Skip to main content
Toggle Menu

Secondary Menu

  • Who We Are
  • What We Do
  • Research
  • Incumbents and Disruptors
  • News
  • Contact
  • Search

Main Menu

  • Who We Are
  • What We Do
  • Research
  • Incumbents and Disruptors
Central Bank and Multilateral Agency Publication | March 01, 2008

Economics of Payment Cards: A Status Report

Regulation of Payment Cards

Chakra Advisors LLC has deep expertise about the economics of payment cards.

Download & Links

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Economics of Payment Cards: A Status Report

Topics

Payments Policy and Regulation
By: Wilko Bolt and Sujit Chakravorti
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Economic Perspectives

The proliferation of payment cards—that is, debit, credit, and prepaid cards—has dramatically changed the way we shop and merchants sell goods and services. Today, payment cards are indispensable in most advanced economies. According to a recent U.S. survey, the percentage of payment cards used for in-store purchases increased from 43 percent in 1999 to 56 percent in 2005 (American Bankers Association and Dove Consulting, 2005). For Europe, Bolt and Humphrey (2007) report that the number of card payments increased by 140 percent across 11 European countries during the period 1987–2004. Amromin and Chakravorti (2009) find that greater usage of debit cards has resulted in lower demand for small-denomination bank notes and coins that are used to make change. Furthermore, without payment cards, Internet sales growth would have been substantially slower.

Debit, credit, and prepaid cards are three forms of payment cards. Debit cards allow consumers to access funds at their banks to pay merchants; these are sometimes referred to as “pay now” cards because funds are generally debited from the cardholder’s account within a day or two of a purchase. Credit cards allow consumers to access lines of credit at their banks when making payments and can be thought of as “pay later” cards because consumers pay the balance at a future date. Prepaid cards can be referred to as “pay before” cards because they allow users to pay merchants with funds transferred in advance to a prepaid account. (Prepaid cards are not discussed in this article.)

Recently, some merchants have started to accept only card payments for safety and convenience reasons. For example, a cafe in Washington, DC, stopped accepting cash for purchases primarily because the cost of safekeeping cash was too expensive (Rafsanjani, 2006). Also, many quick service restaurants and coffee shops now accept payment cards to capture greater sales and increase transaction speed. Wider acceptance and usage of payment cards suggest that a growing number of consumers and merchants prefer payment cards to cash and checks.

As more consumers and merchants adopt payment cards, providers of these products may benefit from economies of scale and scope. In the United States, being able to operate on a national level allowed some issuers (banks that issue cards to consumers), acquirers (banks that convert payment card receipts into bank deposits for merchants), and payment processors to benefit from economies of scale and scope. Some European payment providers might enjoy these benefits in the future as greater cross-border harmonization occurs with the introduction of the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA). The primary focus of SEPA is to create a uniform framework not only for card payments, but also for electronic credit transfers and direct debits, so that these retail payments can be completed in the euro area without intermediation by other banks. The potential advantages of SEPA are increased competition among a greater number of payment providers and the realization of scale economies and more-efficient payment instruments.

The increased usage of cards has increased the value of payment networks, such as Visa Inc., MasterCard Worldwide, Discover Financial Services, and others. Earlier this year, Visa Inc. had the largest initial public offering (IPO) of equity in U.S. history, valued at close to $18 billion (Benner, 2008). The sheer magnitude of the IPO suggests that financial market participants value Visa’s current and future profitability as a payment network. One potential reason for Visa to change its corporate structure from a card association to a publicly traded company is to reduce antitrust scrutiny by regulators and to lower the threat of lawsuits filed by certain payment system participants. In 2006, MasterCard Worldwide became a publicly traded company. Also, in 2007, Discover Financial Services was spun off by Morgan Stanley.

Some industry observers have suggested that the high profitability of payment card providers has increased scrutiny by public authorities in many jurisdictions. Several U.S. merchants have filed lawsuits against MasterCard and Visa regarding the setting of interchange fees. Interchange fees are generally paid by the merchant’s bank to the cardholder’s bank. These fees are set by the network—and not bilaterally negotiated among the banks in the network. In addition, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation about the level and determination of merchant fees. Recently, the European Commission (EC) ruled that the (multilateral) interchange fees applied by MasterCard in Europe violated Council Regulation (European Commission) No. 1/2003: The EC said that MasterCard’s fee structure restricted competition among acquiring banks and inflated the cost of card acceptance by retailers without leading to proven efficiencies.

To date, there is still little consensus—either among policymakers or economic theorists—on what constitutes an efficient fee structure for card-based payments. In this article, they discuss several theoretical economic models that analyze whether intervention by public authorities might improve the welfare of payment system participants. These models consider the costs and benefits of payment card usage versus other types of payments—for example, cash—and the underlying pricing of payment services under various types of market structures for payment providers and merchants. The following questions are addressed in this article:

  • What is the optimal structure of payment fees between consumers and merchants?
  • Will competition among payment providers, networks, or instruments improve consumer and merchant welfare?
  • What guidelines should policymakers follow when regulating fees for payment services?

You May Also Like

Book Chapter | December 27, 2012

Regulating Retail Payment Systems: The Case of Payment Cards

Bolt and Chakravorti discuss different types of market interventions by public authorities in retail payment markets. They concentrate on three types of market interventions. First, they analyze the impact of removing pricing restrictions placed on merchants that prevent them from setting different prices based on the payment instrument used to make purchases. Second, they summarize the impact of public authorities mandating caps on interchange fees – the fees paid by the payer’s financial institution to the payee’s financial institution – on the adoption and usage of payment cards. Third, they discuss the forced acceptance of all types of payment cards belonging to a single payment network (ie, credit, debit and prepaid) when merchants enter into contracts with acquirers. Such rules are often called honor-all-cards rules. While their focus is on payment cards, various pricing policies used to reach critical mass and steal market share from other payment instruments may also be valid for other types of payment instruments.

Academic Journal | April 21, 2016

The Role of Interchange Fees in Two-Sided Markets: An Empirical Investigation on Payment Cards

Carbó, Chakravorti, and Rodriguez study the impact of lowering interchange fees on consumer and merchant adoption and usage along with bank revenues during a ten-year period in Spain using bank-level data. Using cutting-edge econometric techniques, they are able to test two-sided market model predictions about payment card pricing policies. They find that the lowering of interchange fees over a ten-year period in Spain resulted in greater payment card usage because merchant adoption increased significantly from a relatively low base. They caution that such policies may only be effective if the merchant and consumer adoption are far from complete. Furthermore, they remain agnostic on any transfers between merchants and banks.

Conference Summary | November 15, 2010

What Is the Role of Public Authorities in Retail Payment Systems?

On June 21–22, 2010, the Chicago Fed and the University of Granada co-sponsored a conference that brought together policymakers, academics, and industry practitioners to discuss evolving retail payment systems and the role of public authorities, with several panels focusing on the Single Euro Payments Area.

Chakra Advisors LLC © 2025. All rights reserved.
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn