Damage Caused by C.Card Rewards

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Damage Caused by C.Card Rewards
26
Sat, 01-09-2010 - 10:47am

Assessing the Damage Caused by Card Rewards


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/your-money/credit-and-debit-cards/09money.html?hp


For several years, I’ve wondered whether my aggressive pursuit of credit card rewards made me a selfish consumer.


After all, the 1 to 3 percent or more of every transaction that merchants pay to accept the cards is a significant cost, and the small local retailers that make neighborhoods vibrant often pay a higher percentage.


Stores then build those fees into higher prices, so people who aren’t earning any rewards can end up subsidizing those who do. Many of these people have no credit cards because they’re financially troubled.


So the risk is that we perpetuate a sort of reverse Robin Hood problem, as Prof. Steven Semeraro of Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego puts it. It’s possible that the poor pay subsidies to finance the rewards of the affluent.


Andrew Martin’s article in The Times earlier this week noted how quickly the fees that merchants pay to accept certain debit cards had risen, too. That suggests a related question: Wouldn’t we all be better off if those of us who use plastic to earn free travel or cash back laid down our cards en masse?


So this week, I tried to figure out what would happen if we did just pay cash, or if there’s a better course of action for people who spend in a self-interested fashion but still have a conscience.


Quantifying the damage the cards cause merchants and the poor turns out to be quite difficult. Each card in your wallet can bear a wide range of costs, and retailers may pay different amounts to accept the same card. You can get a rough sense of your cards’ costs by punching in the first six numbers at truecostofcredit.com. (Me: This link has good info.)


Here’s one finding: Rewards-earning credit cards with the Visa and MasterCard logo often cost merchants more than plain-vanilla ones, which hints at the card companies’ laserlike focus on subsidizing rewards for the affluent customers who are still spending, even if they are paying their bills off each month and thus paying no interest.


But cards undoubtedly also benefit retailers. People can use credit to spend more than they have in the bank at the moment, and some may spend more on a card than they would if they had to lay out a pile of money. Merchants who handle less cash, meanwhile, bear fewer costs for counting it, calling the armored car, and theft by employees or armed bandits.


As for the cost to consumers of all the card use, the National Retail Federation figures that the so-called interchange fees that their members pay to accept Visa and MasterCard alone cost an average of $427 an American household in 2008. Add in other fees the stores pay, plus costs for American Express and Discover, and that number could approach $600.


Bringing that cost down to zero means that everyone would have to quit cards cold turkey. That’s a tall order, given that the campaign wouldn’t work unless all Americans were in on it, especially those who earn well over that $600 each year in rewards.


Besides, cards offer other benefits besides rewards, like ease of budgeting and record keeping, allowing you to avoid checks by paying monthly bills with a card, the ability to dispute charges and the time savings in not having to refill your wallet at an A.T.M. as often (and cost savings in not paying A.T.M. fees).


But let’s pretend that a boycott is feasible. Then what? Some merchants would keep the money they no longer had to pay to the banks instead of lowering prices. Banks, having lost that income, might try to make it up by charging consumers higher fees.


There is no way for consumers to win. No way, that is, unless merchants started giving us all discounts for using cash instead of cards. Then, we could decide whether the card rewards were worth more to us than the discount that any given retailer was offering. Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover all say that this is perfectly fine (not to mention the retailers’ right by federal law); they allow cash discounts but prohibit surcharges for card use. (Me: Offered to pay cash at a furniture store if they gave me a discount. Instead they gave me a 10% for obtaining their store card. Which I paid off when I received the bill.)


But most merchants find this problematic for a variety of reasons. What difference is there, really, between a discount and a surcharge except semantics? And what retailer needs the risk of inadvertently breaking one of the rules and having to pay a fine or losing the ability to accept cards altogether?


Other retailers find it offensive on its face that they should have to offer a discount to people who use United States legal tender. How, they ask, did we come to a point where anyone would even be bold enough to suggest something so outrageous? Besides, it makes little sense to hand over money to people who are already paying cash without knowing how many card users will join them, if any.


Then, there are the rules in some states that require retailers to display both the cash and credit price on every single item. That might work for a gas station but be expensive for a big-box retailer. (Me: Gas stations do this where I live.)


John Rydman, co-owner of the Spec’s chain of wine and liquor stores in Texas, offers a 5 percent discount to customers who use cash or punch in their PINs when using their debit cards. He decided to mark every item in the store with two prices, even though the state didn’t require it. “We do it for the ease of the customer, because they can’t do the math generally,” he said.


You’d think his largess would satisfy every customer, but it does not. “Some people don’t get it and don’t like it,” he said. “They’re mad that nobody else does this to them.”


Indeed, this is the problem that gas stations can face, according to Jeff Lenard, a spokesman for NACS, an industry group that represents convenience stores and gas stations. If they introduce a cash discount, many card-using customers will drive on by, assuming that the station owner has in reality simply raised prices for people swiping plastic. If the station owner then capitulates and establishes a single price again, cash customers who were getting a deal before now think prices have gone up again, and they, too, find another place to fuel up.


Life might be simpler and more efficient if retailers could levy a surcharge that covers their costs to accept cards and let consumers figure out whether to pay it. But the card companies don’t allow that, and Congress hasn’t yet forced their hand, though this is now how things work in Australia (where some retailers charge excessive fees, alas).


So what’s an American consumer to do in the meantime? For help answering that, I turned to Dave Hanson. Mr. Hanson, a Spokane, Wash., resident, is one of the savviest card users I know. He also happens to have studied philosophy in graduate school at the University of Chicago and taught applied ethics at Gonzaga University.


He’s not cutting up his cards just yet. “The marginal effect of my individual use of plastic simply won’t impact the larger outcome,” he said. “The assumption that we ought to act in a way that we wish all of us would act ignores the fact that there is no mechanism by which we can ensure that we will all act that way. And we won’t.”


But shouldn’t some us take a stand anyway, if only to prove a point? “You wouldn’t get very far if you suggested that to people,” he said. “The sad fact of contemporary American economic culture is atomistic individualism. Anything else is decried as communism.”


Mr. Hanson suggested some other ideas. He uses cash for certain small purchases and at retailers where he has reason to believe that his card use will cause undue economic harm. He also supports politicians who aim to change banking practices that hurt merchants and the poor.


Indeed, if you’re worried about the social impact of your card use, you could donate some of your card rewards each year to nonprofit groups that help the economically disadvantaged.


Or, you could give up on cards and try to earn your rewards back by investing in Visa stock. Making money off the card system in that way might not be ethically consistent. But at least you’d still have a stake in what appears to be an inexorable march down the road toward a cashless society.

 


    Photobucket


        The WeatherPixie


  Patriot


              

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 01-12-2010 - 3:27pm

I use a local bank. They weren't affected at all like the large banks that needed to be bailed-out.

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-21-2004
Tue, 01-12-2010 - 4:14pm

I don't think in either of these cases I received these gifts out of the pockets of someone paying more than I was for the same service. Same with your free beer no one was paying twice as much so they could provide you with a freebie.


I beg to differ. Perks for selected customers have to be paid for somehow. Those beers and that champaigne didn't just materialize! In my own business, I give presents to my biggest and oldest customers, and the cost of those is, to some smal extent, borne by newer and smaller customers who don't get the same perks. The scale might be smaller, but the principle is the same

--


martinisnsushi - living the good life since 1963

--


martinisnsushi - the two most important food groups!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 01-12-2010 - 5:51pm
The gifts I received

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-21-2004
Tue, 01-12-2010 - 7:32pm

From a busines perspective "paid out of profits" and written off" still translate to cost of business. Just because an expense is minor doesn't mean it isn't an expense, or that you don't include that in your budget, even if its part of "petty cash" or some such slushy catch all.


My point was that credit card rewards are different from other freebies or perks only in their scale.

--


martinisnsushi - the two most important food groups!

Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 01-13-2010 - 8:02am

<<>>


You mean they don't?


If it wasn't for the average consumer, the rich would be a whole lot less rich.


Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Avatar for ddnlj
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 01-13-2010 - 8:20am

Banks decline amid earnings, fee worriesReuters





By Joe Rauch Joe Rauch – Tue
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Pages