President Trump may be gunning to reform the Dodd-Frank Act, in particular one of the most contentious policies of the act: the Durbin Amendment.
The Durbin Amendment—passed as a stipulation of the Dodd-Frank Act—allows the government to set price caps on fees for card transactions. Before 2009, interchange rates were set by banks and merchants involved in the transaction process.
The passing of the Durbin Amendment resulted in the stagnation of free services offered to consumers: before 2009, 76% of banks offered free checking accounts. After Dodd-Frank and Durbin, that number dropped to 45% in 2011, 39% in 2012, and 37% in 2015. This decline has forced some Americans to avoid banking entirely.
The goal of The Durbin Amendment was to pass savings to consumers by giving merchants fee breaks on interchange rates. Instead, 77% of merchants’ prices have stayed the same, while 22% have increased.
What would happen if President Trump and congress overhauled Dodd-Frank and repealed Durbin in its entirety?
A return to the pre-2009 era of interchange rates would result in retailers negotiating the cost of card transactions. This could lead to larger businesses paying less per transaction, while smaller businesses could take a more significant hit.
There is something to be said for retailers’ motivations: the largest proponents of keeping Durbin in the Dodd-Frank Act are massive outlets like Walmart, Walgreen’s, etc.
For the individual consumer, this could mean a change in the price of goods, depending on where they shop. It could also mean an increase in the number of free services that many banking institutions provide to incentivize the clientele that they’ve lost since 2009 to return, now that the burden of card processing fees are no longer shifted onto the consumer.
Either way, these changes are not likely to take place any time soon: Height Securities analyst Edwin Groshans theorizes that these regulation changes may not take place for at least another year. Ultimately, the ability to amend or repeal Dodd-Frank lies with the regulators in charge of these sanctions, not just with the President or congress, and any changes made will be hard-fought, given that the act was initially considered to prevent the irresponsible banking practices that lead to the 2008 market crash.
With the 2014 holiday shopping season about to grind down to the home stretch, the sales figures are already rolling in. And once again, online transactions have maintained their brisk and healthy growth from years past.
Cyber Monday chalked up record sales, rising a reported 17 percent from 2012 according to USA Today. Cyber Monday, the Monday after Thanksgiving, has been embraced by the media as a flashpoint date for online retail sales during the traditional holiday shopping cycle. The convenience of online shopping versus the hassle of holiday shopping traffic gets the consumers interested. Combining that convenience with the staggeringly low sale prices of the time period and suddenly the appeal of online shopping becomes apparent for folks looking to get their holiday shopping done inexpensively and hassle free.
So with the boom in online shopping, there exists a disparity in sales tax in some instances. This isn’t something that comes up too often in Delaware, the original home base of Host Merchant Services. But many states have sales tax for purchases, and are finding it difficult to compete with the surging online retail business.
While legislation in some states requires sales tax be paid on some online transactions, most sales are still untaxed. In many states that translates into a 5-10 percent price advantage for the online vendor. But it also is a 5-10 percent disadvantage for local brick-and-mortar stores that not only collect sales taxes, but also pay property taxes, employ local residents and support local causes.
Thus there’s been a movement to level the playing field by attacking the sales tax disparity. The Marketplace Fairness Act is the solution to the sales tax disparity. The marketplace fairness act is:
“Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013 – Authorizes each member state under the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (the multistate agreement for the administration and collection of sales and use taxes adopted on November 12, 2002) to require all sellers not qualifying for a small-seller exception (applicable to sellers with annual gross receipts in total U.S. remote sales not exceeding $1 million) to collect and remit sales and use taxes with respect to remote sales under provisions of the Agreement, but only if such Agreement includes minimum simplification requirements relating to the administration of the tax, audits, and streamlined filing. Defines “remote sale” as a sale of goods or services into a state in which the seller would not legally be required to pay, collect, or remit state or local sales and use taxes unless provided by this Act.”
Which means out-of-state online, catalog or remote would need to collect sales tax at the time of the transaction, just as local retailers are required to do. For this to happen each state would have to simplify their sales tax laws, making it easier for national vendors to calculate the tax and manage it.
The Marketplace Fairness Act would pave the way for states to require online sellers from out of state to begin paying the sales tax they’ve escaped for years. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said “The Marketplace Fairness Act would level the playing field for small businesses by allowing states — if they so choose — to treat brick and mortar retailers the same as remote retailers.” Durbin, who is sponsoring this bill, is best known for authoring the Durbin Amendment, a piece of legislation that caused much controversy in the Payment Card Industry when enacted.
The act passed the Senate. But has yet to be voted on in the House, with all signs pointing to it not passing the House.
There’s been an uptick in media coverage and analysis of this bill. Essentially the verdict is that the increased sales volume from the holiday shopping season is going to push the political infrastructure to once again address the issue of state sales tax and online merchants.
And that raises the most interesting question of all for the credit card processing industry: Is the global aspect of online shopping going to take a huge step towards pushing sales tax to a federal layer and remove it from the states?
That’s a very big picture outlook on the issue. But as online shopping becomes more and more prevalent, the issue gains traction. The world is becoming a pretty tiny place due to the saturation and convenience of communication. You can video-call people on the other side of the globe instantly with your smartphone right now. Mobile Wallets and NFC are seeking to make it so that you can wave your magic wand, or iPhone, and pay for things instantly. State based sales tax laws look to fall behind the curve of quick evolving technology. Five, ten, even fifteen years down the line the way we make purchases and the marketplace wherein we make those purchases may have evolved past the scope state sales tax. The Marketplace Fairness Act seems to be just a precursor to a larger movement afoot in the retail sales industry.
Here at Host Merchant Services we guarantee to save our customers money every month on their credit card processing. We understand that some of you are wondering how we do this! Transparency is a key cornerstone of our customer service values, so we have no problem sharing our secret formula and show everyone out there exactly how we carve out superior savings for every single one of our customers. We believe that when you get your statement every month, you should understand every item, and it should match what you were promised in the sales process. One of the first things to understand when switching to Host Merchant Services is we utilize the most cost effective and fair pricing available in credit card processing. It is called “interchange plus” or “cost plus pricing.” Interchange is a set of rates and fees determined by the card associations (Visa, Mastercard, and Discover). What this means is that our merchants are able to clearly see what interchange categories they qualify for. Here are a few different interchange categories that merchants pay with the same consumer visa credit card. Keep in mind each interchange category has a percentage and a dollar amount included in the category.
Supermarket Credit
1.22% + $0.05
Small Ticket (Transactions under $15)
1.65% + $0.04
Standard Retail / Restaurant
1.51% + $0.10
Charity
1.35% + $0.05
Service Station
1.15% + $0.25
e-Commerce / Mail order & Telephone order
1.80% + $0.10
These examples are based on interchange plus pricing. They also don’t include processor markup, and we have the lowest in the industry! There are other types of pricing that processors will use. You may encounter three-tier pricing (1.79% Qualified, 2.49% mid-qualified, and 3.29% non-qualified) for example. Some merchants are priced flat rate (2.9%, or 2.75%) or flat rate plus surcharges. There is also the dreaded enhanced bill back! Once you understand your pricing and category you need to look at how you are accepting your credit cards. Credit cards that are taken face-to-face (card present) often cost less than cards that are taken over the phone or on the Internet (card not present). For example, retail swiped transaction of 1.51% versus an e-Commerce transaction of 1.80%. Card associations justify this increased interchange rate due to transactions not being face-to-face. The next step in saving money is learning how much money is currently being spent on average to take in each dollar on credit cards. This is called your effective rate. This is calculated by totaling all the money you are paying in fees divided by the total amount your business processes in sales and refunds. For example a merchant who pays $300 in fees to bring in $10,000 in credit cards has an effective rate of 3.00% ($300 / $10,000 x 100 = 3.00%). A few other pieces of information are important to solving the puzzle. The average ticket or average transaction amount is also critical to understanding your rates. The reason being is that a $.20 transaction fee is not a substantial amount of an average ticket of $100 ($.20 / $100 = 0.20%). However, take that same transaction fee on an average ticket of $10 ($.20 / $10 = 2.00%). This goes to show that merchants with larger average tickets pay lower effective rates on average. Lastly we want to look at other fees; many processors will charge monthly fees, statement fees, administrative fees, regulatory and product fees, PCI fees, and annual fees. Host Merchant Services will help you save money on these fees as well! You can learn more about this process through our Official Host Merchant Services Road to Savings Infographic. The best way to start the process is to have one of our industry experts analyze a current merchant statement. We will walk you through the confusing process by explaining what you are currently paying versus what you would pay with HMS. Along with the potential to save hundreds to thousands of dollars each year on your credit card processing, we’ve upped the ante with our new $100 Challenge.
Call us today at (877) 517-4678 and let us design a solution that dramatically improves your bottom line – we guarantee it!
Two years after the Durbin Amendment became law, the consequences of this historic legislation are still unfolding. In the coming months, new developments in Durbin implementation could lead to historically low debit swipe fees for merchants. Last July, U.S District Judge Richard Leon ruled on a Durbin-related lawsuit that pitted a consortium of retailers against the Federal Reserve.
Could Debit Interchange Be in For Serious Reductions?
Siding with the plaintiffs, Judge Leon ruled that the Fed had failed to implement the Durbin Amendment in good faith. Since 2011, the Fed has enforced a debit fee cap of approximately 24 cents per transaction. Judge Leon has not specified what new cap the Fed should implement. However, the judge’s ruling did favorably mention “Alternative 1,” an interchange cap proposal that the Fed considered and dropped in 2010. In the past few weeks, much of the public reaction to the new ruling has focused on Alternative 1, which caps debit swipe fees at 7 to 12 cents.
Released in March, the Fed report was overshadowed by the body’s decision to maintain the status quo in debit fee limits. Judging from the data in the March report, the Fed’s new debit fee cap could solidify well below 7 cents. Some experts predict that the new cap will hover around 5 cents per transaction. Merchant services analyst Eric Grover suggests that even a 2 cent cap is not beyond the realm of possibility.
Since debit cards have achieved deep saturation throughout society, changes to interchange fee rules create dramatic effects in multiple industries. For many companies, a 12-cent debit fee cap would provide much-needed breathing room during this time of slow economic growth.
On the other hand, government-mandated changes in merchant services can have unintended consequences. Defying all expectations, the original implementation of the Durbin Amendment led to higher costs for many small businesses. A similar dynamic could complicate court-ordered debit fee reform. Debit cards are so critical for modern commerce that society must find the right balance when regulating debit card issuers. Future developments will demonstrate if Judge Leon’s ruling will promote a healthier, more sustainable economy.
A new U.S District Court ruling could lead to major changes in debit card processing fees. Will the Durbin debit rates go lower with this? Let us understand.
On July 31, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon swept aside the Federal Reserve‘s 2011 implementation of the Durbin Amendment. Passed in 2010, this amendment to the Dodd-Frank law was intended to limit the upward trajectory of debit processing rates. According to Leon, the Fed’s 2011 regulations directly counteracted the original intent of the Durbin Amendment. Though the Fed capped the base rate for debit processing fees at 21 cents, they raised debit rates for transactions under $12. Essentially, the Fed lowered the debit price for large transactions while raising them substantially on small transactions.
Can Durbin Debit Rates Go Lower?
In general, debit card caps are highly advantageous for retail businesses. However, the current implementation of the Durbin debit amendment creates grave concerns for many retailers. It is sensible to lower debit card interchange fees at a time when many retail companies are struggling with low consumer demand. Months will pass before the nation sees new, concrete debit processing rules. In the meantime, the response to Judge Leon’s ruling starkly illustrates a growing conflict between the retail industry and major banks.
In this struggle to define the costs of merchant services, both sides claim to represent the best interests of the public. However, the banking industry is so politically influential and entrenched that it is hard to see this industry as truly vulnerable or consumer-focused. Retailers are achieving broader public support as they tout their intentions to lower costs for ordinary Americans.
To be fair, it is demonstrably true that banks could lose enormous profits in the wake of Judge Leon’s ruling. Undoubtedly, the banking industry will pass some of these costs on to consumers in the form of higher fees and tighter restrictions. A strong, profitable American banking industry is vital for the United States and the global economy.
At the same time, history has shown that the banking industry is far less volatile than the retail sector. When banks are in danger of failing, they can often use their political influence to gain unique concessions and loans from the government. In stark contrast, retailers must stand on their own during problematic times. In light of this power imbalance, the public may well benefit from retailer-friendly debit price controls.
The new ruling on Durbin debit rates represents a fascinating turn of events. However, only time will tell if Judge Leon will have the final word in Durbin implementation. The Federal Reserve and large banks have many more tools at their disposal in their quest to control the state of debit processing fees.
What Is the Durbin Amendment
The Durbin Amendment is a part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, a law enacted in 2010 in the United States. It was named after Senator Richard Durbin, who played a role in its development. This amendment primarily focuses on the fees that merchants pay to banks for processing debit card transactions, known as interchange fees.
The key features of the Durbin Amendment are as follows
Regulation of Interchange Fees: The Durbin Amendment introduced regulations to limit the interchange fees charged by banks to merchants, for processing debit card transactions. The aim was to make these fees more reasonable and transparent.
Exemption for Smaller Financial Institutions: These regulations specifically apply to institutions that surpass a certain asset threshold. Smaller banks and credit unions generally do not have to follow the restrictions on interchange fees.
Choice of Network Routing for Merchants: Another objective of this amendment is to promote competition among payment card networks. It allows merchants to select which network they prefer for processing debit card transactions. This provision encourages competition. May potentially reduce costs, for merchants.
Prohibition of Exclusive Network Agreements: The Durbin Amendment prohibits card networks from imposing agreements that would restrict merchants from routing their transactions through networks.
Measures to Protect Consumers: The amendment included provisions that aimed to strengthen consumer protection. One of these provisions required issuers to offer consumers a choice, between two payment card networks that were not affiliated with each other for each debit card. This gave consumers options and flexibility.
Challenges in Implementation
The implementation of the Durbin Amendment faced some difficulties, which sparked debates about its effectiveness and potential unintended consequences. While some believed that it successfully achieved its goal of reducing interchange fees others had concerns about effects on smaller banks and financial institutions.
Impact on the Debit Card Industry
The Durbin Amendment had an impact on the debit card industry by changing the dynamics of interchange fees and fostering competition among payment networks. It continues to be a regulation in the United States influencing the relationships, between banks, merchants and consumers when it comes to debit card transactions.
Today the Official Merchant Services Blog brings you another update on the ongoing Interchange lawsuit settlement. We began talking about the possibility of ‘The Big Cash Comeback’ back when the settlement was first announced in July, and later we discussed the opposition to the settlement. Last week a federal appellate court denied a retailer’s appeal to review part of the controversial settlement in the massive credit card interchange case, clearing the way for the trial court to move toward final approval. At the same, the process of notifying the millions of merchants affected is getting under way.
Judge John Gleeson of the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, N.Y., gave preliminary approval of the settlement on Nov. 9 and has set a hearing for next Sept. 13 to consider final approval.
Lawyers representing seven merchant trade groups as well as some individual merchants asked the Second Circuit Court to consider a narrow part of Gleeson’s preliminary approval, the provision of the settlement that releases defendants Visa Inc., MasterCard Inc., and some major banks from liability for interchange pricing policies. The provision is shaping up to be the key objection of the 1,200 retailers and trade associations since it would affect current and even future card-accepting merchants. This case, now seven years in the making, began when merchant plaintiffs accused the networks and banks of using anti-competitive practices in setting interchange rates.
Under the settlement announced in July by lawyers for both sides, the defendants will pay class merchants about $6 billion in damages, and Visa and MasterCard will provide another $1.2 billion in temporarily reduced interchange rates and ease up on certain rules, especially ones restricting merchants’ ability to add a surcharge for card transactions. In return, the networks want to be released from future court challenges by merchants regarding Interchange and network rules. The defendants also are paying about $550 million to a handful of large merchant plaintiffs that have now dropped their claims.
Judge Gleeson indicated that the standard for final approval is much higher than the one for preliminary approval, which means that the objecting plaintiffs still have some hope even though parts of the settlement already are going into effect or will be soon. For example, the networks have 60 days from Nov. 27, when the court entered Gleeson’s order implementing preliminary approval, to conform their rules to terms of the proposed settlement.
The district court meanwhile, is setting up the machinery to administer the settlement process. Gleeson appointed Kansas City, Kan.-based Epiq Systems Inc., a specialist in legal-systems administration and technology, to oversee notifications and related matters. That is no small task: the class settlement covers any merchant that has accepted Visa and MasterCard cards between Jan. 1, 2004, and late 2012. Experts estimate 6 million to 8 million affected merchants that must be notified. The settlement agreement also calls for merchant acquirers to assist in the notification process.
While we have discussed this settlement from different aspects previously, noting the advantages it would seem to give the Issuing Banks over merchants, the settlement seems to be proceeding along without much further adjustment or negotiation. Although it is not finalized yet, the dissenter’s cries seem to be going unheard, as they believe that the settlement protects the status quo more than anything, and will not change the way the networks set interchange. Host Merchant Services will keep you informed of all the latest news involving this landmark litigation.
Today’s edition of the Official Merchant Services Blog will take a look into the newest data breach, involving NY-based Barnes & Noble Inc.
Barnes & Noble revealed last week a “sophisticated criminal effort” had taken place at 63 stores, resulting in hacked PIN pad devices putting some of its customers at risk. The company discovered the hacking in September, but did not disclose it until recently on the advice of federal authorities. Security experts at the FBI have admitted that immediate disclosure in data breaches can make it harder for investigators to find the perpetrators.
In response, the chain has ceased using all PIN pads in its stores, and it has identified the affected locations in California, Connecticut, Florida, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.
“The tampering, which affected fewer than 1% of PIN pads in Barnes & Noble stores,” the company said in a news release, “was a sophisticated criminal effort to steal credit card information, debit card information, and debit card PIN numbers from customers who swiped their cards through PIN pads when they made purchases. This situation involved only purchases in which a customer swiped a credit or debit card in a store using one of the compromised PIN pads.”
Barnes & Noble said its customer database was unaffected, and that none of the compromised PIN pads were at its college bookstores. The company also said the breach did not affect e-commerce sales, customers who bought online or through company’s Nook e-reader and Nook mobile app remain safe.
The bookseller is also working with the payment card networks, banks, and card issuers to identify accounts that may have been compromised. The company expects to have to go through a re-validation process before it again is deemed to be Payment Card Industry (PCI) compliant.
Although unfortunate, this data breach could have been prevented by discontinuing the use of unnecessary equipment. PIN pads for terminal are no longer a cost benefit to a company, since the Durbin Amendment. Durbin makes PIN Debit rates the same as Swipe Debit rates (as long as the bank is large enough to qualify), essentially eliminating the need to a PIN pad altogether. Check out our blog post on the differences between PIN and Swipe Debit here. Fewer PIN pads would reduce tampering of terminals and theft of cardholders PIN numbers.
In the meantime, Host Merchant Services continues to offer the lowest PCI Compliance rates in the industry, as well as a vigorous PCI Compliance Initiative that seeks to inform and educate everyone interested as to the details of the process, step-by-step.
Today’s edition of the Official Merchant Services Blog will discuss the best way for merchants to save money on fees when accepting credit or debit cards for smaller transactions. Host Merchant Services is committed to bringing its clients the lowest fees in the industry. Our Small Ticket Program is a feature that helps us do just that for those merchants who process transactions at $15 or less.
Many merchants have seen debit savings thanks to the Durbin Amendment, which caps the Interchange Fees that Visa and MasterCard charge for debit cards at $0.24 and 5 basis points. Smaller merchants do not see the savings when running transactions under $15, since the 24-cent per item fee and the 5 basis points amount to 2.1% of the total ticket, before any additional fees are incorporated.
The Small Ticket Program however, allows qualifying merchants to pay a per item fee of only 5 cents, while paying an interchange rate of 1.6% for Visa. MasterCard has set its small ticket rate at 4 cents and 1.55%. This program saves merchants money on lower transaction amounts, since the per item fee is less of a burden on them in terms of overall effective rate.
The Interchange category for small tickets is available for merchants who are on Interchange Plus pricing, and who qualify under the Visa business types listed below. Merchants enrolled in flat rate pricing or any type of three-tiered pricing will not be able to utilize these savings, which is just another way Interchange Plus pricing is truly the best out there.
While some processing companies hide added percentage points in the difference that exists between small ticket and large ticket processing, Host Merchant Services gives the savings directly to you. Our Small Ticket Program offers a better Interchange category and a lower per item fee, saving you more money in processing fees for all purchases $15 or less.
Visa opened up the types of businesses that qualify for Small Ticket Processing in November, 2010. Now each of these industries qualify:
Local Commuter Transport
Limos & Taxis
Bus Lines
Bridge & Road Fees/Tolls
Grocery Stores/Supermarkets
Convenience Stores
Service Stations
Fast Food Restaurant
Drug Stores
Book Stores
News Dealers, Newsstands
Dry Cleaners
Quick Copy, Reproduction & Blueprint
Parking Lots & Garages
Car Washes
Motion Picture Theater
Video Tape Rental Stores
Post Stamps/Government Only
If you qualify under any one of these categories, contact Host Merchant Services for your small ticket savings right away. Host Merchant Services promises: we deliver personal service and clarity and as always, we want to keep merchants informed of any potential savings.
In this installment of the Official Merchant Services Blog, we look at the actions several retail trade groups and merchant advocates have taken to further the fight against the antitrust settlement proposed by Visa and MasterCard. We have touched upon this subject several times before, however these steps may have been the most drastic yet.
In an open letter last week to leading members of congress, the National Retail Federation (NRF), the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA), and seven other large retail-related groups expressed their frustration with the pending litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, saying that the outcome could further “entrench the Visa/MasterCard duopoly.”
The groups called on congress to pay attention to the state court settlement, in an attempt to escalate the issue and garner attention from lawmakers and Americans.
The groups argue, “The proposed settlement, which was negotiated by Visa, MasterCard and lawyers purporting to represent the merchant community, is one-sided and preserves the very anti competitive actions that were the genesis of the lawsuits.”
“Given the important oversight role of Congress and your continued interest in this important issue, we write today to urge you to reject the false claims from the card networks and their representatives.” The letter also stated “The proposed settlement does nothing to resolve the failures in the electronic payment market and continued Congressional involvement in these issues is imperative. We look forward to keeping you fully informed as the legal process moves forward and the chorus of objections grows.”
RILA’s Brian Dodge described the problem retailers face, “Visa and MasterCard centrally set fees that are ultimately paid by merchants and collected by issuing banks. With two fee schedules imposed by two companies that control 70 percent of the marker there is no meaningful competition.”
The groups argue that the $7.2 billion dollar settlement is not the problem, even going so far as to accuse Visa and MasterCard of using the pending settlement exchanges as penitence for maintaining the status quo.
In a statement released in July, just after the settlement was announced Visa said it believes that the settlement is in the best interests of all parties involved. “This agreement should remove the distraction of litigation for all parties,” said Joshua R. Floum, general counsel of Visa Inc. “We will go forward with a focus on helping retailers grow their businesses and providing them with efficient and valuable payment options.”
On October 3rd, these retail and trade groups will appear before a court seeking to order the Federal Reserve Board to start over in devising regulations for implementing the controversial amendment’s provisions because the Fed allegedly did not follow the amendment’s dictates in setting the debit card rules now in place. The trade groups and retailers sued the Fed last November in an effort to start the rule-setting process anew. In a May filing, the plaintiffs said the board “manufactured ambiguity” in its interpretation of the amendment’s language. A Federal Reserve spokesperson would not comment about the upcoming hearing, although attorneys for the Fed said the board properly implemented the law’s directives regarding the authorization and settlement costs that could be considered in regulating debit card interchange, as well as which costs to exclude.
Retail groups continue to fight both the Interchange settlement and the Federal Reserve Boards Durbin rules. There seems to be no end in sight for this case, and only time will tell if the Fed will be forced to reset its Durbin amendment rules and regulations and start anew.
The Wall Street Journal, citing a document they obtained on September 20, revealed Bank of America has plans to cut 16,000 jobs by the end of the year.
This move is not exactly surprising news since the company had already discussed plans to shave 30,000 jobs in a plan to trim jobs and cut costs by the end of 2013. The move, however, does accelerate the earlier plan from cost cutting that would take more than a year — and eliminate annual expenses by $5 billion — to cost cutting that will happen right now. The overall plan of cutting 30,000 jobs is designed to help the company offset unprofitable moves such as the 2008 takeover of Countrywide Financial Corp.
In fact, Forbes, in this article reporting the news of the job cuts, characterizes the mortgage section of the bank as something that “has hamstrung the bank” citing specifically the acquisition of Countrywide. The article notes that 3,200 of the job cuts could come from the division overseeing new mortgages.
Overall, these proposed cuts will bring Bank of America’s workforce down to 260,000 overall employees by year’s end — a number that drops the bank from being the biggest employer in the U.S. banking industry. After this round of cuts hits the company’s bottom line, Bank of America would fall behind Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase.
The Official Merchant Services Blog is citing these cuts because beyond the issues brought up with Bank of America’s acquisition of Countrywide, one of the other key factors in the bank losing profits was the Durbin Amendment. Back on October 13, 2011 we reported Bank of America felt a huge national backlash based on its reaction to the Durbin Amendment. The bank decided to offset losses it would incur from the legislation’s hardcap on debit swipe fees — losses which Forbes reported in March 2012 to be $441 million in Q4 of 2011 when compared to Q4 2010 — by initiating a $5 monthly transaction fee for using their debit cards.
This type of move was predicted by Host Merchant Services in its Durbin Amendment analysis, and was embraced by a host of large, debit card focused banks, besides just Bank of America. JP Morgan Chase, Sun Trust, Regions Financial Corp., and Wells Fargo all had plans to charge a similar fee. But consumer backslash was intense, media scrutiny was focused, and Bank of American in particular felt the brunt of the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. So the banks all backed off of the idea to implement these added fees.
The hardcap being what it is, however, left Bank of America with the continued problem: Losses.
So as part of a combination of bad moves, Durbin included, the bank is faced with the decision that to stay profitable they have to cut jobs. Some analysts, such as Anthony Polini, for the investment firm Raymond James, feel these belt-tightening measures are evidence of an agile and healthy company. “The company is doing great,” the analyst said in this article, “It’s another phase of expense control.”
The bank’s stock price took a hit based on the news as shares closed down 0.82 percent to $9.11 on Friday.
