It's funny, so many American consumers complain about having to pay for car or health insurance, saying that people should pay for what they use... but they would be livid if a store dropped prices by 10-15% but got rid of all exchange policies and warranties. And yet, that 10-15% is effectively insurance against buying a defective product, or even one you're just unhappy with.
btw, I'm extremely happy with IKEA's policies. We bought the wrong bed (with delivery - $20) and only figured it out while I was putting it together. My GF went to IKEA, paid the $10 difference, the delivery company came by the next day, took the wrong bed, brought the right one and confirmed that we had everything we needed. No double delivery charges, no discussion, and all that on a $150 product.
Don't forget about advertising which on it's own often adds 20% to niche items costs.
Also, CC processing might be ~3% but it's added on at the end. aka 3% of manufacturing, 3% sales etc. Which can add up to 10% of the initial manufacturing cost.
Might be tax incentives for any loss of money/lower charge, but I get what you were saying and with Ikea being the one producing these much of the marketing and logistics would be taken care of, right? Though customer support may cost a bit more...
If Ikea stocked them in their stores then the logistics could easily be covered with their economies of scale. Importantly if Ikea did stock them it would be a way of raising money for the project. They could sell them for $1500 and give away one to charity for every three sold (assuming 20% overheads and $300 donation).
Massive amounts of risk, supply chain, logistics, all eliminated when selling to the UN like this.