Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): No queremos que nos cobren de más en ese bar. - We don’t want them to overcharge us at that bar.

Because querer que + a change of subject triggers the present subjunctive in Spanish. The main clause subject is nosotros (No queremos…), and the subordinate clause subject is an implied ellos (the staff at the bar), so you need the subjunctive: que nos cobren. The indicative cobran would be used for statements of fact, e.g., Sabemos que nos cobran de más.

What exactly does de más mean here?

De más is a fixed expression meaning “more than is appropriate/than one should,” i.e., “over and above the correct amount.” It implies overcharging or excess relative to what’s due. Compare:

cobrar de más = to overcharge
cobrar más = to charge more (not necessarily unfair)
cobrar demasiado = to charge too much (focus on a large amount)
más de la cuenta = more than one should (very common alternative)

Is de más the same as demás?

No.

de más (two words) = “too much,” “extra,” “unnecessary.”
demás (one word, accent) = “the rest/the others,” as in los demás (“the others”). So cobrar de más is correct; cobrar demás is not.

Who is the subject of cobren? There’s no explicit ellos.

It’s an implicit, generic ellos meaning “they” (the staff/people at the bar). Spanish often omits the subject when it’s clear from context. You could make it explicit: No queremos que los camareros nos cobren de más.

Could I say No queremos que el bar nos cobre de más (singular)?

Yes. That treats el bar (the establishment) as the subject, so you use singular subjunctive cobre: No queremos que ese bar nos cobre de más. Both plural (implied staff) and singular (the business) are natural.

Why is there no no before nos cobren?

The no negates the wanting: No queremos… If you put it in the subordinate clause, you change the focus:

No queremos que nos cobren de más = We don’t want them to overcharge us.
Queremos que no nos cobren de más = We want them not to overcharge us.
Both are idiomatic; the second emphasizes the negative action in the subordinate clause. Avoid No queremos que no… unless you literally mean “we don’t want them not to…,” which is a different idea.

Can I say No queremos que nos cobran de más?

No. After querer que, you need the subjunctive: cobren. Use the indicative cobran only in factual clauses like Sabemos que nos cobran de más.

Is nos a direct or indirect object here?

Indirect object. The verb is typically cobrar(le) [algo] a alguien (“to charge [something] to someone”), so nos = “to us.” You can add emphasis with a nosotros: No queremos que a nosotros nos cobren de más.

Can I move parts around, e.g., No queremos que en ese bar nos cobren de más?

Yes. Spanish allows flexible word order for emphasis or flow. All of these are fine:

No queremos que nos cobren de más en ese bar.
No queremos que en ese bar nos cobren de más.
En ese bar no queremos que nos cobren de más. Keep the clitic nos before the finite verb cobren.

Where else can the pronoun nos go?

With a finite verb, it must go before the verb: que nos cobren. With an infinitive/gerund/affirmative imperative, it can attach:

Pueden cobrarnos de más / No queremos que nos cobren de más.
Están cobrándonos de más (less common in Spain; often nos están cobrando de más).

Could I simply say No queremos pagar de más?

Yes. That’s a natural alternative focusing on the payer rather than the charger.

No queremos que nos cobren de más = We don’t want them to overcharge us.
No queremos pagar de más = We don’t want to overpay.

What’s the difference between cobrar, cargar, and cobrar extra?

cobrar = to charge/bill (general, standard in Spain).
cargar = to charge to an account/card, e.g., cargarlo a la tarjeta.
extra is usually a noun: cobrar un extra/suplemento. Cobrar extra is heard informally, but in Spain cobrar de más or cobrar un suplemento is more idiomatic.

Why en ese bar and not a ese bar?

En ese bar = “in/at that bar” (location).
A ese bar would express motion (“to that bar”), e.g., Vamos a ese bar.
You could also say en aquel bar or en este bar depending on distance.

When do I use este/ese/aquel with bar?

este bar = near the speaker or “this” in discourse.
ese bar = near the listener or previously mentioned.
aquel bar = far from both, or emotionally distant/“that one over there.”

Could I use para que instead of que?

Different structure and meaning: para que introduces purpose. For example:

No vamos a ese bar para que no nos cobren de más. (We’re not going to that bar in order that they don’t overcharge us.)
Your original uses querer que to express desire, not purpose.

What’s the opposite of cobrar de más?

Cobrar de menos = to undercharge.
Example: Nos cobraron de menos por error (“They undercharged us by mistake”).

Any colloquial Spain-Spanish ways to say “overcharge”?

Yes, informal/slang options include:

clavar: Nos clavaron en ese bar (they ripped us off).
sablear: Nos sablearon en la terraza.
timar: Nos timaron con la cuenta.
These are stronger and imply dishonesty, not just a pricing policy.

How would I say it in the past?

Use imperfect subjunctive after a past main verb:

No queríamos que nos cobraran/cobrasen de más en ese bar.
Both -ran and -se forms are correct.

What is the present subjunctive paradigm of cobrar?

Present subjunctive: cobre, cobres, cobre, cobremos, cobréis, cobren.
So your clause uses ellos/ustedes: cobren.