5 ms·

Yes - but since the merchant is the one liable you can assume those costs are being passed down to you either way (key part being the contractual obligation vis

Yes - but since the merchant is the one liable you can assume those costs are being passed down to you either way (key part being the contractual obligation visa/mastercard assert that prohibits the merchant from charging you more for using a credit card). Therefore in the meanwhile you can be covered for fraud and a) get your 1-2% back b) get airline miles - or c) none of the above. Seems like an obvious choice?

germanier 10y ago
The point is that for the whole system it's beneficial to move to a more secure system with less fraud. For the individual user of course less so.
tostitos1979 10y ago
I don't understand about the contractual requirement for no price differences. Gas stations do it everywhere ... a different price for cash vs cards.
- forgotpwtomain 10y ago
  Ah, Apologies there were some changes to this recently (2013) which had slipped my mind (they mostly don't affect New England due to state-based restrictions - which is probably why I'd forgotten): https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/surcharge-considerations-and-requirements.pdf https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/surcharge-c...
- stonemetal 10y ago
  It is an insane marketing speak thing. The contractual requirement isn't for no price differences. There may be a discount for using cash, but they can't word it as being charged more for using a card. The two might be equivalent in numerical terms, but it is the language that is important.
shaftway 10y ago
Fun fact: The contractual obligation says they can't charge you more for using a credit card. But it doesn't say they can't charge you less for using cash. This is how gas stations get around it. The gas is the higher price, but you get a 10 cent discount for using cash.
- tomc1985 10y ago
  Gas stations have a special loophole for that
- CardFellow 10y ago
  Merchants actually can charge more for credit card usage now. It's been permissible since a 2013 lawsuit, except in 9 states where it's prohibited by state law.
CardFellow 10y ago
Visa and MasterCard have permitted surcharging for credit card use since 2013, as the result of a class action lawsuit.

germanier 10y ago

The point is that for the whole system it's beneficial to move to a more secure system with less fraud. For the individual user of course less so.

tostitos1979 10y ago

I don't understand about the contractual requirement for no price differences. Gas stations do it everywhere ... a different price for cash vs cards.

forgotpwtomain 10y ago
Ah, Apologies there were some changes to this recently (2013) which had slipped my mind (they mostly don't affect New England due to state-based restrictions - which is probably why I'd forgotten): https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/surcharge-considerations-and-requirements.pdf https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/surcharge-c...
stonemetal 10y ago
It is an insane marketing speak thing. The contractual requirement isn't for no price differences. There may be a discount for using cash, but they can't word it as being charged more for using a card. The two might be equivalent in numerical terms, but it is the language that is important.

shaftway 10y ago

Fun fact: The contractual obligation says they can't charge you more for using a credit card. But it doesn't say they can't charge you less for using cash. This is how gas stations get around it. The gas is the higher price, but you get a 10 cent discount for using cash.

tomc1985 10y ago
Gas stations have a special loophole for that
CardFellow 10y ago
Merchants actually can charge more for credit card usage now. It's been permissible since a 2013 lawsuit, except in 9 states where it's prohibited by state law.

CardFellow 10y ago

Visa and MasterCard have permitted surcharging for credit card use since 2013, as the result of a class action lawsuit.