• filter:

New Sales and Use Tax Rates for Los Angeles County and Some California Cities effective July 1, 2017

  • Text Only
  • Search this Topic »
Voting History
rated:
 
New Sales and Use Tax Rate for Los Angeles County Operative July 1, 2017

The 0.50 percent tax rate increase listed below was approved by California voters in November 2016 (Measure M ) and applies to the county of Los Angeles, including all cities and unincorporated areas. To find the correct tax rate for your area or business location, visit the Board of Equalization's (BOE) website at Find a SALES TAX RATE by Address. (Please note: This new rate will not be available on this website until July 1, 2017.)

At this time, the BOE will not be administering Los Angeles County’s Measure HSales Tax for Homeless Services and Prevention, which was approved by voters on March 7, 2017. The BOE may implement Measure H at a later date pending legislative approval. The below tax rates do not include the rate increases approved by Measure H.


NEW DISTRICT TAX
County/City New Code Acronym Prior Rate New Rate
Los Angeles County
(The 9.25 percent tax rate applies to all unincorporated areas and cities, and the incorporated cities1 that do not have city district taxes.)
577 LAMA 8.75% 9.25%
City of Avalon 578 AMHC 9.25% 9.75%
City of Commerce 585 CMMG 9.25% 9.75%
City of Compton 589 COMG 9.75% 10.25%
City of Culver City 584 CLEG 9.25% 9.75%
City of Downey 592 DWYG 9.25% 9.75%
City of El Monte 581 EMGF 9.25% 9.75%
City of Inglewood 579 IGWD 9.25% 9.75%
City of La Mirada 586 LMGT 9.75% 10.25%
City of Long Beach 588 LBTG 9.75% 10.25%
City of Lynwood 590 LWDG 9.75% 10.25%
City of Pico Rivera 582 PCRV 9.75% 10.25%
City of San Fernando 587 SNFE 9.25% 9.75%
City of Santa Monica 591 SAMG 9.75% 10.25%
City of South El Monte 583 SEMT 9.25% 9.75%
City of South Gate 580 SGTE 9.75% 10.25%

Agoura Hills, Alhambra, Arcadia, Artesia, Azusa, Baldwin Park, Bell, Bell Gardens, Bellflower, Beverly Hills, Bradbury, Burbank, Calabasas, Carson, Cerritos, City of Industry, Claremont, Covina, Cudahy, Diamond Bar, Duarte, El Segundo, Gardena, Glendale, Glendora, Hawaiian Gardens, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Hidden Hills, Huntington Park, Irwindale, La Canada-Flintridge, La Habra Heights, La Puente, La Verne, Lakewood, Lancaster, Lawndale, Lomita, Los Angeles, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Maywood, Monrovia, Montebello, Monterey Park, Norwalk, Palmdale, Palos Verdes Estates, Paramount, Pasadena, Pomona, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Rosemead, San Dimas, San Gabriel, San Marino, Santa Clarita, Santa Fe Springs, Sierra Madre, Signal Hill, South Pasadena, Temple City, Torrance, Vernon, View Park, Walnut, West Covina, West Hollywood, Westlake Village, and Whittier.
For more information on city and county tax rates, visit the BOE's website at All Sales and Use Tax Rates. You can also call the Customer Service Center at 1-800-400-7115 (TTY:711). Customer service representatives are available to assist you weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Pacific time), except state holidays.


Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
That's insane to spend half a million for studio apartments for homeless people. With LA real estate prices they shou... (more)

jerosen (Jun. 10, 2017 @ 9:29a) |

Strangely enough the very first US national income tax was in fact "sold" to the public as being temporary, and actually... (more)

fw9999 (Jun. 10, 2017 @ 10:57p) |

Closer to home would be trailer park in the desert outside Barstow, CA.

megatard (Jun. 11, 2017 @ 1:04p) |

Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

rated:
Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.

rated:
I've always thought that the 10% level was the highest psychologically people were comfortable going.

rated:
lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.

Unfortunately, the cities, counties and state of California are all trying end runs around Prop 13 to increase revenue via property taxes too.  Prop 13 was originally designed to cap property taxes at 1% of a home's purchase price with a 2% annual tax inflation factor.  However, bond measures, special assessment districts, increased transfer taxes upon sale, etc, have pushed effective property taxes up for property owners.

Additionally,  high housing prices in coastal areas of California make property taxes an expensive item for today's home buyers even at say around 1.25% of the purchase price (1% Prop 13 + .25% approx voter approved bonds/assessments).  Per a recent article in LA Weekly.  "Greater [Los Angeles] $599,400 median home price represents a 6.4 percent increase over the past year, The L.A. Metro area still has some of the highest home prices in America, bested only by California cousins San Jose (with a $979,400 median) and San Francisco ($839,600); San Diego's $529,200 median ranked the city just below Greater L.A." 

Then we also have the upcoming increase in gasoline taxes (takes effect Nov 1, 2016)  and increase in auto registration fees on the horizon thanks to our legislature.  The increased gas and auto registration fees were not a voter-approved measure -- they were proposed by our governor and some legislators:.

  • A 12-cent increase in the gasoline excise tax 
  • A 20-cent increase in the Diesel excise tax
  • A 5.75 percent increase in the Diesel sales tax
  • A new vehicle fee, which will annually charge drivers between $25 and $175, depending on the value of the vehicle
  • A $100 annual fee on zero-emission vehicles 

"The gas tax increase will take effect November 1 and new vehicle registration fees will begin Jan. 1, 2018. Fees on zero-emission vehicles will take effect July 1, 2020.  This will bring California's gas excise tax to 30 cents per gallon. 

 

rated:
lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.
Don't forget about income taxes, gasoline taxes, etc.  
 
At least with their property taxes, the rate is arguably low. Too bad the taxable value of the properties are so high (unless you have owned your home for 20+ years).

rated:
lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.Relatively low property tax rates. The taxes are still high due to high prices.

Most of the nearby counties' sales tax is 7.75%. 2-2.5% is a pretty good incentive for people living or working near the edges to shop outside their city/county.

rated:
bighitter said:    


The 0.50 percent tax rate increase listed below was approved by California voters in November 2016 


  Seriously? 

rated:
atikovi said:   
bighitter said:    




The 0.50 percent tax rate increase listed below was approved by California voters in November 2016 


  Seriously? 

The chart and related text that I posted is a direct paste from a California Board of Equalization's email that our company received so I am assuming it is accurate..  

Per the Sacramento Bee newspaper regarding the 2016 ballot, "Turnout among all Californians eligible to vote in Nov 2016 , not just those registered, stands at 58.73 percent."  So as crazy as it might seem, you have to understand that California attracts the fringe of society.   And that fringe does vote for legislative representatives, which probably also explains why our California legislators passed "cow fart" emission control in late 2016.  

rated:
bighitter said:   "cow fart" emission control in late 2016.  
Everyone farts. Why do you have to shame cows?? 
  

rated:
From what I understand, California’s politicians decided to impose a “catalytic converter” of some sort on cows to control greenhouse gases.   You can read the California Air Resources Board press release here:  http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/newsrelease.php?id=801 
Please do give us fellow FWer's your feedback if you are knowledgeable in this subject matter so that we can be appropriately enlightened. 

rated:
Come July 1st, the soda tax in Chicago will add 1 cent per ounce for all regular and diet soft drinks and energy drinks. So a 2 liter soda bottle selling for $1 today will cost more than $1.70. This 1 cent per ounce will apply to fountain drinks at restaurants, 7 Eleven and gas stations too.

rated:
LA County voters love to tax themselves. Measure M passed by over 70% and surprisingly Measure H, the homeless tax, passed by 69% on a off year election. The H people got away with people being scared to campaign against the homeless. You need 2/3 in order for a tax to pass.

The nice thing about Measure H is that it is a temporary tax only lasting ten years. If the streets are not clear of homeless people, everyone is in a shelter being housed, and they aren't getting treatment then I will vote no on the renewal. 

rated:
ach1199 said:   Come July 1st, the soda tax in Chicago will add 1 cent per ounce for all regular and diet soft drinks and energy drinks. So a 2 liter soda bottle selling for $1 today will cost more than $1.70. This 1 cent per ounce will apply to fountain drinks at restaurants, 7 Eleven and gas stations too.
  
It could be worse.

rated:
bighitter said:   
lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.

Unfortunately, the cities, counties and state of California are all trying end runs around Prop 13 to increase revenue via property taxes too.  Prop 13 was originally designed to cap property taxes at 1% of a home's purchase price with a 2% annual tax inflation factor.  However, bond measures, special assessment districts, increased transfer taxes upon sale, etc, have pushed effective property taxes up for property owners.  ...

 

 Amateurs!  California has a long way to go to beat Illinois in terms of the highest number of governmental taxing bodies - 6,963 of them! 

https://www.illinoispolicy.org/reports/too-much-government-illin...

While lotta taxin' goin' on - and still broke!

rated:
bighitter said:   From what I understand, California’s politicians decided to impose a “catalytic converter” of some sort on cows to control greenhouse gases.   ... 
 This just cries out for a visual...     https://virginiapatriot1776.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/17d4f944...

rated:
calwatch said:   LA County voters love to tax themselves. Measure M passed by over 70% and surprisingly Measure H, the homeless tax, passed by 69% on a off year election. The H people got away with people being scared to campaign against the homeless. You need 2/3 in order for a tax to pass.

The nice thing about Measure H is that it is a temporary tax only lasting ten years. If the streets are not clear of homeless people, everyone is in a shelter being housed, and they aren't getting treatment then I will vote no on the renewal. 

If I recall correctly, there were two measures for homeless:   Measure H on the Los Angeles County level (1/4 % increase in sales tax)  and Measure HHH on the Los Angeles City level (a property tax assessment). Both measures passed, although  I don't recall when the taxes for those measures take effect or the details on HHH.

As noted in the Board of Equalization's chart (see original post above), their rate chart doesn't include the rate increase approved by Measure H. 

rated:
I swear, if those idiots in Sacramento implement single-payer healthcare, I'm getting the hell out of California.

It's becoming loud and clear that the nice weather isn't enough value-added to stick around.

rated:
scripta said:   
lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.
Relatively low property tax rates. The taxes are still high due to high prices.

Most of the nearby counties' sales tax is 7.75%. 2-2.5% is a pretty good incentive for people living or working near the edges to shop outside their city/county.

  I prefer to shop outside the state.

Pretty soon the only thing people will be paying taxes on are taxes that are legally mandated.  Everything else will just be purchased out of state.

rated:
calwatch said:   LA County voters love to tax themselves. Measure M passed by over 70% and surprisingly Measure H, the homeless tax, passed by 69% on a off year election. The H people got away with people being scared to campaign against the homeless. You need 2/3 in order for a tax to pass.

The nice thing about Measure H is that it is a temporary tax only lasting ten years. If the streets are not clear of homeless people, everyone is in a shelter being housed, and they aren't getting treatment then I will vote no on the renewal. 

  
Our tax money raised via Measure H tax dollars will be exhausted very quickly.  Here is an example of a homeless development project proposed that will be built with taxpayer dollars.   My guess, based upon construction costs in Los Angeles,  is that the cost to construct per unit will be in excess of $400,000 per door for this design:   "Sleek new supportive housing complex planned for Skid Row".    http://la.curbed.com/2017/5/17/15654428/skid-row-affordable-homeless-housing-sp7 


That said, the homeless issue in Los Angeles is serious and growing, and does need a solution.  But lining developer's pockets or relying on local politicians who will throw money to their favorite constituents (in exchange for campaign contributions, etc)  that they tell us and the idiot media will  "fix the homeless problem" isn't going to be a viable solution.
  

rated:
runningair said:   I swear, if those idiots in Sacramento implement single-payer healthcare, I'm getting the hell out of California.

It's becoming loud and clear that the nice weather isn't enough value-added to stick around.

  
Who cares?  As far as you are concerned all insurance is "single-payer" (ignoring re-insurance and odd cases) -- if its cheaper than what your for profit insurance costs at the end of the day then you complaining about the wrong things.

That said, I have serious doubts that CA can run a single payer system equitably.  At a guess they will contract it out to one of the big for-profits to manage anyway.

rated:
bighitter said:   
calwatch said:   LA County voters love to tax themselves. Measure M passed by over 70% and surprisingly Measure H, the homeless tax, passed by 69% on a off year election. The H people got away with people being scared to campaign against the homeless. You need 2/3 in order for a tax to pass.

The nice thing about Measure H is that it is a temporary tax only lasting ten years. If the streets are not clear of homeless people, everyone is in a shelter being housed, and they aren't getting treatment then I will vote no on the renewal. 

  
Our tax money raised via Measure H tax dollars will be exhausted very quickly.  Here is an example of a homeless development project proposed that will be built with taxpayer dollars.   My guess, based upon construction costs in Los Angeles,  is that the cost to construct per unit will be in excess of $400,000 per door for this design:   "Sleek new supportive housing complex planned for Skid Row".    http://la.curbed.com/2017/5/17/15654428/skid-row-affordable-homeless-housing-sp7 


That said, the homeless issue in Los Angeles is serious and growing, and does need a solution.  But lining developer's pockets or relying on local politicians who will throw money to their favorite constituents (in exchange for campaign contributions, etc)  that they tell us and the idiot media will  "fix the homeless problem" isn't going to be a viable solution.
  

  
This project sounds more like a nicer looking version of SRO, so I suspect it will not cost as much as you think.  However that dense an SRO is going to have its own issues.  SROs are the best option for MOST homeless - but nobody wants them in THEIR neighborhood and there is a tendency by the city and developers to concentrate them which turns the area around it into a slum.   Not as badly as the area around the downtown "Soup-pot" has become - but it does make people twitchy.  They work FAR better as smaller complexes spaced out.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy

 

rated:
speedracer714 said:   scripta said:   lonestarguy said:   Yikes!! 10.25%!! At least California has low property taxes.Relatively low property tax rates. The taxes are still high due to high prices.

Most of the nearby counties' sales tax is 7.75%. 2-2.5% is a pretty good incentive for people living or working near the edges to shop outside their city/county.
I prefer to shop outside the state.

Pretty soon the only thing people will be paying taxes on are taxes that are legally mandated.  Everything else will just be purchased out of state.
Aren't all taxes legally mandated? I think you're talking about taxes collected at point of sale.

rated:
scripta said:   speedracer714 said:   I prefer to shop outside the state.

Pretty soon the only thing people will be paying taxes on are taxes that are legally mandated.  Everything else will just be purchased out of state.
Aren't all taxes legally mandated? I think you're talking about taxes collected at point of sale.
They are most likely ignoring that they are required to pay Use Tax for those purchases where their "home" tax was not collected at POS.
  

rated:
What kind of person am I that I welcome the measure H tax and really detest the Measure M tax?

rated:
RedWolfe01 said:   
runningair said:   I swear, if those idiots in Sacramento implement single-payer healthcare, I'm getting the hell out of California.

It's becoming loud and clear that the nice weather isn't enough value-added to stick around.

  
Who cares?  As far as you are concerned all insurance is "single-payer" (ignoring re-insurance and odd cases) -- if its cheaper than what your for profit insurance costs at the end of the day then you complaining about the wrong things.

That said, I have serious doubts that CA can run a single payer system equitably.  At a guess they will contract it out to one of the big for-profits to manage anyway.

  
I'm more concerned about the quality of healthcare declining.  We already have a shortage of MD's.  

rated:
A lot of people I know buy stuff in Oregon. There are even remailer services from Oregon to CA which charge a reasonable amount. A relative is into one of the MLM nutritional supplement schemes and instead of paying the sales tax plus the administrative fee (since CA won't let businesses for this supplement to get tax certificates, and even charges tax on "suggested retail price" which no one ever pays) gets her shipments shipped to Oregon, which is then repackaged and sent in bulk to SoCal to be broken up and redistributed. The cost for the remailer was about $10 for a $200 actual price purchase ($300 MSRP) which as you can see is a substantial savings. 

rated:
calwatch said:   CA won't let businesses for this supplement to get tax certificates, and even charges tax on "suggested retail price" which no one ever paysWow. I didn't know such a thing was possible. Always thought tax is collected for the price paid, and if the product is acquired for resale it isn't subject to sales or use tax for the reseller, only to the end-user.

rated:
calwatch said:   A lot of people I know buy stuff in Oregon. There are even remailer services from Oregon to CA which charge a reasonable amount. A relative is into one of the MLM nutritional supplement schemes and instead of paying the sales tax plus the administrative fee (since CA won't let businesses for this supplement to get tax certificates, and even charges tax on "suggested retail price" which no one ever pays) gets her shipments shipped to Oregon, which is then repackaged and sent in bulk to SoCal to be broken up and redistributed. The cost for the remailer was about $10 for a $200 actual price purchase ($300 MSRP) which as you can see is a substantial savings. 
  
You can also get a substantial savings on your monthly gas spending by siphoning gas from parked police cars.  

rated:
Socialism is not merely repugnant;  it is also quite expensive.  

rated:
The problem with taxes are they never go down. So any jurisdiction that taxes high will only ever get higher. California and Illinois stand out here for sure. They just get so greedy and money hungry, that when another problem occurs their solution is always just to tax more.

All of the "issues" they deem as worthy of tax increases are temporary measures, which means once the issue has been addressed the tax should go away. That's the ultimate problem is appealing to the bleeding hearts of "help X with this fund!" which puts in place a plan to resolve whatever problem they have. Great! So the tax goes away afterwards right? Nope. Of course not. It's going to be interesting in another 100 years as those tax amounts only get higher and higher.

rated:
ach1199 said:   Come July 1st, the soda tax in Chicago will add 1 cent per ounce for all regular and diet soft drinks and energy drinks. So a 2 liter soda bottle selling for $1 today will cost more than $1.70. This 1 cent per ounce will apply to fountain drinks at restaurants, 7 Eleven and gas stations too.
  I guess that adds 16 cents to a latte at Starbucks too right?

rated:
I get your point, justignoredem, but temporary measures do expire. Sometimes they are replaced by other measures, but not always. The combined state+local rate has been fairly stable for 26 years: https://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/taxrateshist.htm

rated:
scripta said:   I get your point, justignoredem, but temporary measures do expire. Sometimes they are replaced by other measures, but not always. The combined state+local rate has been fairly stable for 26 years: https://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/taxrateshist.htm
  
While one might be relatively stable (or small increases such as .25%), over a period of time, that doesn't mean your property taxes, state income taxes, gasoline taxes, cell-phone taxes, internet taxes, etc... are all standing still

rated:
justignoredem said:   The problem with taxes are they never go down. So any jurisdiction that taxes high will only ever get higher.

That has not been my personal experience.  County taxes (there are no city taxes) where I live have declined at times in recent years.  Other taxes have remained fairly steady or risen only slightly.

I realize things are different from this in many American venues.  But responsible, prudent, government continues to exist in some places, even today.      

rated:
The closest thing to immortality is a government program paid by a temporary tax.

rated:
justignoredem said:   scripta said:   I get your point, justignoredem, but temporary measures do expire. Sometimes they are replaced by other measures, but not always. The combined state+local rate has been fairly stable for 26 years: https://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/taxrateshist.htmWhile one might be relatively stable (or small increases such as .25%), over a period of time, that doesn't mean your property taxes, state income taxes, gasoline taxes, cell-phone taxes, internet taxes, etc... are all standing still Actually... gasoline tax is about to go up for the first time in 23 years, but property tax rates, state income tax rates, and I'm pretty sure phone taxes (I haven't paid these in years) have been stable, and there are no internet taxes (yet).

rated:
Oregon Sales tax hasn't gone for over 100 years.

rated:
Here is a link to a somewhat relevant and informative news article (in response to an earlier poster's comment about California property taxes)  from the Los Angeles Times.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-city-property-tax-table-htmlstory.html 

The chart the LA Times included in their article is  too long to post here however I have included their lead-in to the article below.  I was frankly surprised to see this type of transparent information in the Los Angeles Time inasmuch as they have long supported only liberal candidates for political office throughout the state.  Note the Time's comment that I bolded below.  From a quick review, it appears that City of Industry has the highest "base tax" rate at 1.926277%

"The small working-class city of Bell not only paid some of its officials the highest municipal salaries in the state, but its residents pay the highest property tax rates of all but one of Los Angeles County's 88 cities, county tax records show.

Use this chart and map to see how your city's rate compares.

Keep in mind that even within cities such rates can vary due to additional assessments for schools or special services that may apply to only some areas.This chart uses the highest tax rate for the assessed value of homes in each city. It does not account for direct assessments for services such as lighting, sewage, refuse and others charged by cities. All county property owners pay 1% general property tax, along with special or direct assessments levied by their municipalities.
The countywide average of all tax rates is 1.16%, or $11.60 for every $1,000 of assessed value."





 

rated:
RedWolfe01 said:   
bighitter said:   
calwatch said:   LA County voters love to tax themselves. Measure M passed by over 70% and surprisingly Measure H, the homeless tax, passed by 69% on a off year election. The H people got away with people being scared to campaign against the homeless. You need 2/3 in order for a tax to pass.

The nice thing about Measure H is that it is a temporary tax only lasting ten years. If the streets are not clear of homeless people, everyone is in a shelter being housed, and they aren't getting treatment then I will vote no on the renewal. 

  
Our tax money raised via Measure H tax dollars will be exhausted very quickly.  Here is an example of a homeless development project proposed that will be built with taxpayer dollars.   My guess, based upon construction costs in Los Angeles,  is that the cost to construct per unit will be in excess of $400,000 per door for this design:   "Sleek new supportive housing complex planned for Skid Row".    http://la.curbed.com/2017/5/17/15654428/skid-row-affordable-homeless-housing-sp7 


That said, the homeless issue in Los Angeles is serious and growing, and does need a solution.  But lining developer's pockets or relying on local politicians who will throw money to their favorite constituents (in exchange for campaign contributions, etc)  that they tell us and the idiot media will  "fix the homeless problem" isn't going to be a viable solution.
  

  
This project sounds more like a nicer looking version of SRO, so I suspect it will not cost as much as you think.  However that dense an SRO is going to have its own issues.  SROs are the best option for MOST homeless - but nobody wants them in THEIR neighborhood and there is a tendency by the city and developers to concentrate them which turns the area around it into a slum.   Not as badly as the area around the downtown "Soup-pot" has become - but it does make people twitchy.  They work FAR better as smaller complexes spaced out.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy 

 


Can you point me to something that I perhaps missed in the news article or the design schematics that support your contention that the project I linked may be an SRO (single room occupancy hotel) and not be as costly as I think?

Not that I disagree with your later point that SRO's are better options and should be less costly to build than a typical apartment design.

For the record, though, Los Angeles isn't confining homeless housing to downtown "soup-pot" locations -- Los Angeles has targeted several sites throughout Los Angeles. As you say, people who live in those targeted neighborhoods are "twitchy" about having a homeless building built next to their homes. To be fair to the NIMBYS, Los Angeles has had several recent attacks (stabbings, etc) perpetrated by mentally ill homeless on people merely walking by. I asked myself - if I bought a home and the city proposed a homeless shelter next door, would I campaign against it. Yes, I would. So I don't know what the answer is. Perhaps the homeless shelters should be located next door to police stations or hospitals that are equipped to deal with the number of homeless who live on the streets because they are either mentally ill and/or drug addicts vs.  other homeless who are just merely temporarily down and out financially. All of these people need help -- I'm just not sure that there is a single "one-size" solution for all.

Skipping 6 Messages...
rated:
jerosen said:   That's insane to spend half a million for studio apartments for homeless people. With LA real estate prices they should really just export the homeless to somewhere cheap. Why not build the LA homeless shelter in Texas with all the other ex Californians?
 

  
Closer to home would be trailer park in the desert outside Barstow, CA.

  • Quick Reply:  Have something quick to contribute? Just reply below and you're done! hide Quick Reply
     
    Click here for full-featured reply.


Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017