Energy Marketers of America Raises Alarm Over Visa and Mastercard’s Proposed Settlement on Swipe Fees
Washington, D.C., November 10, 2025 – Today,
the Energy Marketers of America (EMA) expressed deep concern over the reported
terms of a new proposed settlement between Visa, Mastercard, and U.S. retailers,
calling it “insufficient relief in the face of years of unchecked fee
increases.” The Wall Street Journal
broke the story.
The settlement, filed today in federal court in
Brooklyn, New York, comes nearly 20 years after the original antitrust lawsuit
was launched and follows the rejection of a prior $30 billion agreement in 2024.
While it includes a modest 0.1% (10 basis point) reduction in interchange fees
for five years and new flexibility for retailers to decline high-fee rewards
cards, EMA warns the deal falls far short of delivering meaningful, long-term
relief.“
Swipe fees have exploded in recent years—reaching $111 billion
in 2024 alone—while this settlement offers only temporary, minimal relief,” said
Rob Underwood, President of Energy Marketers of America. “The devil is in the
details, and the proposed settlement raises more questions than answers. Energy
marketers cannot afford another hollow compromise.”
Key concerns include:
-
Minimal Fee Reduction: A 0.1% cut for just five years does not offset the 70% surge in swipe fees since the pandemic, leaving fuel retailers—who operate on razor-thin margins—without sustainable relief.
-
Rewards Card Loophole Risk: While retailers may decline entire categories of cards, it remains unclear whether accepting one rewards card would require accepting all—potentially allowing Visa and Mastercard to reclassify non-rewards cards with token rewards to preserve high fees.
-
Consumer and Sales Impact: With 70% of transactions involving rewards cards, refusing them could drive customers to competitors, forcing retailers into an untenable choice between profitability and customer loyalty.
EMA supports fair competition and transparency in payment processing but urges the court to demand stronger, permanent safeguards before approving any agreement.“
America’s energy marketers deserve a settlement that reflects the true cost burden they’ve endured—not one that protects network profits at the expense of Main Street businesses,” Underwood added. EMA will continue monitoring developments as the proposed settlement moves toward judicial review.