I understand what you were saying. I'm saying it's exactly the same thing. Let's say there are 3 customers who each buy a $98 item at a retailer: customers A,

I understand what you were saying. I'm saying it's exactly the same thing. Let's say there are 3 customers who each buy a $98 item at a retailer: customers A, B, and C. If all three paid with cash, the retailer would receive $294, so the net change would be: Retailer: +$294 Customer A: -$98 Customer B: -$98 Customer C: -$98 But they don't all pay in cash: customer A pays cash, customer B pays with a card that gets 1% cash back, customer C pays with a card that doesn't get cash back. They all buy a $98 item at a retailer. The credit card company charges 3% in fees, or ~$3 for each of the CC customers, so the retailer is now making $288. So they raise the price of the item to $100. Now all three customers are paying $100 each, the retailer is making $294 again, and the credit card company is making $6. Customer B has a card that gets 1% cash, so they receive $1. Now the net change is: Retailer: +$294 CC: +$5 Customer A: -$100 Customer B: -$99 Customer C: -$100 Now, the way I'm summarizing this situation, is customers A and C have each given $2 to the credit card company, and customer B has given $1 to the credit card company. You're saying, customers A, B, and C have given $2 to the credit card company, and customer A (the one paying in cash) has given $1 to customer B (the one receiving cash back). That's technically not wrong--it's certainly a way to represent the cash flow that gets you to the same place--but it's a pedantic, inane difference, and it certainly isn't a "correction".