more sophisticated solution, but I don't quite understand why other opinions aren't being understood. Some people are interpreting the EU regulation to mean that a login wouldn't be a problem. We're not there yet, folks. At worst, time will tell. There's plenty of written guidance on implementation, based on the current assessments from lawyers and trade associations. We don't manage inventory, packing lists, invoices, etc., in the Thirtybees shop. The shop system is simply the customer frontend for us. All orders are transferred to our inventory management system, where everything else is handled, including picking in the warehouse, label printing, etc. Perhaps the requirements are simply too different. But it's good that we're discussing it, and I think the topic will become more prominent in this forum in the near future as more people look for a solution.

ok, so you are fine. It´s not my idea. The regulation says in point 37 regarding implementation: ....For example, the consumer should not have to undertake procedures to find or access the function.... So again my question: is a login an additional "procedure" to access this function? Please answer this question for yourself. In my opinion, it's at least one more step than simply clicking the first button or link, so it is. But perhaps we simply have to wait until June to see how this plays out. In Germany, we have the specific problem that lawyers can send out cease-and-desist letters, which are very expensive. This isn't the case in all countries, so perhaps that's why you're not so sensitive about it. Yes, unfortunately, this makes us very "anxious" in Germany, and online shop owners are often treated like serfs.

I understand if you want to support the module for your own reasons... but that's no reason to be so pushy. As already mentioned, requiring a login could be seen as a hurdle > it's not entirely clear yet; time will tell. However, I don't want to be a guinea pig and have to pay for it. 🙂 The explanations in point 37 of the regulation provide further clarity regarding implementation: ....For example, the consumer should not have to undertake procedures to find or access the function.... Is a login a "procedure" to access this function? Please answer this question for yourself. I just find it problematic to offer a module that might not take this into account and tells the customer it's 101% compatible with the regulation, because I don't think it is or it is not clear yet. But it's everyone's own decision. We'll probably find different solutions, and that's why we're here, not to quarrel.

@Yabber no absolutely not - and even if that were the case, it is exactly what is sufficient. 🤒 Do you have read any of the papers? And what about the opinions and recommendations of chambers of commerce, lawyers, etc.? I almost don't think so... You also haven't read my ideas on this, and yes, of course, it can be implemented in different ways, but I still want to keep it at the most minimal level. This needs to be implemented, and that's enough work and expense for most retailers. I won't be adding any extraordinary service levels. Please explain how you see this and how you will implement it. Then carefully check off the checklist to determine if and how the EU requirements are met.

I won't be performing any customer validation beforehand, as the policy doesn't require it. To prevent spam, I'm integrating Cloudflare Turnstile. If any "fake" customers misuse the form, it's just one more email we have to delete. But emails with the subject "cancellation" have to be processed or at least briefly reviewed anyway. A more automated solution isn't an option for us, as we only accept orders in the shop, and all further handling, delivery, invoicing, etc., is done in an ERP system. The form includes: Name, email, order number, and an optional text field for customer notes (e.g., to cancel only some items). That's sufficient for processing. We'll see whether we need to add another interface to the ERP system later (the number of returns is simply too low to justify the cost, thankfully). I'll place the link to the form in the "My Account" section, highlighted in color, so it's accessible from every page. There's plenty of space there, and it looks good and is easy to find. The emails to the customer are equally simple; they contain exactly the information they entered in the form. I'll also include the date and time (because that's required by the regulations), as the email header apparently won't suffice. There's still time before the deadline. I've already started working on it and can finish it within a few hours.

Hi, it is clearly stated: The withdrawal function shall be continuously available throughout the withdrawal period. Even if the button is displayed after the withdrawal period has expired, this is not a legal problem. There is no reliable technical way to calculate the withdrawal period in the shop. It depends on many factors, such as partial deliveries or whatever period the retailer voluntarily grants. The details of a partial cancellation of a larger order are not addressed in the EU directive. Thank you for that 😞 If a reliable way can be found to link the withdrawal period to the withdrawal period, that's fine. Please do so. However, if there is only one instance of an incorrect withdrawal period, it is not good for the retailer. The permanently displayed button naturally carries the risk that it will be used even after the withdrawal period has expired. However, this is not a problem; the withdrawal is then invalid. The retailer will have to check this in any case and inform the customer, etc. Then he has to inform the customer that the cancellation was received after the deadline, but this is no different from before, or if a customer still cancels by email. Just expose your guest tracking controller with a link in the footer for all guests, and that should suffice. >> Yes, that's true, but guests and logged-in customers can use it, except that the login process is (possibly) displayed afterward. This could be seen as an additional hurdle by logged-in customers > not good. I'm not sure if it's clear what I mean by that point? With all this in mind, I have to say that we actually don't have any cancellations/returns. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things? We simply have to implement it; only one customer will use it per year. But please let us discuss here further!

Thank you very much for the additional information. However, there seem to be differing opinions or different laws depending on the EU country. It appears that the EU regulation is then transposed into national law in each country. In Germany, the situation is such that the button must be clearly visible at all times, from anywhere (possibly highlighted in color). A login could present an additional obstacle and is therefore not permitted. A login is only allowed if ordering can only be done with a login. This likely doesn't apply to most shops, as almost all of them allow guest checkout. See my link, which is in English and explains all the guidelines for implementation in Germany. The same applies to several other EU countries, so Germany isn't alone in this. This concerns the amendment to EU Directive 2023/2673 on the introduction of the right of withdrawal (for goods deliveries). I absolutely cannot see in this that the shop operator has to provide a solution in which the customer can identify the contract (i.e., select their order in a login process). It is perfectly fine if the customer simply enters the order number in the withdrawal form. That's why I initially wanted to know how to implement such a button and now we can clearly see that most of the solutions will bringt this into the footer. I wish your module were suitable for me, but after all this and a checklist, unfortunately, it isn't. This is the official document and you can choose every EU language: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2023/2673/oj (main thing is Article 11 a) and it explains in detail what is necessary (and what is not necessary, or what we as retailers do not need to represent).

Hello, thank you for the information. Please provide us with some more details. The product images are unfortunately difficult to see. How are guest orders handled? According to regulations, a login should not be required. The button must always be easily accessible and available. You mention refunds several times. Is this process implemented, or are you only referring to the cancellation request? An automatic refund would be problematic for the retailer and is not required. Additionally i found an actual paper with a lot of pratical help and hints, which explains a lot of questions which was earlier in this post here (e.g. place it in the footer...), please find it: https://www.noerr.com/en/insights/implementing-legislation-for-the-withdrawal-button-published

Yes, something like that was my intention. Maybe the thirtybees Team is looking for making some $ and sell this as a paid premium module.

...useful to find malicious files on the server if they are placed, let's say in img where they are extremely hard to find manually... This is a very nice idea and a real business case 🙂 Maybe we can see more about this in future. And regarding growing up, I'd like to say: my bank knows if there are too many zeros and it doesn't fit on the bank statement; they'll let me know 🤪🤑

All the free AI offerings have a daily usage limit (or they even fake model versions.). Nothing is truly free if you're looking at cutting-edge models. However, http://poe.com/ offers some pretty good models for free.

Some kind of OT, but which pricing model do you use @vincentdenkspel? I have a look for some php work on https://openlaboratory.ai/models/CodeLlama-70B but the Claude Sonnet with Coding looks also interesting. Maybe we should split this here for future AI things?

We shouldn't mix things up too much here. And I do think that one more problem can create one more problem than the other. 🙂 The right to be forgotten, data deletion, etc., must be guaranteed, but this can also happen through a standard request and doesn't have to be an automated process (perhaps it's different in other countries). Most retailers will probably use an ERP system or CRM in addition to their online shop system, so a process within the online shop itself isn't very helpful, because the data also needs to be deleted from other systems. I would find it a shame if the discussion and search for a solution ended here. That's usually how it feels in forums when someone brings up a different idea. Let's work on solutions for the cancellation button, and if necessary, everyone can review the minimum legal requirements again.

I actually came across a case where something very similar was being complained about. It's not about a cancellation for goods, but rather the long-standing law regarding cancellations for subscriptions or financial services, etc. It concerns an offer from HP: (please use the translation for you language) https://www.bundesjustizamt.de/DE/Themen/Verbraucherrechte/VerbandsklageregisterMusterfeststellungsklagenregister/Verbandsklagenregister/Unterlassungsklagen/Klagen/2025/282/UKlag_282_2025_node.html