Helene Bourguignon, Renato Gomes, Jean Tirole, Jan 30, 2015
The role of payment cards in modern economies can hardly be underrated. In 2013, debit and credit card transactions represented roughly half of all consumer payment transactions in Western Europe, and accounted for more than 45% of all payment transactions in the United States. The payment card industry has faced intense antitrust scrutiny on both sides of the Atlantic, partly in response to the merchants’ recurrent complaints about high transaction fees. In the past, regulation has mainly targeted the fees imposed by payment card networks. For instance, the most commonly used regulatory instrument caps the “interchange fee,” which is the payment made by the merchant’s bank (called the acquirer) to the cardholder’s bank (the issuer). This interchange fee in turn impacts the merchant fee, which has sparked the controversy in the first place. The last few years have witnessed a renewed interest in policies allowing merchants to differentiate price according to payment choice. Absent public regulation on the matter, payment systems (open systems such as Visa and MasterCard, but also closed systems such as Amex, PayPal, and Google Wallet) have prohibited merchants from levying surcharges on their own payment method (the so called “no surcharge rule”). Arguably, one natural alternative to traditional regulation of interchange fees is to let merchants price discriminate as a function of payment method, allowing them to pass through to consumers any excessive merchant fees. The primary object of this note is to shed light on this debate, and clarify how optimal regulation of cash discounts/card surcharges by merchants is related to traditional modes of regulation of merchant fees.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Malaysia Grants Licenses to WeChat and TikTok Under New Social Media Law
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Axinn Announces Promotions of Antitrust Experts
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Federal Competition Office to Scrutinize High Electricity Prices in Germany
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Mexican Lawmakers Advance Controversial Plan to Dissolve Independent Oversight Bodies
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Motorola Accuses UK of Antitrust Breach Over Terminated Emergency Services Contract
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand