So called "Credit Card Competition Act"

[sengsational]

I'm getting an unfair advantage over, I suspect, the majority of Americans. I also suspect that the proposal (I have not analyzed) will reduce the advantage, and so I feel that leveling the playing field would be better (more fair).

I think it's the wrong place to start, though. I feel it's too easy to execute credit card fraud. The CC companies just push it out to their customers in the form of inconvenience (requiring travel itinerary in advance), inconvenience in randomish denials (so we need extra accounts just in case) and higher prices at the merchant (covering unrecoverable fraud losses). Many people think, because their instance of fraud doesn't cost them anything, the scammers didn't get them. The truth is that scammers get all of us, every purchase. Especially the cash customers, who pay the inflated credit card price due to the "no higher price for CC payment" in the T's&C's. There's technology that could be employed, but would require investment and a possible changing of the guard, but the entrenched players don't want change. Change will come, but it will be slower than it could be.

 

[Koolau]

I'm getting an unfair advantage over, I suspect, the majority of Americans. I also suspect that the proposal (I have not analyzed) will reduce the advantage, and so I feel that leveling the playing field would be better (more fair).

I think it's the wrong place to start, though. I feel it's too easy to execute credit card fraud. The CC companies just push it out to their customers in the form of inconvenience (requiring travel itinerary in advance), inconvenience in randomish denials (so we need extra accounts just in case) and higher prices at the merchant (covering unrecoverable fraud losses). Many people think, because their instance of fraud doesn't cost them anything, the scammers didn't get them. The truth is that scammers get all of us, every purchase. Especially the cash customers, who pay the inflated credit card price due to the "no higher price for CC payment" in the T's&C's. There's technology that could be employed, but would require investment and a possible changing of the guard, but the entrenched players don't want change. Change will come, but it will be slower than it could be.

Yeah, it costs the CC companies little or nothing for "fraud." They just charge us more to make up for fraud. Of course, I try to make sure I'm not the one paying the extra by never paying them inflated interest. YMMV

 

[athena53]

Yeah, it costs the CC companies little or nothing for "fraud." They just charge us more to make up for fraud. Of course, I try to make sure I'm not the one paying the extra by never paying them inflated interest. YMMV

They also whine that they "have to" charge such high interest rates because of the default risk- which would be a lot lower if they were more careful about granting credit.

Right now I have 4 active credit cards with total available credit close to my Adjusted Gross income- which is the number I provided as my income when I applied. I pay them off in full every month. I do not want to think about what the minimum monthly payments would be if I maxed them out but I might default, too.

 

[Aerides]

Yeah, it costs the CC companies little or nothing for "fraud." They just charge us more to make up for fraud. Of course, I try to make sure I'm not the one paying the extra by never paying them inflated interest. YMMV

I used to work in the industry. Around 1% of all transactions are fraud (at least that was the stat I remember around 20 years ago) and the CC company eats a whole lot of that if the merchant got authorization at the point of sale.

 

[sengsational]

... Of course, I try to make sure I'm not the one paying the extra by never paying them inflated interest. YMMV

Absolutely! Again, those that can't afford it are the ones who pay the most to cover the fraud and defaults. If these expenses were called out separately, there might be some push back and the possibility of meaningful changes.

 

[Phroig]

It’s not just the case that rewards/bonuses will disappear. Credit card companies aren’t nonprofits. If they can’t charge merchants transaction fees, the only way they can make money is by charging annual fees (all of us) and interest/penalties (some of us).

 

[folivier]

Whenever I see a bill like this come across, especially with a name that may or may not be accurate, I like to ask "what problem are they trying to solve"?
Typically it is not to help the consumer.

 

[foxcreek9]

It’s not just the case that rewards/bonuses will disappear. Credit card companies aren’t nonprofits. If they can’t charge merchants transaction fees, the only way they can make money is by charging annual fees (all of us) and interest/penalties (some of us).

Bingo, also interest from the day of purchase and much stricter on who qualifies for a card. So all the mom and pop stores that are complaining about cc fees will soon realize that people don't overspend with debit cards, the old adage "be careful what you wish for"

 

[Time2]

The site won't let you read it without disabling the ad blocker. Not happening.

Read the fine print, it allows you to continue without disabling.

 

[Sojourner]

Whenever I see a bill like this come across, especially with a name that may or may not be accurate, I like to ask "what problem are they trying to solve"? Typically it is not to help the consumer.

+1

I have come to believe that "helping the consumer (i.e. voter)" is usually a minor afterthought. It is usually much, much more about helping the lawmaker retain power and/or enrich their coffers.

 

[ERD50]

To play the devil's advocate: I've read that the cash management costs to merchants for credit cards are generally lower than for "cash". Those armored cars you see picking up and distributing cash to convenience store tills aren't free. Depending on your business model, credit cards can be the preferred payment.
....

Interesting, never thought about the cost of those trucks and armed guards. I wonder what that amounts to?

And counting on Uncle Billy to drop it off at the banks could be risky too!


DW worked in corporate offices of a major Midwest grocery chain in the 80's, the stores handled so much cash in those days, that workers were paid in cash. I'd be nervous about leaving the store on payday, in some of those neighborhoods especially!

-ERD50

 

[foxcreek9]

Interesting, never thought about the cost of those trucks and armed guards. I wonder what that amounts to?

And counting on Uncle Billy to drop it off at the banks could be risky too!


DW worked in corporate offices of a major Midwest grocery chain in the 80's, the stores handled so much cash in those days, that workers were paid in cash. I'd be nervous about leaving the store on payday, in some of those neighborhoods especially!

-ERD50

They are expensive, I worked part-time at a small bank right after retiring from MegaCorp. I now understand why some banks will charge for taking in change and only from bank customers.

 

[ERD50]

I generally hate regulations like what's being mentioned (I didn't read in detail though). Let the free market determine this stuff.

Now, if the CC companies are engaging in non-competitive practices, there are already laws for that. Tighten the general anti-trust type laws if necessary, but don't micro-manage every transaction.

But some Congressperson just wants to get their name on a bill and claim they "helped people". It's 99.99% a scam, IMO.

-ERD50

 

[jazz4cash]

Interesting, never thought about the cost of those trucks and armed guards. I wonder what that amounts to?



And counting on Uncle Billy to drop it off at the banks could be risky too!





DW worked in corporate offices of a major Midwest grocery chain in the 80's, the stores handled so much cash in those days, that workers were paid in cash. I'd be nervous about leaving the store on payday, in some of those neighborhoods especially!



-ERD50

Uncle Billy! That’s a good one.

I’ve asked many of the small businesses I frequent and they seem to favor apple pay, zelle and conventional credit card over cash. My barber mentioned cash being a hassle. I’ve read that grocery stores love giving cash back (something I never think of doing) so they have less paper to manage

 

[jurgs01]

If the government is writing legislation there is are special interests involved, and you ain't it!

 

[Koolau]

Uncle Billy! That’s a good one.

I’ve asked many of the small businesses I frequent and they seem to favor apple pay, zelle and conventional credit card over cash. My barber mentioned cash being a hassle. I’ve read that grocery stores love giving cash back (something I never think of doing) so they have less paper to manage

Yeah, Uncle Billy was reliable only when he had just one thing to remember with his string.

 

[ownyourfuture]

I like my rewards! My cash back, my marriott points, etc. I don't know who is asking for this? The thought that it removing fees and rewards would benefit for consumers is hogwash.

Agreed.
I have an Amex card (3% back on groceries) a Bank Of America Mastercard (3% back on fuel) a Chase Visa freedom (different monthly cash back items up to 5%) and a Visa rewards card (2% on everything)

Plus I received substantial cash bonuses for signing up.

No thanks.

 

[gwill1010]

The site won't let you read it without disabling the ad blocker. Not happening.

Ha. You can disable for this one site. You'll probably never visit it again. What's the big deal? Ads on ligit sites are harmless. Not your problem I know, but if everyone had this attitude there would be no decent content on the web.

 

[gwill1010]

If the government is writing legislation there is are special interests involved, and you ain't it!

Ain't that the truth.

 

[The Cosmic Avenger]

Ha. You can disable for this one site. You'll probably never visit it again. What's the big deal? Ads on ligit sites are harmless. Not your problem I know, but if everyone had this attitude there would be no decent content on the web.

Not always. Legitimate ad networks sometimes get bad actors slipping through before they get banned. I read one blog that uses an ad network, and once in a blue moon an ad has shown up that follows your mouse pointer or something else malicious. The network seems to try to take those seriously, and it hasn't happened now in a year or two, but the blogger is just one person who relies on WordPress and her hosting company to know about these things.

My solution is using both an ad blocker and a script blocker. If I decide to allow ads on early-retirement.org, and their ad network posts an ad that tries to run a script from s3xy4u.ru, my script blocker will allow scripts from ER.org but not the .ru domain. Legitimate ads will just show an image and have a link. (I rarely do this just because most ads are animated, and I find it hard to concentrate on reading with movement like that in the corner of my vision.)

 

[CincyDave]

The site won't let you read it without disabling the ad blocker. Not happening.

I had the option to "continue without supporting us". I've noticed many sites with the ad blocker message popping up. Some give you the option to continue and others don't. On those that don't, I just move on.

 

[foxcreek9]

Dead, for now

https://viewfromthewing.com/durbin-marshall-credit-card-competition-act-fails/

 

[Koolau]

I had the option to "continue without supporting us". I've noticed many sites with the ad blocker message popping up. Some give you the option to continue and others don't. On those that don't, I just move on.

Yep, move on is what I do. Life is too short for ads that I can block.

 

[rk911]

"...there would be no decent content on the web...l

there's decent content on the web? ;-)

 

[Koolau]

"...there would be no decent content on the web...l

there's decent content on the web? ;-)

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.