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

Search: low-income


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 }

There is a perception among many families that private elementary and high schools are worth the costs of tuition even though public school is comparatively free to attend (not including taxes and bake sales). That’s a debate that will never end. Parents, who always want what’s best for their children, will take advantage of every opportunity possible to provide them with an advantage.

Similar to higher education, private grade schools and high schools make financial aid available for certain students whose families may not be able to pay the full tuition. An increasing number of families are applying for financial aid at private schools, and I was surprised to read that families with incomes as high as $350,000 a year were asking for help paying for their child’s tuition. In fact, when the financial aid is awarded, it’s going mostly to these high-income families rather than low-income families who truly need financial assistance. As schools dedicate more financial aid to their wealthier students, less is available for families who are on the lower end of the income scale.

This type of financial aid is more like a grant than a loan. Families who qualify for financial aid from private schools, for the most part, do not need to pay back what they receive.

  • If a family can pay half of the tuition bill while requiring the rest from financial aid, that family stands a greater chance of receiving what they need. Meanwhile, families who could afford to pay only a small portion of the cost of tuition will not receive the financial help needed to bridge the larger gap.
  • When the family a student who has previously attended a private schools loses liquid assets as a result of the recession, schools would like to see that student stay in the program.

The financial advantages one has in life, while mostly earned, not inherited, beget more financial advantages. The school-based grant type of financial aid is focused on those who can afford to contribute a significant portion of the tuition, while lower-income private school attendees need to increasingly turn to loans. The need for financing changes the calculation of whether private school is worthwhile.

Does your family receive financial aid for private school? Should school-based grants be offered to more low-income students? Should those who can’t afford private school be satisfied with the public school system?

CNN

{ 8 comments }

Just when you thought it was safe, Bank of America and other large, national banks, are still finding ways to charge customers new fees. Only a few months ago, word of a new $5 monthly fee for debit card users sent Bank of America customers into a frenzy, threatening to move money away from the financial giant. Bank Transfer Day was largely a success, despite the complicated process of switching banks in today’s automated banking environment.

Hundreds of thousands of customers enrolled in credit unions, smaller organizations that are generally more consumer- and community-friendly than national institutions. Fees like Bank of America’s $5 debit card fee hit mainstream news outlets, bringing personal finance into the consciousness of the public once again. Bank of America eventually dropped its proposal for the new fee, but the bank didn’t stop looking for more methods of extracting funds out of its customers.

Bank of AmericaFor the last generation, customers have grown accustomed to free or mostly-free checking and savings. These are considered deposit accounts. Depositing your money with a bank is more beneficial for the bank than for the customer. Doing business with a bank does the company a favor. The institutions should be paying customers for the banks’ benefit of holding the customers’ money. Sometimes banks do pay consumers, through interest on savings accounts, which as most people know have been at pathetic rates for the last few years.

With money on deposit, banks can go out and offer loans to businesses and individuals, earning money on the interest charged on those loans. That’s where banks should make money from their customers. Savings and checking customers are doing banks a favor.

Lately, the problem has been that banks aren’t making as much money from lending as they had previously, and shareholders demand consistently growing profits. That pressure results in even more fees. And banks are now counting on the fact that last year’s outrage has subsided, and the public is now willing to live with the idea that basic banking is not free. Additionally, it’s fair to say that the cost for a bank to manage checking and savings accounts may have increased, due to research and development into technology to provide all the banking conveniences (online access, mobile apps, person-to-person payments, etc.) that consumers have come to expect, although one could argue the lowered reliance on tellers and live customer services representatives should offset that cost.

Furthermore, the latest round of fees are designed to hurt lower income households more than those with higher net worth amounts. It’s been true in investing for a while that the better rates and lower fees are available to those with higher balances. This is due to the attempt to convince customers to invest as much money as possible with any one particular institution or brokerage. The same is true with fees; the more money you have, the more leverage you have to demand lower costs for the services you buy.

This leaves low-income families in a tough spot. If you can’t maintain a minimum balance in your checking account, a monthly fee will reduce that low balance even further, possibly even below zero, so you end up owing money to the bank or the bank decides to close your account. While the balance minimums encourage customers to leave more of their money with one institution, not all customers have more money to deposit.

Here are a few recent examples of how the latest round of new fees from big banks penalize those without the means to deposit more.

  • Some Wells Fargo customers have been subject to a new $15 monthly fee if unable to maintain a $7,500 balance. And they’ve recently changed policies to prevent customers from suing the bank or being part of a class-action lawsuit.
  • Citibank increased its minimum balance to avoid a $20 monthly fee from $6,000 to $15,000.
  • Bank of America is testing new monthly fees of $6 to $25 in three states (Arizona, Georgia and Massachusetts).

At the same time, an informal poll of fans of Consumerism Commentary on Facebook and followers on Twitter indicates most engaged Consumerism Commentary readers, who generally earn more than the average internet user according to basic demographic research, pay nothing for their checking account, though some are still subject to a minimum balance or enrolling in direct deposit to avoid a fee. Finding free checking is still possible, especially with credit unions, but non-students still need to occasionally jump through hoops with major banks.

New regulations are often cited by the financial industry as the trigger for punishing low-income customers for handing their money to banks for safekeeping and lending. Others see these new fees as a way for banks to increase profits while using regulation as a convenient scapegoat. Of course, opinions on the matter are generally divided along political party lines as well as between industry lobbyists and consumer advocacy groups.

Low-income families might continue to avoid the banking industry, which may be the unstated goal of financial institutions in the first place. Unfortunately, that leaves little choice for low socio-economic status communities other than turning to non-bank financial products, like expensive payday loans and check cashing services. Not only do these communities need better financial role models (education alone will never solve the financial literacy problem), but they need to be guided toward better products and services.

There’s a real market opportunity for better products and services, for smart entrepreneurs who are looking to make a difference. In the mean time, here’s how to close your Bank of America savings or checking account when walking into the branch won’t work for you.

Photo: MoneyBlogNewz
KVAL / AP

{ 9 comments }

After Wells Fargo, Chase Bank, SunTrust Bank, and Regions Bank dropped their plans for debit card fees yesterday, the largest bank in the United States, the only bank holding onto its policy of eliminating unprofitable customers by annoying them with inconvenient fees, dropped their own plans to enact a $5 monthly debit card fee in 2012.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that thanks to customer backlash and likely due to a public relations nightmare, the bank is reversing its policy. It’s a smart move, but is it too late? Bank of America has done a great job burning an imagine in customers’ minds of a bank that is willing to sacrifice its customers — not to recover from a potential loss, but to recover from a lower profit due to regulators’ new rules against excessive interchange fees. Corporations are expected to look for profit under every rock, but this particular type of fee hurts low-income customers much more than high-income customers. You would have been able to avoid the potential fee by having a significant balance of deposits held at the bank, much more than the typical customer might hold.

On Twitter, Michael Kitces from kitces.com said in response to my comment about the fee cancellation, “I think people that BoA didn’t want as customers still got the message loud & clear, even if BoA drops the fee now.” Kyle from Amateur Asset Allocator responded, “Doesn’t affect my attitude one way or another. If I were affected, I’d probably just go to cash-only instead of using the debit card.”

This doesn’t affect plans for Bank Transfer Day. This fee could have been the wake-up call consumers needed to gain the extra motivation to move to a credit union. As we’ve seen with the interchange fee regulation, a window of potential profit closed in one area leads to another window opening somewhere else. Bank of America and the other banks who dropped plans for a debit card fee will find a way to earn their profits, and the next fee may not be nearly as transparent and well-marketed as the debit card fee.

Keep an eye on those bank statements.

Wall Street Journal

{ 22 comments }

Do Millionaires Pay Less Tax Than Their Secretaries?

by Flexo

Warren Buffett has frequently claimed that he pays less tax as a percentage of his income that his secretary. President Obama has jumped on this as a basis for the Buffett Rule, a new proposed tax code that ensures that millionaires pay their fair share of income tax. According to Buffett, his effective tax rate ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →

The Buffett Rule: Tax for Millionaires

by Flexo
Warren Buffett

As a continuation of President Obama’s jobs proposal (economic stimulus) for curbing spending and increasing federal government revenue, the administration is taking a cue from famous investor, Warren Buffett. On many occasions, Buffett has claimed that wealthy Americans do not pay a fair share of the tax burden relative to their means to do so. ... Continue reading this article…

38 comments Read the full article →

Save Money By Not Having Children

by Flexo

I don’t have children; perhaps I will at some point, but I don’t see kids in my immediate future. It’s not due to the cost of raising children, though for many years, I believed I wasn’t in a financial position to provide all that I would want to provide to a child growing up. A ... Continue reading this article…

36 comments Read the full article →

Low Income Families Paid More for College While Everyone Else Paid Less

by Flexo
College Graduate

Sallie Mae and Ipsos Public Affairs, a research company, shared some good news for college students and their families. In the latest research results, gleaned from a representative sample of 1,600 undergraduates and their families, the total amount paid for a year in college has decreased. With tuition costs increasing every year faster than the ... Continue reading this article…

7 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 3123