As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: laws


In discussing unbanked and underbanked American consumers, we tend to focus on low socioeconomic status communities. The mainstream opinion is that building wealth and long-term financial stability relies on the use of traditional banking and investing products and the knowledge to use these products effectively. The financial industry tends to avoid low socioeconomic status communities for a variety of reasons, but the bottom line is that these customers have not been proven to be profitable. Taking the place of these mainstream institutions are check-cashing facilities and payday loan outfits, designed to be very profitable while providing the immediate services required in these communities.

These “low-class” financial product purveyors are part of a growing industry. As with any burgeoning industry, there is beginning to be more research into its consumers. The unbanked and underbanked consumer is becoming better defined, and traditional banks see this as an opportunity to create products that directly compete with the successful check-cashing and payday loan market.

Check CashingWith this new research comes some interesting findings. Prepaid debit cards are products designed for consumers with low or no credit scores, a condition that is more common among low-income households, though there are many reasons anyone in any income bracket could have damaged or undefined credit. Think Finance has determined that the use of prepaid debit cards is the same regardless of income level. Among the consumers surveyed, a representative sample of the Millennial generation, someone earning up to $74,999 a year is just as likely to use a prepaid debit card as someone earning less than $25,000 a year.

The statistics pertaining the check-cashing services show a similar trend. For a fee of usually 1 to 4 percent, a check-cashing storefront can immediately give you cash. So can any bank branch, but you often need to open an account first, and that requires patience, the willingness to share your personal information and submit to a ChexSystems verification, and the openness to endless marketing. In many cases, it’s just easier to just pay the fee. 34 percent of Millennials with the lowest income make use of check-cashing services outside of traditional banks, only 5 percentage points higher than those with the highest income.

An article in USA Today addresses what might representative of the fact that the status of unbanked or underbanked is pervasive in this age group regardless of income:

Ammy Orozco, 30, who works as an executive assistant at a Check Cashing USA branch in Miami, has a checking and savings account with Bank of America but often chooses to cash checks at work instead. She says she’d rather pay to cash a check immediately than pay for gas to drive to the bank. She has also taken out payday loans in emergencies. She’s tried to get a loan from the bank, but it was “stressful.”

“They wouldn’t confirm right away… You’re there sitting and you need the money, and you’re like, is this going to happen or not?”

Millennials expect instant gratification and are willing to look past fees and unnecessary expenses in order to feed this desire, regardless of income. For a generation whose defining economic moment has been the Great Recession, the credit crunch, and high unemployment, as well as the media environment dominated by stories about bank executives behaving badly, poor use of taxpayers’ money, and class-action lawsuits pertaining to anti-consumer practices, it’s understandable that a mistrust of the mainstream financial industry keeps people away from banks regardless of income. Half of Americans are not saving for retirement, and while unemployment certainly plays a role, lack of trust in the industry and in markets in general is an important factor.

With the proliferation of services targeted to the unbanked and underbanked reaching a wider set of customers — that is, popularity and use has moved beyond low socioeconomic status communities — regulators have begun to take notice. (In other words, these products and their negative effects were acceptable when they took advantage of only the poor and whoever you might assume is more likely to live in poor neighborhoods, but now that the middle class is targeted, it’s an issue worthy of consideration.) The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is looking into designing regulations for these products. Meanwhile, traditional financial institutions are taking advantage of this regulatory grey area to create products that compete with check-cashing storefronts and payday loan issuers, and to use these products as profit centers with the intent of eventually mainstreaming these customers into other profitable services.

Are you a Millennial who prefers immediate services like check cashing, payday loans, and prepaid debit cards instead of checking accounts, bank loans, and credit cards? This is not the primary audience of this website, but I’d love to hear some feedback from the millions of Americans who fit this description.

Photo: Daquella manera
USA Today

{ 13 comments }

In April, LIMRA, a think-tank for the financial industry, completed a survey intended to focus on the savings and investment preferences of those living and working in the United States. After receiving responses from 2,697 Americans, a representative sample of the country, LIMRA was able to determine that 49 percent of the country is not saving for retirement. Additionally, more than half of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34, at 56 percent, are not saving for retirement.

Saving for retirement — and receiving the associated tax benefits through typical investment types like 401(k) plans and IRAs — requires a public trust in the financial industry. On one side, financial planners, investment salespeople and brokers, columnists, and bloggers are encouraging the use of financial products that, through both apparent and hidden fees, enriches the industry, while on the other side, investment firms are the beneficiaries of massive taxpayer bailouts and frequently in the news for using taxpayer money for paying their executives bonuses that defy the laws of gravity.

Wall StreetIt may be true that the reason many Americans do not save for retirement is ignorance. There are typical excuses for not saving for retirement, such as the lack of good, seemingly trustworthy information about the options that are available, the lack of knowledge about the benefits of investing in 401(k) plans and IRAs, or the belief that during tight personal economic times, not a cent is available to save for the future. After the recession, however, many people just see the financial industry as unworthy of trust. Organizations like LIMRA, working for the industry and promoting financial products, are unlikely to bring this attitude to the public attention.

The industry is more interested in shaming people unwilling to get on the boats rather than analyzing the leadership capabilities and trustworthiness of the boats’ captains.

I’m saving for retirement with 401(k) plans and IRAs. When possible, I choose plans that have low fees, but the choice is not always up to me. Employees may be able to choose from a selection of investments inside their 401(k) plan, employees can’t choose their company’s 401(k) administrator and broker without a coordinated effort among a large portion of employees. That would be nearly impossible in a large company. Unions are intended to solve some of these issues, but it can often reach the point where being a member of a large union is much like working for a large employer. The power of any individual is limited.

The 401(k) is ingenious for the financial industry, particularly now that it’s automatic. In a perfect world, every single employee is enrolled in a 401(k) plan on their first day on their first job. The investments may not perform well over time, but that’s not particularly relevant for the financial industry. As long as every American is investing a portion of their paycheck every week, two weeks, month, or other period, 401(k) administrators and brokers will continue to thrive. The employee probably benefits when retirement approaches, but that is by no means guaranteed. All you need to do is look at the portion of Americans who planned to retire in recent years but saw their nest eggs trampled on during the recession.

Investors bear the responsibility for changing their risk profile as they near their planned retirement, but there is a mixed message. The financial industry says you need to stay invested in stocks (highly volatile, highly risky) as you approach retirement because most people need their funds to last several decades throughout retirement while at the same time warning people to risk only what they can afford to lose. When people receive conflicting information, making decisions becomes more difficult. And when the conflicting information is coming from the same source — that is, the financial industry — the default reaction is the lack of trust.

Does the financial industry wants to do American citizens a favor by providing options for saving for retirement? No. The financial industry wants its companies to not only stay in business but to profit as much as possible. And to that end, it sells products — investment opportunities — designed to enrich the companies and their shareholders. There’s nothing wrong with this, because consumers will only buy products they need or desire enough. Companies will sell towards that need. And when only half of Americans have discovered retirement savings vehicles like 401(k) plans and IRAs, the industry will resign itself to doing a better job in explaining to the country why their products are needs, not wants.

Saving for retirement is important. For most people, stocks are the only investment type that can grow wealth quickly enough to provide the dream retirement so impressed upon Americans through media. It’s risky, as recent would-be retirees have seen. Thanks to the cognitive dissonance resulting in the understanding that the promotion of retirement is a result of the financial industry trying to increase profits on a large scale rather than corporate concern for the well-being of a nation and the knowledge that Americans must do something drastic to save money in order to fulfill the dream of quitting work, some Americans choose to invest while others would sooner give away their firstborn rather than drink the financial industry’s Kool-Aid.

LIMRA may be right — that most people who do not invest for retirement with 401(k) plans and IRAs have not done so because the industry’s message hasn’t successfully penetrated their consciousness. That may be due in part to a lack of education, but for others, it’s a lack of faith and trust in the industry.

Photo: zoonabar
LIMRA

{ 18 comments }

In just a short period of time, Consumerism Commentary will be entering its tenth year of existence. The site’s ninth anniversary is approaching, and I’ve been involved with the website longer than I’ve been involved with any other commitment in my life. Jobs and relationships have come and gone, but Consumerism Commentary remains.

I started the website in an effort to track my personal finances at a time when I was struggling financially, though I had already started a new path towards financial independence. Thanks to the readers early on who believed the website offered something unique, the growth of the community has been nothing short of amazing. Consumerism Commentary has changed character a little bit from those early years, when a blog was more about short, quick chronological updates and about sharing links to other interesting things found online. Last year, I solidified the website’s vision, mission, and purpose. While the owner of the site is now different, not much else has changed, and there are no plans to change anything in the near future, except for perhaps a more professional-looking logo and site design.

Thanks to all the readers who have continued to visit this website since 2003, our fans and friends on Facebook, and particularly those who continue to participate in discussions today. Thanks also to all the colleagues who have offered their advice and encouragement, and a big thanks to Jay Frosting (also known as Bryan J Busch) and Tom Dziubek who have held down the podcast fort for several years.

And if you’ve encountered any technical issues with the website recently, please continue to bear with me as the technical team continues to work out the bugs.

Last week, my article about The Rich and the Rest of Us by Dr. Cornel West and Tavis Smiley attracted the attention of the two men, and I’m working on scheduling an interview with the pair later this week. They are crusading across the country to elevate the issue of poverty and potential actions to move the United States is a better direction towards resolution. Do you have any questions for Smiley and West?

There are five types of purchases — well, more than five but these five are big — you should never put on your credit card. Every purchase you make is tracked by your credit card issuers and can be used against you if the companies decide you’re a higher risk than they originally thought. And they can change your risk profile based solely on the types of stores you visit.

The Carnival of Personal Finance hosted by Musings of an Abstract Aucklander last week included my article about Sprint’s $300 million tax fraud lawsuit.

Adrian from 7 Million 7 Years talks about how it may be hard to believe that someone in New York struggles on an income of $350,000 a year, but he understands the perspective. Andrew Schiff, who works for a brokerage firm, earns this salary but “feels stuck” according to an article in the Wall Street Journal.

Mike, the Oblivious Investor, argues that even an individual with a reduced life expectancy should wait as long as possible before collecting payments from Social Security. There are some specific circumstances in which it might be beneficial to claim Social Security benefits early, however. Mike explains within the article.

{ 13 comments }

Banks are still struggling with the decisions executives made to maximize profit from overdrafts by rearranging the order of withdrawals to customers’ detriment. By December last year, Bank of America settled a class-action lawsuit related to overdrafts and was expected to pay $410 million. That decision is being appealed by a plaintiff, so it will still be a long time before the results are determined and class members receive compensation, if any.

Earlier this year, JP Morgan Chase settled a related class action lawsuit for $110 million.

Citizens Bank is the latest bank to come to terms with the way it took advantage of customers. This bank has agreed to pay $137.5 million to settle.

For the most part, banks continue to engage in the process of reordering withdrawals processed on the same day (whether the withdrawals be through checks, electronic direct debits, or ACH transactions) to optimize the possibility of collecting multiple overdrafts. The largest withdrawal is processed first, and subsequent withdrawals are processed from largest to smallest. Banks offer a reason for this order. They claim that the largest withdrawals are often the most important, such as rent or mortgage payments, and want to ensure these payments have the strongest possibility of being processed. That explanation doesn’t hold up for customers with overdraft protection, though, because this service allows all withdrawals to be processed — for a fee.

Furthermore, banks at the time of the lawsuit often allowed for multiple overdraft fees on a single day. With a $200 bank balance and withdrawals of $20, $50 and $300 in one day, the customer could be charged three different overdraft fees of $35. This is obviously more profitable for the bank than allowing the smaller transactions to be processed ahead of the larger withdrawal. Since the media attention surrounding the lawsuit, some banks have changed their policy to allow for only one overdraft fee per day, but many banks continue this practice.

So far, the only new regulation regarding overdraft fees requires banks make the service optional. Customers can opt to have transactions declined when the funds are not available to cover the withdrawal. Banks still steer customers towards overdraft protection as they feel it is a better experience for the customer, and, of course, a significantly profitable approach for banks.

Are you a customer of Citizens Bank? Have you ever had problems with Citizens Bank’s overdraft fees and policies?

{ 9 comments }

Sprint in $300 Million Tax Fraud Lawsuit

by Flexo

In order to offer better prices to customers, Sprint has allegedly under-collected and underpaid New York State sales taxes by $100 million. If the Attorney General’s allegations are true, Sprint could end up owing the state government as much as $300 million or more due to underpayment penalties. Sprint is denying the charges, claiming they’ve ... Continue reading this article…

4 comments Read the full article →

IRS Looking For Your Offshore Bank Accounts

by Flexo

The more money you have, the more likely you are to cheat on your taxes. The rich have more opportunities to try to hide assets and income from the Internal Revenue Service, particularly through offshore bank accounts. In the United States, banks are required to report income earned by their customers on savings and investments. ... Continue reading this article…

7 comments Read the full article →

How to Be a DIYer Without Time or Talent

by Gerri Detweiler

This is a guest article by Gerri Detweiler. Gerri is the host of Talk Credit Radio and serves as Director of Consumer Education for Credit.com. She is the author or co-author of five books, including Debt Collection Answers: How to Use Debt Collection Laws to Protect Your Rights. Her next DIY project is to (finally!) ... Continue reading this article…

11 comments Read the full article →

Prenuptial Agreements for Cohabitants

by Flexo
Relationships couple

I’ve discussed whether couples should sign a prenuptial agreement before marraige recently. A good prenup can protect both individuals in the couple if a marriage were to result in irreconcilable differences. Signing a legal document of this type could be helpful if the couple owns substantial assets or if there is a wide disparity in ... Continue reading this article…

12 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1512345···Last »