As you correctly note, the rebate regime is set up to allow vendors to advertise a low price for something (with the words "after rebate" in small type) and then make it difficult for buyers to actually get the rebate. I have seen published references to the fact that half the people who buy something that entitles them to a rebate never even take the first step and send in the forms, receipts, UPCs, etc. to get the money. After that, each successive hurdle -- and there is frequently at least one -- makes more and more people drop out.

My success rate in getting rebates is at or near 100%, but only because I'm very dogged about it, even though I know that it's not worth the time and effort to get back the usually relatively small amount of money involved. Still, I don't like to let them get away with it. Most people make the economically smarter decision and give up, which is what the vendors are counting on.

One solution, it seems to me, is to enact legislation requiring that if a price is advertised for a product, that's the price that the customer should pay before leaving the store. That is, give the rebate at the cash register. Then there's no problem about receipts or UPCs or proving that you actually bought it or whatever. If there's a sign that says "$34.95 (after $10 rebate)," you should pay $34.95 when you leave the premises and not have to send in anything and wait six to 10 weeks to get a $10 check.

Of course, that would make the rebate regime less attractive to vendors, because then every purchaser would get the advertised rebate rather than a minority of purchasers.

Given the long history of well-documented complaints about consumer rebates, I'm surprised that there hasn't been more legislative interest in stopping this frequently abusive practice.