Home > 2011 > Personal Finance

Strange Bedfellows in Debit Interchange Fee Fight

Advertiser Disclosure Comments 2 Comments

Debit_HakanDahlstrom_CCFlickrPolitics makes strange bedfellows, goes the saying. In the fight over how much retailers pay every time you swipe your debit card, the old cliché holds especially true. An unlikely coalition, including organizations from Bank of America to the NAACP, is calling on Congress to postpone the deadline for new rules regarding debit card interchange fees.

It may be the first time in history that civil rights groups like the NAACP and the Latino Coalition have fought to preserve billions of dollars’ worth of income for the nation’s largest banks.

“Some opponents of the proposed rule claim that because banks will lose a sizable percentage of the debit interchange revenue…consumers will be relegated to pay the difference,” Hillary O. Shelton, a lobbyist for the NAACP, wrote in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner earlier this month.

At issue is the Durbin Amendment, an add-on to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed last year. Under rules proposed by the Federal Reserve, the amendment would cap debit card fees at 12 cents per transaction (the current average is 44 cents). Those fees generate at least $24 billion a year in revenue for banks, as we reported here.

[Related article: Interchange Fees—The Billion-Dollar Fight For Control of Your Wallet]

Merchants pass those fees on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. That’s not fair, some consumer advocates say, because it forces people without debit cards—usually low- and moderate-income people who don’t have bank accounts—to pay more for a system they never use. Though bankers and retailers disagree over whether merchants will pass the savings on to customers if the new rules remain unchanged.

“Cash buyers are subsiding card buyers, who generally are more affluent,” says Ed Mierzwinski, director of the consumer program at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG).

A broad spectrum of consumer and civil rights groups worries that the proposed solution may be worse than the problem, however. Reining in excessive bank profits is one thing. Making it impossible for banks to offer free checking, robust ATM networks and other services that help low-income people is quite another.

“We want to make sure the banks have sufficient revenues to provide basic banking services to low- and moderate-income people,” says Josh Silver, vice president of research and policy for the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, a nonprofit group that helps community development organizations, and which rarely finds itself fighting for the interests of banks.

[Free Tool: Obtain your Identity Risk Score from Credit.com]

“The intent of the Durbin amendment is admirable, to make sure that consumers are not getting unnecessarily high fees,” Silver says. “Where’s the right balance? It’s probably somewhere between 44 cents and 12 cents.”

Other groups that normally find themselves on the opposite side of big banks have also expressed reservations about the Fed’s proposed rules, including the National Education Association, the Latino Coalition, the Black Chamber of Commerce and the Consumer Federation of America. While they agree with the Durbin amendment’s intent, these groups worry that the Fed’s proposed scheme for interpreting the law could backfire.

The amendment is scheduled to take effect April 21. While some groups including U.S. PIRG are pushing Congress to let the deadline stand, other groups are asking that the deadline be postponed until the Fed can study the issue more closely.

“You’ve got a consumer interest on both sides of the equation,” says Travis Plunkett, a lobbyist for the Consumer Federation of America. “We’re worried about the most vulnerable banking customers and the increased costs they might be charged, which possibly may drive them away from the banking system.”

Image by Håkan Dahlström, via Flickr

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • http://www.grow-california.com Scott

    Nice Article…The thing that most people are missing is that Retailers have the ability to offer their own Debit Card…and Consumers can have it access any Bank they want.

    Google “DEBITMAN” The Retailers Network or Tempo as the name changed.

    Retailers can issue these Debit Cards as part of their rewards cards…it is simple and provides Competition to the Banks, and Visa & MC. “The Consumer Wins”

    I know…Why Don’t we Regulate Retailers that offer lower prices if we get their rewards cards…Make their prices the same for everyone…ridiculous isn’t it…

  • Christopher Maag

    Good point, Scott. For more on this, check out my recent story about this here:


    It was also picked up by ABC News, here:

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team