Recently in Debit Card Fees Category

Taylor Price, who uses a debit card for almost all his purchases, thinks the new federal rules that prevent banks from charging overdraft fees without his permission could save him big in the future.


Last fall, the 19-year-old college student ordered his usual cheap lunch: two tacos for $1 at Jack in the Box in Santa Rosa.

To his surprise, the cash-strapped student ended up paying about $41 for those two tacos because he didn't have enough money in his account and he got charged overdraft fees by Wells Fargo.

"I knew I was low," Price said. "But I thought if I didn't have the money, it wouldn't work."

He was wrong. But come this summer, that changes.

Under new federal regulations, banks and credit unions will no longer be able to process debit or ATM card transactions unless the underlying checking account has sufficient funds -- or the cardholder gives explicit permission to process underfunded transactions.

The new rules take effect July 1 and apply to existing customer accounts starting Aug. 15.

The rule change has been widely applauded by consumer advocacy groups, which were frustrated that most banks automatically enrolled customers into the fee-laden programs.

But it could cost financial institutions billions of dollars in lost revenue, and the industry is still grappling with how to respond.

Exchange Bank, Sonoma County's largest local bank, generates about $2 million in overdraft fees on debit cards annually, said Brad Hunter, head of electronic banking. Officials are still determining how to deal with any revenue loss from the new rules.

The entire banking industry might have to abandon some perks as a result, he said.

"This may be the death of free checking," Hunter said, echoing others in the banking industry. "A lot of institutions justify free checking because they can make it profitable by the overdraft fees."

Exchange Bank officials are watching how the state's two largest players -- Wells Fargo and Bank of America -- adjust to the new rules before making any decisions.

So far, two dramatically different approaches have emerged from the major banks.

On Monday, Bank of America followed Citibank's lead and announced it was doing away with its $35 overdraft fee associated with debit cards -- a move that The New York Times estimated could cost the nation's largest bank billions of dollars. Bank of America customers will no longer be allowed to use debit cards to overdraw their accounts, even if the customer is willing to pay the $35 fee the bank currently charges.

On the flip side, Chase has launched an aggressive direct-mail campaign to encourage customers to enroll in its voluntary overdraft protection program.

"Your debit card may not work the same way anymore, even if you just made a deposit. Unless we hear from you," the bank is telling customers.

Chase wants customers to opt in to the program, which will allow it to continue providing the service and collecting its $25 to $32 fee.

Wells Fargo hasn't announced any revisions to its overdraft fees yet.

"We are getting ready to share our plan with employees," Wells Fargo spokeswoman Julie Campbell said Friday. "And then we will roll it out to customers."

The rule changes do not impact under-funded checks, which can still be processed by banks and credit unions even if customers have not given their permission.

Exchange Bank is leaning toward letting customers opt in to an overdraft program for debit cards and ATMs, rather than eliminating it entirely like Bank of America, Hunter said. But it has no plans to run an aggressive campaign similar to the Chase direct mailings that have arrived in Sonoma County mailboxes, and which have been lambasted by consumer advocacy groups as misleading.

Redwood Credit Union, the county's second-largest financial institution, will offer its members the opportunity to opt in to its overdraft protection for debit card transactions, according to a statement by Cynthia Negri, who oversees credit and debit card services. The credit union declined a request for an interview to discuss how the new rules would affect its revenues. Currently, members are automatically enrolled in the program and charged $22 per transaction.

Banks and credit unions say their overdraft programs provide an important service. Many customers at Exchange Bank want it to cover their phone bills, utility bills and other critical payments, even if they have to pay its $28 fee, Hunter said.

He understood that people got frustrated having to pay the fee after buying a cup of coffee, but said with debit card purchases there was no way for the bank to distinguish between a critical payment and a luxury purchase.

Jeannine Moore, a spokeswoman for the Consumer Credit Counseling Service, agreed that consumers are better off with an opt-in program than no program at all. Sometimes customers need help covering a bill, and they are better off paying the fee, she said.

Moore re-directed some of the outrage over overdraft fees back at consumers.

"The banks aren't the villains. It's a matter of people taking responsibility for their personal finances," she said. "Ultimately it is your own account, and you need to manage it."

A small percentage of people account for the bulk of overdraft fees, according to a study by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

About 14 percent of customers accounted for about 93 percent of overdraft fees charged by banks, according to the 2008 study. And an incredible 5 percent of customers accounted for 68 percent of the fees, annually paying $1,610 in charges.

These few customers have essentially subsidized free checking for everybody.

But the prospect of losing free checking doesn't bother Ginna Green, a spokeswoman for the Center for Responsible Lending.

"Consumers aren't looking for a free ride, they are looking for a fair ride," she said. "I think when fees and costs are up front, consumers are happy."

For many households trying to improve their finances, tossing out pitches from the bank has become almost automatic. But in recent weeks, Chase has been fanning special letters out to consumers with an offer that it urges them not to refuse.

"Your debit card may not work the same way anymore, even if you just made a deposit. Unless we hear from you," the message, emblazoned in large red type, warns. "If you don't contact us, your everyday debit card transactions that overdraw your account will not be authorized after August 15, 2010 -- even in an emergency," with "even in an emergency" underlined for emphasis.

As the government cracks down on the way banks charge fees for overspending on debit cards, the industry is mounting an aggressive campaign aimed at keeping billions of dollars in penalty income flowing into its coffers. Chase and other banks are preparing a full-court marketing blitz, which is likely to include filling mailboxes with various aggressive and persuasive letters, calling account holders directly, and sending a steady stream of e-mail to urge consumers to keep their overdraft service turned on.

Starting this summer, banks must get consumers to agree, or "opt in," to a service covering purchases on a debit card when there is not enough money in their account. The Federal Reserve has ordered the same restriction for banks that want to let people withdraw more than their balance at an automated teller machine. Many banks now automatically provide such coverage for fees of up to $35 or more.

So many people now dip their balance below zero that banks generated an estimated $20 billion from overdraft fees on debit purchases and A.T.M. transactions in 2009, according to Michael Moebs, an economist who advises banks and credit unions. All of this revenue is potentially at risk, since these are the two areas that the new Federal Reserve regulations cover. (Banks generate an extra $12 billion by covering checks and recurring bills; under the new rules, they can still cover those and charge fees without customers' consent.)

Over the last decade, these fees have become an increasingly important source of income for banks as consumers have turned to debit cards to pay for a wide variety of their purchases, whether monthly bills or a pack of gum. (Many banks also offer less controversial overdraft programs in which consumers sign up to cover shortfalls in their checking account by pulling money out of a savings account or a credit card.)

The persuasion campaigns, which are just getting under way, come at a precarious time for many banks and credit unions as they scramble to find new revenue streams amid an economic downturn and new laws and regulations that threaten profitability. For instance, new credit card laws that went into effect Monday limit banks' ability to raise interest rates on existing balances.

Given the billions at stake, consultants are urging banks and credit unions to hire them to help. "Your fee income will take a substantial 'hit' if you don't start getting consumers to 'opt-in' for POS/ATM overdrafts NOW!" Mike Sobba, president of Strunk & Associates, a financial institution advisory service, warned banks in a pitch on the company's Web site.

Some are even lobbying banks to focus their pitch on the minority of customers who are responsible for the vast majority of overdraft fees. According to a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation study in 2008, 93 percent of overdraft fees come from the 14 percent of people who exceed their balances five times or more in a year.

"Doesn't it make sense to try and protect this revenue stream and encourage these customers to opt-in?" said Eric Wittekiend, strategic adviser at Raddon Financial Group, in a report aimed at banks and credit unions. "Right now I'm favoring an aggressive opt-in strategy to protect as much revenue as possible," he said.

Another consultancy, Pinnacle Financial Strategies, advises an "Opt-in Total Solution" program for banks and credit unions trying to stem losses in overdraft fees. Pinnacle's briefing paper urges an "account holder identification process" to zero in on consumers who pay such charges repeatedly and persuade them to keep the status quo.

The banks' marketing campaigns range from subtle to alarming. In recent weeks, Chase has tested several direct-mail pitches to see whether an assertive or alluring tone will drive people into a branch to sign up for overdraft coverage. "Watch your mailbox so you can say 'Yes' to continue Chase debit card overdraft coverage," read one note, a toned-down version of an alternate letter warning consumers that their debit card might not cover unexpected emergencies, like a highway tow.

A spokesman for Chase said: "We have begun to reach out to customers and are encouraging them to sit down with a branch banker to make sure they understand overdraft services, which can be confusing. We want them to make an informed decision."

When consumers get to the bank, another pitch awaits. Mark Sorenson went into a Dallas branch of Bank of America to turn off the overdraft function on his debit card recently and got a distressing response.

Beware, his banker cautioned. If Mr. Sorenson used the card to buy gas, the station might place a hold on his account and he might not be able to fill up at all, even if he had enough money in the bank to cover a full tank.

"My impression was that it was something he'd been briefed on," said Mr. Sorenson, an architect who said he had tired of paying multiple fees when the bank automatically covered shortfalls on his debit card. "He was trying it out on me."

A Bank of America spokeswoman said that its efforts, including giving consumers a document called "Opting Out of Overdraft Coverage," were not meant to encourage customers to remain in overdraft services but to make sure they understood the complexity of the issue.

Rebecca Borné, policy counsel for the Center for Responsible Lending, said banks still had "tremendous incentive to get as many consumers to opt in as possible." That is because new Federal Reserve regulations taking effect this summer would still allow banks to charge high fees for overdraft, with no limit on the number of times they impose the penalty.

Twinned with the blitz is a lobbying campaign in Washington by community banks and credit unions against several Congressional measures that would impose tough limits on overdrafts. They argue that their overdraft fees tend to be less than the large banks, and that overdraft provides a valuable service to customers, helping them overcome short-term money woes and saving them from the embarrassment of having a card rejected.

Several members of Congress have proposed legislation that would allow banks to charge just one overdraft fee a month, and six a year, and prohibit the reordering of transactions from largest to smallest to maximize fees. But while Democratic leaders insist overdraft legislation remains a priority, the bills have languished as lobbyists have pushed for delay and Congress focused on other financial issues.

"The ultimate strategy was not delay for delay's sake," said Steve Verdier, director of congressional affairs at the Independent Community Bankers Association. "The strategy was to ask Congress for enough time to explain the complexity."

Amid a growing public outcry over these fees, several large banks announced changes to their overdraft policies last year. Bank of America said it would not charge a fee when customers exceeded their balance by $10 or less per day and would limit overdraft fees to four per day. At the end of March, Chase is eliminating overdrafts for customers whose accounts are overdrawn by $5 or less and has already limited overdrafts to three per day.

But even with those changes, customers could still incur more than $100 in fees a day if they opt to take overdraft coverage.

At least one credit union is using the new Fed rules to try to differentiate itself from its competitors. On its Web site, the UW Credit Union in Madison, Wis., says, "While we expect some financial institutions may aggressively market the idea of a consumer 'opt in' within the boundaries of this regulation, we have no such plans."

Michigan and other states began cutting costs a few years ago by offering unemployment insurance and other benefits on debit cards. Even the Social Security Administration has a Direct Express debit card.

The plastic can be easy to use at ATMs, stores and the like. And the debit cards for jobless benefits can be especially helpful for laid-off workers who do not have bank accounts.

But the cost-cutting and convenience of the cards comes with a price. Like other types of plastic, government benefit debit cards can carry plenty of ridiculous, ding-you-when-you're-down fees.

U.S. Rep. Sander Levin, a Royal Oak Democrat, has introduced a bill called the Benefit Card Fairness Act that would set limits on some fees connected to government-benefit debit cards. Some states -- thankfully, not Michigan -- require that jobless workers receive their benefits on a debit card. Levin's bill would require that beneficiaries be given a choice of receiving benefits via debit card or direct deposit.

Keeping the costs of convenience down

I've never liked any fees tied to plastic. So, it should come as no surprise that I take any opportunity I get to grumble about the long list of fees attached to the debit cards issued to people drawing unemployment benefits in Michigan.

A dollar to check your balance at an ATM? How exactly do you know if you've got $25 left to buy gas?

Sure, there's no fee for the first inquiry at a Chase/Allpoint ATM each time benefits are added to your card. (You also can avoid a fee by checking the balance amount via the Internet or by telephone.)

But why should you have to pay anything ever to see how much money is left?

I began criticizing these fees last summer as the jobless rate soared -- even though Michigan's card reportedly isn't the worst.

Now the Benefit Card Fairness Act, introduced last month by U.S. Rep. Sander Levin, a Royal Oak Democrat, would put a stop to some ridiculous fees on all government benefit debit cards -- including a ban on all fees for balance inquiries.

Levin's bill also would:

  • Prohibit inactivity fees. In Michigan, you can be hit with a fee of $1.50 a month for a debit card that hasn't been used in 365 days. The card is considered inactive when no benefit payment is deposited onto it, no money is withdrawn and no purchases are made with it. Other states can charge inactivity fees of $2 or $2.50 a month.

  • Ensure that all beneficiaries receive one free withdrawal from an in-network ATM and one free withdrawal from a bank teller per deposit to the card. The Michigan card offers two free withdrawals from Chase/Allpoint ATMs each time benefits are added to the debit card, but charges $1.50 for each ATM withdrawal after that. Additional surcharges also may apply.

  • Require customer service by telephone and error resolution to be free.

    While such fees are not assessed in Michigan, "some people do get charged for calling customer service" in other states, said Michelle Jun, staff attorney for Consumers Union in San Francisco. Other states also may restrict the number of free calls and then charge 50 cents or $1.25 a call.

    Many people drawing benefits in Michigan avoid the fees by using direct deposit if they have a bank account. A few states don't offer such an option, but they would have to under Levin's bill.

    Not surprisingly, again, people who aren't getting a regular paycheck don't like the fees that can eat into their limited benefits, either.

    "Whatever we get, we're grateful for and we don't want to spend it up in service fees," said Bradly Vaughan, 48, who was out of work about nine months last year.

    Vaughan, who lives in Ray Township and now has a job as a truck driver, said he agreed to get his jobless benefits through the Michigan debit card because he did not have a bank account.

    His solution to avoid fees: He withdrew all the jobless benefits from the card each time money was added. The Michigan card has no fee for the first withdrawal by teller each time benefits are added but additional bank teller withdrawals are $4 each.

    To get the free withdrawal at a teller, you'd need to go to a Chase bank or a participating bank or credit union that displays the Visa logo.

    "Sometimes you can't get to the bank that issued the card," Vaughan warned.

    But again, should you be required to analyze fee charts when you're out of work? Or could you use that precious time to look for a job?

    If you're out of work, all those fees easily can look like a money grab -- and one more way to kick people when they're already down.

  • A. From a security standpoint, signature debit payments are better than using your PIN. That's because when you authorize a transaction with your PIN, the money is immediately debited from your bank account. But a "signature" payment on a debit card with a Visa or MasterCard logo--usually required when you choose the credit option at checkout and use a debit card--is processed through a credit card network, so the actual withdrawal may take a few days. That extra time can be an advantage to you should fraud occur, "because once the money leaves your account, it's a bigger hassle trying to get it back," notes Avivah Litan, a security analyst with Gartner Inc.

    Retailers prefer PIN transactions because they pay lower fees to the bank issuing the debit card--roughly 20 cents on a $100 purchase. A signature debit payment, meanwhile, costs them about seven times more in bank fees. That may help explain why more banks now offer rewards on debit cards when they are used like credit cards for everyday purchases.

    Neither type of debit card transaction offers as much protection as credit cards. Under law, your total liability for fraudulent use of a credit card is only $50, no matter the amount of unauthorized charges. And credit card issuers often waive that amount. But unless you notify the bank within 48 hours after learning your debit card was lost or stolen, your liability for fraudulent use could be as much as $500. Fail to notify the bank within 60 days, and you may be liable for all depleted funds, as well as any resulting overdraft fees.

    Things have been tight for Trina Lee, an Arizona-based nursing assistant, since she got laid off two years ago and suffered some medical problems that have kept her from working full time.

    So, she meticulously watches her bank balance, which is often close to zero.

    Feeling temporarily flush because she has prepaid most of her bills and figured income from child support and a part-time job were coming in, she splurged on a $65 meal with her mom and brother, knowing that this could overdraft her checking account.

    Debit card transactions such as this require a signature and usually take a couple of days to clear, so Lee monitored every purchase after that, copying her daily bank account activity into a computer file each night to make sure she wasn't stepping over the line.

    The night before her son's support payment was due, she breathed a sigh of relief. At 10:45, the dinner charge still hadn't posted and wasn't listed as pending.

    After subtracting every pending payment, she had 16 cents in her checking account. She went to bed imagining that she'd dodged an overdraft because she would get $156 in the morning.

    But before crediting her account for the child support payment, Chase Bank put through the dinner charge and "reordered" every pending transaction, turning one potential overdraft into four.

    The overdraft charges of $35 each then triggered two additional overdraft charges for small debit transactions Lee did that day, before she'd realized her account had gone into the red.

    In total, Chase levied $210 in overdraft charges -- $175 more than Lee imagined possible.

    "I accept responsibility for one overdraft," said Lee, a 29-year-old mother of two. "But they created the rest of these. It's really frustrating."

    Bank spokesman Greg Hassell said Chase would not reverse these charges because "Ms. Lee intentionally overdrafted her account, knowing she had insufficient funds for all her purchases."

    The fact that Chase in effect created five of the overdrafts by changing the order of her transactions, deducting the biggest items first, is policy, Hassell said.

    That policy is common among big banks, industry experts say.

    Bankers justify the practice by saying it ensures that big, important transactions, such as mortgage payments, have less a chance of bouncing.

    Critics, however, say that argument doesn't hold water because the banks pay all the transactions regardless. In that case, changing the posting order simply magnifies the effect of a single overdraft by turning it into several, just as it did with Lee.

    Indeed, an FDIC study found that policies such as this had caused overdraft fees to quadruple in two years, ringing up some $24 billion in revenue for the banking industry in 2008.

    Industry consultant Michael Moebs estimates that overdraft charges have continued to soar and are likely to account for some $38.5 billion in revenue this year, with roughly 90 percent of those fees being paid by just 10 percent of bank customers.

    Worse, the FDIC study found that most bank customers had no inkling they could suffer an overdraft charge because they'd been automatically enrolled in an overdraft program without their consent or knowledge.

    So, millions of bank customers used debit cards for small purchases, assuming the swipe would be rejected if they didn't have sufficient funds.

    They learned later that a $2 coffee cost $37 with the $35 overdraft fee, a practice so common that many experts say using a debit card has become dangerous.

    Starting in July, banks will need permission before enrolling customers in overdraft programs, according to the Federal Reserve.

    Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., have also introduced legislation demanding that banks stop systematically "modifying posting order" and post transactions chronologically.

    The overdraft legislation, which has been stalled by health care reform and other financial regulations, also would require that fees bear some relationship to the cost of processing an overdraft and limit the number of overdraft fees a bank could charge to a single consumer in any given month or year.

    "To actively reorder checks to cause a tidal wave of overdrafts is unconscionable," said Ginna Green, a spokeswoman for the Center for Responsible Lending, which has been pushing for the legislation. "This is exactly why we still need legislation."

    In the meantime, several banks -- including Chase -- have announced they will voluntarily revamp their policies.

    Chase's new policy, spokesman Hassell said, will eliminate changing posting order -- the crux of Lee's complaint.

    It will also reduce the maximum number of overdraft fees the bank would charge in a day, reducing it to three per customer from six, and it will eliminate fees for overdrafts of $5 or less.

    Any of those changes would have helped Lee. Chase's policies have an amorphous starting date -- "in the first few months of 2010," according to Hassell. And the legislation is expected to be voted on early this year.

    Jan. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Toronto-Dominion Bank's U.S. retail unit was accused of gouging debit card holders by charging "abusive" loan fees on overdrawn accounts, according to a lawsuit by a New Jersey customer.

    TD Bank NA processes debit card transactions that exceed available balances on accounts and provides "courtesy" overdraft loans without notifying customers that they are overdrawn, according to the complaint filed yesterday in federal court in Camden, New Jersey.

    "TD Bank is turning these overdraft 'loan fees' into an enormous profit center by manipulating the debit-clearing process so that its customers get caught paying substantially more fees than necessary," according to the complaint, which seeks to proceed as a group, or class-action, lawsuit.

    Toronto-Dominion Bank is Canada's second-largest bank. It spent more than $15 billion to expand in the U.S., including the acquisitions of Portland, Maine-based TD Banknorth and Cherry Hill, New Jersey-based Commerce Bancorp Inc.

    "We believe our methods of handling our customers' transactions are both fair and legal," Rebecca Acevedo, a spokeswoman for the Toronto-based bank, said in an e-mailed statement. "Since the suit was just filed, it would be premature to discuss it at this time."

    Customer Donald Kimenker claims in his complaint that TD Bank "deceptively reorders" an account's debit card transactions in its computers to maximize overdraft fees. Such fees are processed from highest dollar amount to lowest, rather than in chronological order of purchases, according to the complaint.

    Overdraft Fees

    "Charging the largest debits against available funds ahead of smaller debits results in more overdraft fees, as available funds decrease faster than they would otherwise, thereby generating hundreds of millions of dollars in additional overdraft fees for TD Bank," according to the complaint.

    Kimenker claims that a customer with $1,150 in an account who makes six debit transactions totaling $180 and then writes a $1,100 rent check would have overdrawn her account by $130. Rather than charging a single $35 overdraft fee on the rent check, TD Bank processes the rent check and then charges five separate $35 fees for a total of $175, according to the complaint.

    The bank "will make every effort to ensure a customer can complete his or her transaction," Acevedo said in her e-mailed statement. "TD Bank will accommodate the overdraft so our customers avoid the embarrassment and hassle of having their transaction publicly refused."

    Deduction Order

    She said that deposits are applied first to accounts, and then debits are deducted "in order from largest to smallest amount," to ensure that "larger (and usually more important) items like a mortgage are paid first."

    The bank also gives customers the option of opting out of the overdraft program, she said.

    The complaint alleges that TD Bank engaged in fraud, breach of contract and unjust enrichment, and that it violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. It seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

    While converting some of its U.S. branches at the end of September onto a single platform, some clients were delayed in processing transactions because of a technical issue. The bank told investors in December that the problems had ended.

    The case is Donald Kimenker v. TD Bank NA, 10-cv-136, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey (Camden).

    The nation's banks will be bombarding customers with new fees and products in 2010 as they try to replace more than $50 billion in revenue wiped out by new rules that clamp down on certain business practices.

    So far, the changes are mostly concentrated in checking accounts and credit cards. In addition to attaching new fees to old products, banks are introducing new types of accounts that they hope will reel in new customers and reduce their funding costs.

    For plastic, the new rules go into effect in February as part of the Credit Card Act of 2009. The rules will limit some interest-rate increases, require more disclosure to customers and prohibit banks from raising interest rates on current balances unless a customer is at least 60 days behind in a payment.

    Credit-card issuers collected $22.9 billion in penalty fees--such as those assessed for late payments--in 2009, up from $19 billion in 2008, said Robert Hammer, who runs a credit-card consulting firm in Thousand Oaks, Calif.

    Credit-card companies already have been racing to slip new fees and practices into customer contracts ahead of the law. Issuers are closing accounts, switching cards with fixed interest rates to variable rates and introducing cards that have an annual fee.

    Christopher Moss, who regularly shops at sporting-goods chain Gander Mountain, recently was notified that he will be charged a $1 "processing fee" each time he receives a printed statement of his Gander credit-card account rather than an electronic one. The 50-year-old paralegal said he is prepared to cut up the credit card even though he likes the loyalty rewards that come with it.

    "It's not like I can't afford it, but it's another little stick in the consumer's eye," Mr. Moss said.

    The Gander Mountain card is issued by World Financial Network National Bank, a unit of Alliance Data Systems Corp., of Dallas. The company, which also issues credit cards for women's clothing chain Ann Taylor Stores and lingerie maker Victoria's Secret, says that the decision to charge the fee is partly tied to the costs that it will incur from the new rules.

    "One requirement of the Credit Card Act of 2009 is that monthly billing statements will now have to include significantly more information pertaining to the cardholder's terms and conditions, thus increasing the amount of paper, production and postal expenses as well as having a greater environmental impact," the company said in a written statement.

    Issuers also are likely to water down rewards programs and introduce fees for inactive accounts. "There are so many things that issuers can do that the Card Act doesn't touch," said Bill Hardekopf, chief executive officer of LowCards.com, a Web site that tracks the industry.

    In addition to the credit-card rules, the government will crack down next year on ways banks charge overdraft fees, which are assessed when a customer overdraws an account.

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Could debit cards be the next cash cow for banks? If banks have their way, they will.

    Americans have conducted more transactions and spent more money using debit cards than credit cards this year -- the first time that's ever happened.

    Next year, consumers are expected to spend $1.64 trillion with their debit cards, nearly two-thirds more than in 2006, according to the payments industry trade publication The Nilson Report.

    And there is no indication this growth is slowing down anytime soon. Not only are Americans increasingly reluctant to take on more debt, but banks are expected to become more stingy with credit cards once new federal legislation takes effect next year, which could make the debit card the preferred form of payment for many consumers.

    This hasn't gone unnoticed by large and small banks, who are currently looking for ways to wring any extra dollars out of their business at a time of severe loan losses.

    "Banks, just like airlines and local governments, are looking for fee income to fill the revenue gap," said Greg McBride, senior financial analyst with Bankrate.com.

    What is shaping up to be an area of focus for lenders are loyalty or rewards programs for debit card users.

    A concept that has long been associated with credit cards, increasing numbers of banks have looked to such programs as a way to generate more fees from consumers.

    Atlanta-based lender SunTrust (STI, Fortune 500), for example, launched a tiered series of travel debit cards in June that allow consumer and business account holders to earn miles with Delta Air Lines.

    Just this month, Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500) expanded its Cash Back program, saying it would allow customers to apply their debit card rewards toward paying down their home equity loan.

    And Minneapolis-based U.S. Bancorp (USB, Fortune 500), which has offered debit card rewards as early as 2002, announced last week it was now making its own FlexPerks program, which allows cardholders to earn travel, cash or merchandise rewards, available to many of its consumer and small business account holders.

    "We do find our customers are very interested in earning something," said Lynn Heitman, senior vice-president for retail payment solutions at U.S. Bancorp.

    Of course, consumers don't necessarily have to pay for the privilege of having, or using, a debit card. Or at least not upfront.

    Rather it is merchants that foot the bill, paying anywhere from 1% to 3% of every sale for the privilege of accepting a debit or credit card as a form of payment.

    But calls by retailers and small business owners to cap those charges have grown increasingly loud in recent months, prompting some members of Congress to propose legislation aimed at curbing so-called interchange fees.

    Should such lobbying efforts prove successful, banks' debit and credit card business would only come under further strain.

    Lenders are already feeling the pinch from new Federal Reserve rules issued earlier this month that restrict how they charge overdraft fees to consumers.

    "The rules have changed for debit cards," said Gerard Cassidy, managing director of bank equity research at RBC Capital Markets. "What banks have to figure out is how to maintain revenue growth of this product under the new rules and conditions we have to operate under."

    Banks, as a result, have little choice but to pick on the already squeezed consumer.

    And pushing debit card loyalty programs might just be the most painless means of doing so.

    Only half of the nation's banks have some sort of debit card loyalty program in place. At the same time, many consumers have already embraced such offerings, noting that they would have used their debit card to buy groceries or gasoline anyway to make their purchases.

    Still, some experts argue that debit card loyalty programs just aren't worth it for consumers.

    Not only do they have to pay an annual fee of as much as $55 in some instances, consumers also only benefit if they rack up some significant charges.

    Under a typical debit card rewards program, for example, a consumer looking to earn a $100 credit towards an airline purchase would have to spend $33,333, according to research published by consulting firm TowerGroup.

    That's not an easy feat for most Americans, notes Brian Riley, research director of bank card services for TowerGroup. The median annual income for a U.S. household stands at around $51,000, before taking into account taxes and housing costs.

    "Every remaining nickel you spend will have to go on [your debit card], which is just not practical," he said.

    Of course, not all rewards programs are a rip off, although it is rare to find one without some sort of a catch. Customers of East Coast lender Citizens Bank can earn 10 cents on every purchase with their Green$ense debit card, up to $120 a year -- although that means no more paper statements or notices about your account.

    Checking account holders enrolled in Regions Financial's (RF, Fortune 500) CheckCard Rewards program may earn 4% cash back on music downloaded from Apple's iTunes store or airline tickets purchased online from Southwest Airlines. To maintain their account, however, customers are required to pay a $5 monthly fee, which can be waived if a customer uses direct deposit or receives their statements electronically.

    "Consumers need to have an eyes wide open perspective when it comes to financial services," said McBride of Bankrate.com. "Fees are going to be cropping up, but that also gives you a chance to comparison shop. There may be just as many good deals at the other end of the spectrum." To top of page

     Just in time for your holiday spending binge, PBS shines a bright light on the credit-card monster.

    "The Card Game," which airs tonight at 9 p.m. New York time, might tempt you to strangle a banker or two -- an easier target than the other major culprit: our national preference for buying now and paying later.

    Americans use credit cards for about 100,000 transactions a minute, the show says. While individuals bear responsibility for profligate spending, credit-card companies have made it easy to go deep in the hole.

    Host Lowell Bergman interviews Shailesh Mehta, former chief executive officer of Providian Financial Corp. and a pioneer of "stealth pricing" and other creative strategies that earned his company around $1 billion a year.

    Mehta, a suave guy who lives in a slightly miniaturized copy of the White House, illustrates how easy it is to put yourself in debtors' prison. He opens a card offer from Bank of America Corp. boasting an introductory annual percentage rate of zero. Next to an asterisk is small print that lists the APR as "11.9, 15.9 or 19.9" percent. Take your pick.

    Many card holders are also unaware of various fees that can turn that little piece of plastic into a truly toxic asset.

    Subprime Lending

    Martin Eakes, head of the Center for Responsible Lending, says credit-card debt played a role in the economic meltdown.

    "When the subprime lending was really taking off, it was largely a mortgage product to refinance credit card debt," he says.

    Robert McKinley, CEO of CardWeb.com, says some consumers even refinanced their homes to pay off their credit cards. Then "they would go out and charge them back up again."

    In another dose of bad news, McKinley notes that debit cards "can be under certain circumstances even more expensive that credit cards."

    The chief trap is overdraft protection, which isn't always free. A consumer named Josette Wermuth explains that a stalled deposit meant she couldn't cover a $7 pizza purchase. The bank covered it for her, but charged a $33 fee, which the show says is the equivalent of an annual interest rate of more than 24,000 percent.

    Overdraft Charges

    Some lenders also process larger charges first, even if they occurred later in the month, which can empty an account and create numerous overdraft charges (or opportunities, if you're doing the lending.)

    So who's going to fix this mess? While Congress passed reforms in May limiting the practice of arbitrarily changing interest rates, Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Warren says the reforms are "a modest step" and that the industry "instantly set to work on how they could run around them."

    Warren, head of a congressional oversight panel assigned to oversee the bank bailouts, is backing a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency that would have regulatory powers across the lending world. That would include payday lenders, whose storefronts outnumber Starbucks' 2-to-1, according to the show.

    Several big dogs are opposing the plan, including U.S. Senator Richard Shelby, a Republican from Alabama who calls it a "radical departure from the way we have regulated."

    No matter what reforms are devised, Mehta agrees that the industry will find a way around them. Bankers, he says, have a mindset of "tell me the rules, and then I'll outsmart you all."

    Faced with new credit card restrictions, lenders are touting debit card loyalty programs. But many come with fees that may not be worth it for consumers.

    -- Could debit cards be the next cash cow for banks? If banks have their way, they will.

    Americans have conducted more transactions and spent more money using debit cards than credit cards this year -- the first time that's ever happened.

    Next year, consumers are expected to spend $1.64 trillion with their debit cards, nearly two-thirds more than in 2006, according to the payments industry trade publication The Nilson Report.

    And there is no indication this growth is slowing down anytime soon. Not only are Americans increasingly reluctant to take on more debt, but banks are expected to become more stingy with credit cards once new federal legislation takes effect next year, which could make the debit card the preferred form of payment for many consumers.

    This hasn't gone unnoticed by large and small banks, who are currently looking for ways to wring any extra dollars out of their business at a time of severe loan losses.

    "Banks, just like airlines and local governments, are looking for fee income to fill the revenue gap," said Greg McBride, senior financial analyst with Bankrate.com.

    What is shaping up to be an area of focus for lenders are loyalty or rewards programs for debit card users.

    A concept that has long been associated with credit cards, increasing numbers of banks have looked to such programs as a way to generate more fees from consumers.

    5 evil things credit card companies can (still) do

    Atlanta-based lender SunTrust (STI, Fortune 500), for example, launched a tiered series of travel debit cards in June that allow consumer and business account holders to earn miles with Delta Air Lines.

    Just this month, Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500) expanded its Cash Back program, saying it would allow customers to apply their debit card rewards toward paying down their home equity loan.

    And Minneapolis-based U.S. Bancorp (USB, Fortune 500), which has offered debit card rewards as early as 2002, announced last week it was now making its own FlexPerks program, which allows cardholders to earn travel, cash or merchandise rewards, available to many of its consumer and small business account holders.

    "We do find our customers are very interested in earning something," said Lynn Heitman, senior vice-president for retail payment solutions at U.S. Bancorp.

    Of course, consumers don't necessarily have to pay for the privilege of having, or using, a debit card. Or at least not upfront.

     

    About this Archive

    This page is an archive of recent entries in the Debit Card Fees category.

    Check Cashing Stores is the previous category.

    Gift Cards is the next category.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.