Credit Card Mandates Harm Consumers

As proposed by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), credit card mandates would overhaul the U.S. credit card system to resemble Europe’s heavy-handed financial regime and disrupt rewards for millions of households.

Proposed mandates are little more than a thinly veiled giveaway to big-box retailers at the expense of virtually everyone else. Sens. Durbin and Marshall claim that mandates would inject competition into a noncompetitive market, but Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken.

In reality, credit card mandates would allow retailers to continue accepting name-brand credit cards while processing payments through lesser-known networks—all without consumer knowledge or consent.

The central premise of proposed “reforms”—that the credit card market lacks competition—is unfounded. More than 150 companies in the United States issue credit cards. Between 2020 and 2025, market entry has grown at an average annual rate of 8.1 percent. This kind of steady growth does not indicate a broken market, but rather a dynamic and competitive system that continues to serve consumers well.

Credit card mandates would jeopardize that progress. Fraud rates, already on the rise, would skyrocket. Unvetted payment processors would be handed vast troves of sensitive consumer data. The only beneficiaries of using these cheaper alternatives are the retailers, who lack a vested interest in cardholder safety. Meanwhile, smaller institutions—including community banks and credit unions—would see revenue streams dry up.

Imposing heavy-handed regulations on the credit card system would make life more difficult for millions of Americans.