Friday, January 20, 2012

What's next for bank fees?

Big banks have backtracked on plans to impose debit card fees, but fallout from the Durbin amendment - which caps the “swipe fees” merchants pay banks when customers pay with their debit cards - continues, a new report found.

Celent, a Boston-based financial research and consulting firm, says banks are still looking for ways to cut costs or raise revenue. (Bank of America said Thursday account closings spiked after it announced its controversial $5 debit card fee.) The top considerations: raising checking account maintenance fees, cutting debit card reward programs and imposing or raising fees on other products and services.

“It will take a better part of 2012 for the full effects of Durbin regulations to become clearer, but the early signs are that it won’t reach all of its intended outcomes,” Celent said in the report, a broader study of IT spending in banking.

The firm predicts more regulation and disputes with merchants to come, adding that “the fight and the story are far from over.”


Anonymous said...

There will be plenty of these stories. All you wonderful "progressives" who think that a government program/regulation is the one and only solution to absolutely every problem in the universe have brought this mess on us. Hope you're happy.

Anonymous said...

J - In case you aren't aware, it was lack of regulatory oversight that caused the recession we are trying to get out of. Hope YOU'RE happy.

Bill said...

J - please share with us how wonderful the banking industry was prior to 2008? Maybe you can focus on the fun and exciting venture in the mortgage bundling fantasy world.

We're eagerly awaiting the story.

Anonymous said...

Bill - It would have been truly wonderful if anyone paid attention to the calls a number of Congressmen were making in the mid-00s about how badly the government mortgage companies - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, if you aren't familiar - needed major overhaul. You may recall that Fannie & Freddie were eagerly backing loans where the only qualification for the loans was that you could prove you were a primate that walked on 2 legs. As early as 2005 some in Congress had identified this as a ticking time bomb that needed to be defused. Of course, Barney Frank would have none of it, blocking any discussion of changing anything about Fannie & Freddie, but when they and the rest of the economy collapsed, there was Barney to blame the banks for every ill in the universe, and once the "progressives" had both houses of Congress & the White House, by gawd it was high time these evil bankers and investment bankers pay!!!

Let me know what other stories you would like me to tell you that the Obama Media is trying to cover up.

Anonymous said...

Actually, it went back to 2003 when Bush really pushed for a change in Fannie and Freddie. I do agree that Glass Stegall should have never been repealed. The banks really need a buffer between banking services and investment services to cushion any blows to the bank from the investment side of the books. The only reason we are having discussions about additional fees is because of the Dodd bill that basically gutted all of the backend fees banks used to charge companies for credit card transactions. They are now having to push the fees to their own customers now.