I don't know.
For those of us who pay the full balance every month (no interest payment) there's no expenses passed on that I'm paying.
Yes, there's a 2%-3% merchant cost built in to purchases but that's whether you use cash or charge.
Everyone pays, including you. Your share is smaller because the people who pay cash and the people who carry a balance are subsidizing you. One of the problems is that people don't think they're paying for the fraud because they get the money back for specific fraudulent transactions. They don't realize that there's a hidden "credit card fraud tax" on every transaction.
The CC companies haven't "fixed the hull" because it is not yet cost-effective to do so. When it is, they will.
Since they simply pass the costs onto the consumers, it will never be "cost effective"! Let's say fraud tripled. They would increase the fees to merchants, who would increase prices to consumers. The card companies would probably make even MORE money! Admittedly, it would not go that way forever because at some point more merchants would start charging a fee for using credit cards (or discounting for cash...same thing), and credit card usage would drop-off.
That's the only force on the credit card companies right now. Also, maybe if they get to the point of inconveniencing customers due to blocking legit charges, I guess that could be another force on them. That one is a real PITA in my book, a huge dissatisifier they might wish to remedy.
But one thing is for sure: I'm not checking my statement every minute or being annoyed by alerts. To heck with them! I'm not being an unpaid volunteer baler for their leaky hull! My solution is to have multiple no annual fee cards to defend from when one card is out of service due to having been compromised or locked due to legit transactions that their algorithms say are suspicious. The ONLY reason I'm able to do this is because legislation is in place that makes the bad charges their problem. I'm going to continue to lean heavily on that.
Maybe the new legislation could just be a required line on the credit card statement that indicated what your share of paying for fraudulent transactions was. The CC company would add up all fraudulent charges and allocate it to the dollar value of the transactions. So the guy who had $200 worth of transactions in a month would see a number twice as large as the guy with $100 worth. But if you added up all the dollar values across all the CC's held by the company it would equal what they covered in fraud.
This month, your share of the fraud was $2.15.
Then there could be additional government reporting that allowed consumers to shop for credit card issuers that had lower fraud percentage.