<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="/favicon.ico" />
<title>Bigger Banks Means Bigger Fees - Reclaim Democracy!</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
<link media="screen" title="default" href="/styles2.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<link media="screen" title="print" href="/stylesprint2.css" rel="alternate stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<link media="print" title="print" href="/stylesprint2.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
</head>
<body>
<!--#include virtual="/inserts/header.htm" -->
<div id="container">
  <div id="maincontent">      
	<div id="text" style="font-size:16px"> 
<h1>Bigger Banks Mean Bigger Fees</h1>
		  <div id="byline">
                  <!--#include virtual="/inserts/gizmos.htm" -->
				  <p>Published March, 29, 2001</p>
<div class="clearboth"></div> 
          </div>
        <p>Reinforcing 
              the need for limits on corporations' size in order to maintain competition, 
              the Federal Reserve again has documented that large banks (assets 
              over $1 billion) charged significantly higher fees to customers 
              than small banks (assets under $100 million), and that fees at multi-state 
              bank chains exceeded those of single-state banks.</p>
            <p>The 
              report, &quot;Retail Fees of Depository Institutions, 1994-99,&quot; 
              highlights findings from the Fed's annual survey of bank fees. Congress 
              has required the surveys since 1989, and since 1996 the data has 
              been separated by bank size and whether it was a single-or multi-state 
              institution.</p>
            <p>Among 
              the report's findings for 1999 data: the average monthly fee for 
              a non-interest checking account with a minimum balance was $5.62 
              at small banks, compared to $8.20 at large banks. Stop-payment orders 
              averaged $13.92 at small banks and $21.50 at large banks. The required 
              minimum balances were substantially higher at large banks than small 
              ones. Large banks also imposed higher and more frequent ATM surcharges. 
              The report also found higher rates at multi-state banks compared 
              to single-state operations.</p>
            <p>Why, 
              then, do large banks continue to gain market share? Largely through 
              control of ATMs. In many areas, a handful of large banks control 
              most of the ATMs, and the easiest way to avoid surcharges is to 
              open an account with one of the dominant banks. This creates a perverted 
              form of price competition whereby large banks may gain market share 
              by raising ATM access fees-another example of the vast difference 
              between a market economy and US-style corporate capitalism.</p>
            <p>Unfortunately 
              this important information has seen little exposure in corporate 
              or independent media. 2001 may be the last year of the Federal Reserve's 
              annual report unless Congress enacts an extension or permanent status 
              for these reports. As the only source of data on the consumer impact 
              of banking consolidation and deregulation (and information that 
              would be virtually impossible for any non-governmental organization 
              to compile) these reports should be continued.</p>
            <p>Tjis 
              article was based on 
              a report by New Rules Project:<a target="_blank" href="http://www.newrules.org">newrules.org.</a>
              For a visual representation of ATM systems and where all those
              fees go, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.stopatmfees.com/images/img0.gif">StopATMFees.com/images/img0.gif</a></p>
            <h2>Related News:</h2>
              <h2 class="dark">Independent Pharmacies Beat Chains on Price in New York Study</h2>
              <p>n December, 2002 <a href="http://www.nysenior.org/generic.htm" target="_blank">prescription 
              price survey</a> conducted by the New York Statewide Senior Action 
              Council in Albany, New York, concluded, &quot;The lowest prices 
              for generic drugs were found at an independent pharmacy. . . contrary 
              to the belief that chain drug stores with high volume purchases 
              would pass on the savings to customers.&quot;</p>
            <p>For example, prices for Lovastatin, a cholesterol medication, ranged 
              from $84.50 at the independent Lincoln Pharmacy to $199.97 at Rite 
              Aid. The online pharmacy Drugstore.com offered Lovastatin it for 
              $99.99, Wal-Mart for $136.62, and Target for $146.39.</p>
            <p>The Home Town Advantage 
              e-Bulletin, a free Email newsletter, is the source of much information 
              here. See <a href="http://NewRules.org" target="_blank">NewRules.org</a> 
              to view a sample or subscribe.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/inserts/sendthispage.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/inserts/footer.htm" -->
   </div></div>
      <!--#include virtual="/inserts/leftnavn.html" -->  
	</div>
</body>
</html>
