NEW YORK — Credit card-related fees and refunds returned to public attention this month after court rulings, regulatory changes and a major payment-industry settlement highlighted the scale of charges paid by consumers and merchants, with some outcomes exceeding expectations outlined in earlier policy proposals.
A U.S. federal judge on June 9 granted preliminary approval to a revised $38 billion settlement involving Visa and Mastercard and millions of merchants who accused the card networks of charging excessive payment-processing fees, commonly known as swipe fees. The settlement, one of the largest antitrust agreements in U.S. history, could provide merchants with relief through lower fees and greater flexibility in card acceptance policies, according to court filings and Reuters.
The case stems from litigation that began in 2005 and covers more than 12 million merchants. Judge Brian Cogan of the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn said the proposed settlement was “fair, reasonable, and adequate,” while noting that final approval remains pending. Merchants have argued for years that processing fees raised costs for businesses and, ultimately, consumers.
The settlement comes amid broader scrutiny of fees associated with credit card use. In 2025, a federal court struck down a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule that would have capped many credit card late fees at $8. The CFPB and banking industry groups jointly sought to vacate the rule, arguing it conflicted with provisions of the Credit Card Accountability and Disclosure Act, according to court records and Reuters reporting.
As a result, consumers continue to face higher late-payment penalties under existing regulations. Industry guidance for 2026 indicates that safe-harbor late fees can exceed $30 for an initial violation and rise further for repeat violations, subject to federal disclosure requirements.
Consumer advocates have argued that fees associated with credit cards remain difficult for many households to anticipate. Banking groups, meanwhile, have maintained that penalty fees help cover operational costs and encourage timely payments. The American Bankers Association and other industry organizations previously challenged the CFPB rule in court, saying fee limits could shift costs to consumers who pay bills on time.
Attention has also focused on so-called “junk fees,” a category that includes charges not always prominently disclosed during purchases. Federal and state regulators have continued enforcement efforts aimed at improving fee transparency across multiple industries, according to legal and regulatory reviews published this year.
As of Wednesday, the Visa-Mastercard settlement remained subject to further court proceedings, while federal regulators continued overseeing credit card fee practices. Industry participants and consumer groups said they would monitor how the legal and regulatory developments affect merchants and cardholders in the months ahead.
