Carnival of Wealth, Thanksgiving Edition

Why yes, this is a bacon-wrapped turducken.

 

Another installment in the only blog carnival worth a damn*, the Carnival of Wealth. Here’s how it works. Every week, the top echelon of personal finance bloggers (and some from the subgroup that makes the top echelon possible) submit their gems for review. If we like their posts, or find them sufficiently entertaining or noteworthy, we post them here every Monday. If you want to get in on the fun, submit here. Or just sit and watch, that’s cool too. In fact, we prefer it. Now, on with the show:

The incorrigible Free Money Finance borrows an excerpt from Tony Steuer’s The Questions and Answers on Life Insurance Workbook: A Step-by-Step Guide to Simple Answers for Your Complex Questions. Which, honestly, is a way more engaging read than you’d think. We’re not going to tell you not to buy life insurance (at least not in this post), but we will tell you not to buy life insurance until you understand the major differences among policies. Tony via FMF explains them clearly.

Ever wonder why a company, perhaps yours, announces layoffs well in advance? Darwin’s Money did, and his discoveries got our attention. Our favorite justification? “Give crappy raises, and you’ll be happy.” Hopefully you wage slaves are getting this all down.

Remember in 2009, when the Tea Party protestors used public areas and police cars as toilets, sold drugs, died of overdoses, endangered children, stretched civic resources, played unlistenable music, bitched about the inevitable aftermaths of the poor decisions they’d made, committed wanton vandalism, and just generally sat around being unproductive for months at a time?

Of course you don’t, because it never happened. There was barely a discarded gum wrapper at any Tea Party protest, as distinguished from the current gaggle of Occupy (City) protests throughout the United States and Canada. Aloysa at My Broken Coin wishes the current doylt of Occupy protesters would just go home, and you can probably figure out whether we agree with her or not.

Actionable and full of worthwhile advice; that’s what we’re talking about. Your Finances Simplified explains how to buy a foreclosed-upon house. You can’t just show up with a wad of cash and try to make things happen. Instead, read this killer post and learn how to profit off other people’s failure. Someone will. Why not you?

If you ever start or join an investment club, and someone mentions that the treasurer position is still open, just cut them a check and run like hell. Madison at My Dollar Plan didn’t get stuck with that job, but the person who did had to submit the club’s cost-basis reporting to its broker. Cost-basis reporting is another red tape hurdle that ordinary citizens have to clear in the modern U.S. economy, but no, that has nothing to do with stagnation. Nothing at all.

Wallet Blog advocates what we’ve been preaching for some time, and which a close look at the retards of the Occupy Wall Street movement will reinforce: an unspecified college degree is vastly overvalued. Too many degrees chasing too few openings makes a non-applicable college education less than worthwhile.

Boomer and Echo think you should hold onto your stocks. Unless you have a good reason to sell, in which case you should sell.

Kevin McGee at Thousandaire is supposed to be the most entertaining and/or funniest personal finance blog out there, so we’re curious as to what he had to say. This week he advocates buying precious metals for more than face value. Not just to hedge and to diversify, but in the event of nuclear war. In which case you can eat your silver. We’re glad that Thousandaire knew to use brackets inside parentheses, but puzzled as to his shorthand use of “$2.5k” for “$2500”. You save one whole character his way, but if you type out the digits instead you do have a double o in there, which means you’re barely expending any effort at all to type the numeral out in full. And yes, it took us well over 100 characters to point that out.

Another McGee? JT at Money Mamba joins the carnival this week, and we like what he has to say. First off, in his bio he espouses the use of hard and resolute numbers over the moral ambivalence of words. Also, he’s frank enough to admit that a restricted-calorie frozen meal tastes a lot better when topped off with a turkey sandwich. JT appears to live at home, given his liberal references to his mother and the fact that he looks about 15 years old. Anyhow, this week he explains why time is often a greater consideration than money. If you need to buy an asset now, good for you. If you can’t wait to get your hands on a liability, you’re going to end up going poor. Follow the kid, he’s going places. And returning home before curfew.

Daniel at Sweating the Big Stuff clearly put tons of work into this week’s post, in which he asks his friends for one-line responses concerning what they like and dislike about money. One woman’s objection was that “it limits you”, whatever that means. Adam, on the other hand, “hates the taste”, which at least makes sense.

Hank at Money Q&A lists the 10 best personal finance books “that everyone should read”, which presumably means it’s a historical list, not just a current one. We’re assuming they’re not in order, otherwise Dave Ramsey wouldn’t be ahead of Benjamin Graham. Also, Hank forgot this one, but it’s all good.

Finally, Phil at PT Money rails against gifts that add to “the endless junk that we Americans have.” Which seems to imply that Swedes and Portuguese don’t amass stuff that they don’t need, but whatever.

Same time next Monday. Thanks for coming. Oh, and to our Canadian readers, happy upcoming Thursday.

*Excluding all the carnivals we submit to. Those are uniformly wonderful.

Peeling Back The Onion Of The Durbin Amendment

This is a guest post from Bill Hazelton, CEO of Credit Card Assist, where he gives tips, news, commentary and advice on credit- and debit cards.

The man to make all our dreams come true. (This is Durbin, not Bill.)

 

Last summer Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  At the last minute, Senator Dick Durbin introduced the “Durbin Amendment,” aimed at reforming debit card payment processing and fees.

The senior Senator from Illinois, Durbin has served in Congress since 1982, and since 1996 in the Senate.  He’s been Senate Majority Whip since 2007.

He introduced the amendment to protect retailers whom he believed were losing money to debit card-processing fees.  Some of his supporters claimed banks were colluding with credit card companies to extort exorbitant fees from merchants. Visa and MasterCard had had a stranglehold on payment processing and fee setting.

Senator Durbin anticipated merchants would pass savings along to consumers, especially in competitive markets.

The Federal Reserve estimated that capping processing fees at a reasonable level wouldn’t hurt banks unduly.  Chairman Ben Bernanke agreed that retailers would probably pass along savings to consumers. The Fed also wanted to increase competition in the payment processing system, and give merchants freedom of choice.

The amendment went into effect October 1, 2011.

What the amendment changed

The process hasn’t changed: retailers pay a swipe fee (also known as an interchange or exchange fee) for each transaction. The fee is shared by the card’s issuing financial institution and the payment processing network (usually Visa or MasterCard). Financial institutions get a much larger share.

The amendment’s key provisions:

  • The Fed sets a maximum transaction fee, of 21¢ + .05% .  Card issuers that offer fraud protection can receive an additional 1%.  This amount is roughly half of pre-amendment fees.
  • Card payment networks must allow processing on at least two independent networks, effective immediately. Card issuers must do so by this coming April 1 (except for issuers of certain health-related cards, benefit cards and general-use prepaid cards, who can wait a year beyond that.)
  • Merchants can institute a card-purchase minimum and/or offer discounts to cash or debit card purchasers, both of which were previously banned.

The way things were

Debit cards were generating more money and more transactions than credit cards. Debit cards’ use was also growing compared to checks and cash.

Card issuers typically received about 1.3% from each transaction. Swipe fees have increased, and now total about $48 billion annually.  Debit card fees represent about $17 billion of that.

Visa and MasterCard have long held a duopoly, letting them force smaller retailers to pay high fees while offering better deals to large clients.  A merchant’s only recourse was to refuse cards as a method of payment.

Financial institutions are unhappy

Even before the amendment went into effect, banks warned they’d have to tighten credit, and raise fees and interest rates, to make up for projected lost revenue.  Bank of America and Chase threatened to cap debit card charges at $50 to $100, which would have rendered the cards basically worthless for everyday use, possibly pushing customers to use credit cards instead.

Already, some banks have rescinded free or rewards checking programs.  And we’re all familiar with Bank of America’s ill-fated $5 per month debit card fee, now also rescinded after massive customer backlash.

The new interchange fee cap is much friendlier for banks than the originally proposed 12¢ cap.  Nonetheless, bank revenue is estimated to drop around 40-50%, costing banks around $6.6 billion.

Financial institutions with under $10 billion in assets — community banks and all but three credit unions — are exempt from the new fee limit.  Debit card transaction fees enable them to fund big-bank services.  But many fear the new two-tier pricing structure won’t work, and they’ll have to accept lower exchange fees despite their exemption.  Combined with the multiple processing network requirements, that could decrease revenue and force small banks to reduce services or increase fees.  This leads to calls to protect specific advantages offered by credit unions.

Merchants may even refuse to accept small-issuer cards that have a higher swipe fee.  This isn’t allowed, but it’s been hard to enforce and no one really expects that to change.

Small card issuers fear they’ll lose customers to big banks that can still offer broader services.  Big banks also say they’re being forced to either increase service fees and risk losing customers, or simply accept lower revenue.

When Congress established the new fee limits, they didn’t consider fraud and other costs related to debit card transactions. Banks say greatly reduced future revenue won’t cover expenses.  Critics argue that debit card fraud is much smaller than its credit card counterpart, so the lower risk supports lower fees.

Some large retailers claim “fraud risk coverage” is a smokescreen anyway, and that the credit card industry just doesn’t want to bother producing more secure cards, even though the technology exists.

The bottom line: income from debit card transactions will drop for all financial institutions. That’s about all we know.

Consumers may not benefit

Big institutions have or probably will:

  • Add or raise checking fees
  • Increase checking balance minima
  • Lower or eliminate debit card rewards
  • Raise out-of-network ATM fees
  • Even sell customer information to retailers

Smaller banks have capitalized on this, promoting that they’re keeping free checking and not making debit cards onerous to use.

Card issuers are likely to promote credit-based services and prepaid debit cards, neither of which are subject to the new lower swipe fee.  Some issuers are already offering low-interest credit cards and increased reward programs.  Some people argue that increased credit card use will increase consumer debt, and that low and moderate-income consumers may be hit hardest, as banks institute higher fees for necessary services.

In the past, merchants either absorbed swipe fees or raised prices to offset them.  Now, they can charge customers directly, adding a fee on top of the merchandise price.

Merchants may not benefit, either

Consumers have typically paid the same price regardless of payment method, but merchant rates vary considerably for debit, credit and premium cards such as reward credit cards.  Merchants may not gain much if consumers simply switch to credit cards or checks, because swipe fees are higher for credit cards and checks are slower and riskier.

Visa and MasterCard are predicted to increase credit card fees for “small ticket purchases,” so merchants may retaliate by refusing Visa debit cards.  Merchants can now set minimum or maximum transaction amounts, which could result in more use of cash or checks, or customers could take their business elsewhere.

Many financial industry thought leaders believe it’s unlikely retail prices will drop.  Others say merchants could actually increase sales by subsidizing debit-card holders, and they note that merchants benefit indirectly from bank advertising that encourages shopping.

Unintended consequences

In 2010 the Mercator Advisory Group published a report entitled “The Durbin Amendment: Impact Analysis”, before the amendment passed.

In addition to the issues noted above, the report identified unintended consequences that critics have disparaged:

  • Prepaid debit cards are now commonly used for payroll and government benefits.  If state and federal agency revenue drops, card recipients could be at risk for up-front fees.  If card programs are eliminated and agencies revert to using checks, recipients could pay check-cashing and bill-paying fees.
  • Profits from debit card transactions have funded development of new financial services products – like mobile payment, and next generation smart cards. This could diminish, jeopardizing America’s position as global market leader.
  • Processing networks may institute non-transaction-based fees to recoup lost revenue, or be slower to offer merchants new ways to receive payments electronically.
  • Diverting resources to implement the changes mandated by the amendment may hamper financial institutions’ participation in economic recovery efforts.
  • Regulating just one portion of the financial services industry could spawn entities that offer non-regulated services.

Debit card revenue has been a powerful profit center for financial institutions.  The electronic payment processing system is tremendously complex. Whether the provisions of the Durbin Amendment will benefit consumers and merchants, we still don’t know.

**This article is featured in the Carnival of Personal Finance (336th Edition)**