QUESTION

Riverdale, NY

Someone has World Cup tickets that he wants to resell. One can resell through the FIFA resale website, where one sets a price and sees whether someone will buy it (and FIFA takes a cut). The going prices there have ranged from 2x to 70x the face value of the ticket. This person has a private Jewish buyer who agreed to pay a little less than 2x the face value. Is there any ona’ah issue because it is so much more than the face value, or not because this price falls within the “secondary market” rates?

ANSWER

Initially, I would have said that there is no problem here at all. Ona’ah (overcharging or unfair pricing) is determined by market rates, and when tickets are sold out, the going rate in the secondary market is simply higher. This is no different from buying a bushel of oranges when they are plentiful at one dollar each and then reselling them later at five dollars when they are scarce, and that has become the market price. In that sense, this is simply how markets work: buy low, sell high.

However, I was shown New York State law, which prohibits reselling tickets at more than a few dollars above their face value. That introduces a potential issue of dina d’malchuta dina (the halakhic principle that civil law is binding). It also raises the question of whether, for purposes of determining market rates relevant to ona’ah, only prices in the legal market count, while prices in an illegal resale market do not. I did find one posek (Shu”t Minchat Asher 3) who writes that items sold on the black market do not have a sha’ar (an established market price), and therefore there is no ona’ah. Still, that case is not fully analogous, since here the item itself is not illegal. It clearly has a market value in the legal market and a very different value in the illegal resale market.

That said, at least as far as ona’ah is concerned, this case does not appear to be problematic. Both sides are fully aware of the market rate. As ruled in Shulchan Aruch (CM 227:21), when the price disparity is explicit and acknowledged, there is no claim of ona’ah:

אבל במפרש, אין לו אונאה. כיצד, מוכר שאמר ללוקח: חפץ זה שאני נותן לך בק”ק יודע אני שאינו שוה אלא מאה על מנת שאין לך עלי אונאה אני מוכר לך, אין לו עליו אונאה

When the price is explicitly stated, there is no claim of overcharging… if the seller says, “I know this item is worth only X, but I am selling it to you for Y on condition that you have no claim of ona’ah,” there is no ona’ah

Accordingly, the seller should ideally state explicitly that the face value or standard price of the ticket is X, but that he is selling it for Y with the understanding that there is no ona’ah. Under those conditions, ona’ah would not apply.

The remaining question, then, is the scope of dina d’malchuta dina. Does it render the act itself halakhically forbidden, or does it apply only within the monetary realm, such as taxation or civil liability? And does it apply to laws that are regularly and openly violated? For example, when someone crosses the street outside of a crosswalk, has he violated dina d’malchuta dina?

Beyond the technical scope of dina d’malchuta, there is also a broader question of civic and ethical responsibility. As a frum Jew and as an ethical human being, does one have an obligation to follow all civil laws regardless of whether they generate direct halakhic consequences? I will leave it to you to decide whether and how you wish to address that aspect with this person.

For what it is worth, I do not think the transaction itself is ethically problematic. The ticket is worth at least that amount to the purchaser, and both sides benefit. The concern, if any, would be the legal violation, not exploitation.

In this case, FIFA is an international organization, the World Cup is taking place in a foreign country, and the transaction is therefore not governed by New York law. Given that, the question of dina d’malchuta dina regarding NY State law is irrelevant. Moreover, the fact that the resale is occurring on FIFA’s own platform is a strong indication that there are no legal issues with the resale at all. In that case, neither ona’ah nor dina d’malchuta dina would appear to be implicated.

In summary, while ticket resale at above face value could raise concerns of ona’ah and dina d’malchuta dina, neither applies here, where the price is transparent, and the resale occurs through a lawful international platform such as FIFA’s own system.