Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aardwolf | Hacker News Reader

> you, reader, use credit cards in preference to debit cards as a payment instrument

Reader from Europe here. I use debit cards for daily payments, that's just the most standard expected payment method in Europe (with mobile payments now replacing it. Is a mobile payment app more like a debit or like a credit card? I have no idea actually!).

But credit cards for online payments on the internet because (despite some debit card based systems existing which don't seem to work by default) on the internet credit cards seems to be the main supported payment method, including e.g. through Paypal, but also for local online shops, airlines, ...

So in the US credit card vs debit card is probably an important distinction between buying on actual credit or not and all the fun stuff they have there like credit ratings, but in Europe the main distinction seems to simply be which one works for online purchases or not. Of course some reward programs for credit cards do exist here, I think American Express specifically has some benefits to the user but isn't accepted everywhere (Heard from other users, don't have this one myself. I'm not really into rewards programs myself, why not just make the stuff you buy cheaper instead?). Also, visa and mastercard seem to have no practical difference and some banks just give both.

If this view is naive or incomplete, it probably just shows credit cards are indeed not as important in Europe, if they gave some huge benefit I'd have known!

Edit: I don't mean to say credit and debt collection doesn't exist in Europe. All the stuff like payday loans, car loans and buying on credit from some stores exists.

View on HN

There is zero chance that I, a US resident, will ever use debit cards for anything. The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge (which still happens surprisingly often, given that chips were supposed to put an end to that):

- With a debit card, I am out $X of my own money, until the bank can be bothered to agree that the charge is fraudulent and refund my money, which can take weeks or months, if at all. Good luck paying rent or buying food or whatnot in the meantime if you don't have a nice savings cushion.

- With a credit card, I am out $0 of my own money, and now the bank is potentially out $X of THEIR own money, making them significantly more motivated to investigate promptly and agree that the charge is fraudulent. For however long this takes, I still have my own money to pay rent and buy food, and I'm not on the hook for paying the fraudulent charge.

The fact that credit cards tend to have "rewards" in the form of cash back or airline miles or whatever is secondary to me, personally, although I do take advantage of this as much as possible.

Yeah, I don't use rewards or loyalty programs at all; I don't like giving over the headspace to corporate manipulators. But I still use debit cards very carefully because of the better protections from fraud for credit transactions.

The rise of the chip card may have fixed that; it's been a long time since I've had a problem. But I'm reluctant to find out.

I will say, it seems better than it used to be in the pre-chip days, but I've had to replace my primary CC once already this year due to an obviously fraudulent charge. To the credit of my bank, it was virtually painless - I had a new card in under 24 hours, and I didn't have to think about the $2000+ charge at all until they confirmed (two months later!) that it was in fact fraud.

Agreed. Using flat 1.5% cashback cards with autopay + setting the cashback balance to auto apply to each statement is the convenience compromise I have found

Same. I have a debit card that I literally only ever use to take money out of a secure bank ATM (the ones attached to actual branches), or ID myself at the bank teller.

Every single thing I'm actually paying for goes on one a handful of cards.

There is zero chance that I, a US resident, will ever use debit cards for anything.

Does being a US resident have any meaning here? I mean, does the rest of the world not secure credit card payments, or does the rest of the world secure debit card payments like the US secures credit card payment?

I assume the rest of the world is less stupid/greedy than the US here, but honestly I have no idea how this works elsewhere - that's the reason for the "US resident" clarification.

People are equally stupid/greedy around the world. Different countries have different laws though, and that makes a major difference.

There are things which come with being the richest country and a really populous one - you're targeted by all kinds of scammers who view you as the best target. Similar to how startups try to serve the U.S. market since it's 300 million relatively wealthy people. You could start your startup in Germany, but is the market there for what you're doing? Scammers use the same logic.

In the US if your credit card number is compromised you are legally out at most $50 (I haven't checked in 20 years so this may have changed, my comment is at least partially historical). In almost all cases the bank will just wave that $50 as they are already paying the rest. If your debit card is compromised the money comes from your account and legally they don't have to return it to you, instead you need to figure out who defrauded you and collect (my info is 20 years out of date so this is almost certainly wrong), though in practice the banks will probably return your money and collect on your behalf but this takes a month.

Note that the above is about the number, which is not secure in any situation. You don't need to have someones credit card, you just need to know the numbers. If you compromise an insecure website and get these details (bank rules don't allow storing the numbers, but if the website doesn't follow the rules). You can also take a picture of a card as someone is scanning it.

Europe went to the chip and pin system, plus a system where they bring cards readers to each table because they did not have the above protection for credit cards. Thus in Europe you would be a fool to let your waiter take your credit card to a backroom to pay for a meal because the waiter can then copy the numbers and/or the magstripe, and then use your credit card after returning the physical one to you (again, this is 20 years out of date, laws have changed but I don't know how!). Since the US has (20 years ago) better consumer protection laws around credit cards, people didn't care that chip+pin was more secure as practically it didn't make any difference, and for a while banks figured it wasn't worth caring. Once banks started caring everyone switched to the chip in the US - but we mostly don't use a PIN as the annoyance of needing to remember a PIN isn't worth putting on consumers here. (also Europe has made the portable terminals cheap so you find a lot of portable terminals here as well so cards are less likely to leave the owners hands thus making the PIN less important)

In EU law all payments get pretty much the same protections as USA credit card payments, even for debit cards the customer is legally out at most 50 EUR, so there is no advantage in it being a credit card.

The motivation of Chip&PIN in EU is driven by the fact that banks are forced to cover most of the fraud costs (as opposed to USA, where much of stolen card fraud is forced upon merchants), so they have a motivation to actually prevent it; and the inconvenience of PIN is mitigated by highly prevalent contactless (and PIN-less) chip payments for small transactions.

Yes, the residence matters - in USA (and some other countries, I think at least UK as well) there are major legal differences between debit cards and credit cards with respect what the consumer rights and practical protections are for them, and in other countries (like in EU payment laws) debit card payments get all the same or almost the protections as credit card payments.

> The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge

Not sure if a fraudulent charge of a debit card is a thing I ever heard of in Europe. These cards have also been using chips for over 20 years. Maybe they work differently here.

To me credit cards sound less secure than debit cards: debit cards have chips and pin codes. With credit cards, knowing the number is in theory enough (they have digital verification now too though). Also, with debit cards, you put it in the payment terminal yourself.

With credit cards, in the US I've had the waiters in restaurants taking your credit card from your table, walking to somewhere else with it, and giving it back to you later. I had never seen that before (In Europe, they carry a portable payment thingie in which you can put/tap credit or debit cards to the table). How is that more secure? They could easily copy the number there.

That credit cards don't have PIN codes has nothing to do with them being credit cards vs debit cards, it's just a choice by the industry to not institute them.

It is less that cards don't have PINs for the chip, but that they still have magnetic stripes. It is still possible to skim the card info. I assume that there is mandate to update equipment but I still see registers with swipe. Issuers can distribute cards without magstripe in 2027. But they keep pushing the date out.

IIRC with most credit card purchases in the US, if the retailer only takes magnetic strips, they're liable themselves; if the issuing bank doesn't offer EMV cards, then they're liable; after that is the credit card company I believe, who has an option to put up to $50 liability on the owner (though they rarely do).

In the US, fraudulent charges are rampant. The default expectation is that a card eventually has fraudulent charges.

A slightly different but similar issue is paying for services in advance but never rendered. When that happens on a credit card I just inform the card issuer and they handle it.

Generally I've seen this happen when you've contracted to do business in some form and the other side reneges on it in some way. Like you ordered something online and it never ships.

We were going to get a large water purifier from Costco. On the order of $6000. We paid, but we had 3 days to cancel. We found it for significantly cheaper the next day and cancelled. 3 months later Costco still hadn't reversed the charge, so we challenged it with the credit card company. Fixed in 24 hours.

Also, it's worth pointing out that when you challenge something successfully, it's effectively like it never happened. Interest gets rolled back and you can call to have late payments associated with that time period striken from your credit report.

On the flip side, I would never use a debit card. I've been told "your pin was used so it must have been you" when contesting small things there. Credit card have chips and some banks allow you to use pins.

The U.S. has legislation limiting consumer liability of credit card fraud to $50, and many cards will further waive that to $0. It's just simply not the consumer's problem if someone copies their credit card number and uses it for fraud. They just have to call the bank to report the fraud, and then the bank will cancel the old card, issue a new one, and then it's the bank's problem on how to get the money back.

Chips don't make the cards more secure. They just shift liability back to the consumer making it cheaper for credit card companies.

If someone steals your card and can guess your pin, then you're out of luck in filing any claim because obviously you disclosed your pin.

If I use a credit card, I pay up to 20% on the outstanding amount. If I use my debit card, I get interest on the money that I don't spend. I also cannot spend more than what is in my account. If there is a charge I disagree with, I can easily reverse it without any cost. And I have never met anyone who had a fraudulent charge (without being dumb). To me, I cannot understand why anyone would use a credit card unless debit isn't accepted. I use that card maybe once a year for paying toll on the highway.

> If I use a credit card, I pay up to 20% on the outstanding amount.

Key is never having outstanding debt. Pay your credit card balance in full. Most people with credit cards do this. I have never met anyone who paid any interest on their credit card because everyone I know pays it in full each month.

> And I have never met anyone who had a fraudulent charge (without being dumb).

And? The point is if it happens, you are far safer with a credit card than a debit card. Once the money is gone from the credit card, it's the credit card companies problem. Once the money is gone from your debit, it's your problem.

> To me, I cannot understand why anyone would use a credit card unless debit isn't accepted.

Because credit card is more secure. As the OP already told you.

As long as you have financial discipline, using a credit card is smarter than using a debit. It's a simple concept.

Paying your credit card off fully every month ensures you don’t pay any interest (use it like a debit card). Wrt the earning interest point, consider that with a credit card you still get interest on the money you don’t spend, and you can also collect interest on the money you do spend (eg I buy something for $100 on the 15th, I can collect interest on the $100 until I have to actually pay the bill on the 1st of next month). Not to mention that you also pay 1-1.5% less for everything you use a card for due to cashback schemes. I definitely see why it might seem weird the way Americans use credit cards but it is mostly rational.

Yup. For a responsible user there simply is no downside to using a credit card in most situations.

In the US, the terms of service are much better for credit cards than debit cards, so even folks who pay off their cards every month (for example, airline miles cardholders) prefer credit cards because of superior ToS.

The terms on credit cards are expensive for issuers, so debit cards were introduced with terms more favorable to issuers. Even if they improved the terms, consumers would still be hesitant to use them because US debit cards' reputation is tainted.

Europe has much stronger consumer protections, so I can only assume EU debit cards dont share the disadvantages of US debit cards.

[Edited for balance and clarity, thanks]

  It’s so severe that even if they improved the terms, nobody would use them because US debit cards' reputation is tainted.

Say what now?

  “According to the 2019 Federal Reserve Payments Study1, “Debit cards, including both prepaid and non-prepaid, were used almost twice as often as credit cards in 2018, but the value of credit card payments exceeded the value of debit card payments by almost 30%.”

And

  In Visa’s Operational Performance Data4 report for the three months ending on Dec. 31, 2020, it reports $741 billion in U.S. debit transaction volume, a 17.4% increase over the previous year. It compares to $542 billion in credit card volume.

(Source: https://www.creditcards.com/statistics/debit-card-statistics...)

Debit cards in the US are widely used.

You need moderately good credit to get a credit card.

You only need a bank account to get a debit card. The bar is much lower.

And if you're including prepaid cards, those are handed out like candy for promotional purposes, as gifts, etc.

The difference I see is that in Europe, at least where I live, at the end of the month the bank will charge your bank account with the full amount of whatever is the balance of your credit card.

If you have no money you will go into overdraft and that’s about it, you basically have a problem and the bank will keep nagging about that overdraft if you don’t have an agreement.

The goal is to use the “credit” of the credit card for 30 days as a convenience. The implicit expectation is that it will be paid in full at the end of the month.

In countries like US and South America (e.g.) many people see credit card as free money (that they don’t have), so when the end of the month comes they simply don’t have the money to pay the balance or pay very little of it. The consequence is what we all know: high interest on the balance which keeps snowballing.

I know in south america banks even have interface for payment in instalments etc. Here in Europe, at least my bank they don’t have have such feature, I guess it’s just not meant to be used and abused they way it happens in other places.

This is my view at least.

That definitely also happens in UK, financial illiteracy and poverty/desperation exists everywhere I suppose.

In US financial jargon, a card that expects payment in full every month is a "charge card".

https://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit-cards/is-a-charge-ca...

Gotta love when you’re eating at a restaurant in Chile and when it’s time to pay they ask if you want it billed on your card in 6 monthly installments. Even as an American, it always makes me laugh a bit at the absurdity of doing that for your meals.

Swedish credit cards work with invoices and you are able to pay in partial payments, overdraft doesn't exist

Overdraft was a thing back when balance wasn’t checked online.

What you are talking about is a Charge card, but in Europe you can get a Revolving credit[1] card as well but I would say they are not as common as in US.

On the Charge "credit" card you don't pay interest unless you go into overdraft at the end of the payment day for the month.

With the revolving credit you pay the balance on your own terms but you pay the interest rate for it until closed.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/revolvingcredit.asp

[In the UK] despite the verbiage on most sites still saying "credit card", I've been using ordinary debit cards (from both Visa and MC) online for as long as I've shopped online, and never had a single issue related to them being debit. For many years I didn't even have a credit card

Edit: it's possible that this is an issue of semantics. My cards have been debit cards in every sense of the term - they are labelled as such, are linked to a specific current account, and debit it immediately - but I don't think any of mine have actually said Visa/Mastercard Debit. So strictly speaking they may be implemented as a sort of instant-clearing credit card - essentially shimming debit onto credit infra. I don't know a whole lot about the finance industry or its tech, so if anyone can chip in please do

Edit 2: Ah, my current one does have "debit" in the MC hologram on the back

I'm in the UK and my debit card literally says "VISA debit" in the lower right corner (with "debit" in much smaller text).

In any case, there are a couple of important semantic differences between a debit card vs a credit card that you pay off immediately:

* you automatically get insurance/protection for certain purchases in a credit card (so I read, I've never used it)

* It's much worse if someone steals your debit card details and starts making purchases than it is for a credit card, because it's linked to your current account that you use for other stuff. If your credit card gets deactivated for a while then it's no big deal really.

> ...because it's linked to your current account that you use for other stuff.

I solve this by having separate accounts for the debit cards that get manually populated with some money every now and again.

I also have a separate account to pay "Bills that will make me homeless if I don't pay them", so no matter what happens with my debit cards (and no matter how long it takes the bank-issued checks (some of my creditors still refuse to do electronic transfers, I have no idea why) to be cashed), I know those pending payments are accounted for and will not bounce.

The "automatic insurance" thing is called section 75 protection. Legally it's more limited than you might think - it only applies to purchases over £100 and under £30000 for example and I think there's a lack of clarity if eg PayPal purchases are covered or not even within those limits.

However, the debit card industry (as do some other oddities like Amex charge cards) largely voluntarily offer very similar protection to section 75 on debit card purchases and the credit card industry largely voluntarily offer the same protection on purchases under £100.

I'm also based in the UK and, in my experience, debit cards actually tend to be slightly more widely accepted than credit cards, even online.

But by and large, if a website accepts Visa or Mastercard, it doesn't tend to matter if it's a debit or credit card.

> But by and large, if a website accepts Visa or Mastercard, it doesn't tend to matter if it's a debit or credit card.

One large exclusion here is for gambling sites. Gambling using credit card sourced money was banned in 2020: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/gambling-...

Back in the day, UK debit cards were issued on distinct networks from credit cards - eg: Switch, Solo, and Maestro. Those cards weren't necessarily accepted in all the same places as credit cards, particularly internationally.

But over the past 10 years or so, those debit card networks have been phased out in the UK and almost universally replaced with Visa and Mastercard debit cards. As far as acceptance goes, these are pretty much 100% identical to using credit cards on those same networks.

I think it's just inexact US terminology that has become global through the internet because they (IMO rightly) mostly use credit cards for normal purchases. My browser says it saves 'credit cards' - in reality it saves both credit and debit.

> Is a mobile payment app more like a debit or like a credit card?

My understanding is that the mobile payment app is just a medium for a virtual debit or credit card

> on the internet credit cards seems to be the main supported payment method

Over many years, I've never had any issue paying with debit cards on the internet, except _once_ to rent a bike on a taiwanese website (bc they do a credit card hold).

This probably depends a bit on which part of Europe. In the UK the consumer protection law surrounding credit cards is stronger so it's better to use a credit card for larger purchases especially.

For daily payments shops all accept both credit and debit and there's no difference to the consumer whether they happen to tap a credit or debit card.

My Finnish debit and credit cards are equally accepted everywhere. I normally pay with Apple Pay, also sometimes chip & pin, and of course online.

For all purposes, they are the same. In fact, they are bundled in the same physical card. The only difference is that one debits my account immediately (usually, unless the point of sale is not networked), and the other collects debt I usually pay off at the end of the next month.

I've never had any special rewards or cash back programs associated with my cards. There is some kind of travel insurance bundled with my Visa Credit cards, but that's kind of worthless for me as I usually have other insurance in place already.

Not sure if this is different in Europe (check before saying it’s different, many people in the US aren’t aware of this either) but in the US at least all credit card transactions (and possibly debit too?) incur like a 3% fee. You’re paying that fee (either directly or through it being built into the price of goods) no matter what. The reason to use a card with a good rewards program is so that you actually get something in return for that small fee. So there is a sense in which you need to play the rewards game, otherwise you’re just paying more for goods for no reason.

It’s a bit more insidious than that in that in a lot of stores and restaurants in America owners just bake that fee into the price instead of explicitly passing it onto the consumer and giving them the choice on whether they want to pay it. So if you use a debit card in the states you are usually actually subsidizing everyone else’s 3% fees (there are in fact places that explicitly charge the 3% fee to credit card users but they are rarer in comparison)

That fee is massive business for Visa etc. There was a pretty big battle between Walmart and the credit card companies a few years ago because Walmart started defaulting to “debit” as the option when you stuck a debit card into their machines (debit cards can be run as either debit or credit) in order to save money. Which of course removed that money directly from the pockets of the payment processors.

a lot of stores and restaurants in America owners just bake that fee into the price instead of explicitly passing it onto the consumer

Not really. Most businesses don't set prices based on "cost plus" methodology. Maximizing profit based on price and volume is how most do it. Some merchants may choose to absorb the 3%, to compete on price and maximize profit through higher volume than a competitor who charges the same price but doesn't accept credit cards.

You "always pay the 3% fee" the same way you "always pay" for anything else the merchant may offer but you don't use: curbside pick-up, free delivery, the "free gift with purchase" you don't accept because you don't need it, generous returns policy, etc, etc.

For a long time the merchant agreement for accepting credit cards required that you not charge a different price so merchants where forced to bake the price in.

Though the costs of cash and checks is probably more than the 3% fee on a credit card. Cash needs to be counted twice at the register, then change made which again is counted twice (at least, sometimes a 3rd time if the numbers are not the same!), then at the end of the day the manager needs to count it all twice again, and even then mistakes are made. On top of that is often stolen: by robbery, dishonest clerks, management fraud, and owner fraud (owners are defrauding the IRS, while management implies someone not the owner who is trusted to count the cash). Checks need to be counted as well, and they can bounce thus being worth very little (they are sold to collections - see article for hints to how that works). Credit cards by contrast are run electronically and so know instantly you are paid you don't have the overhead of adding up the numbers. (debit cards with the lower fees are still subsidizing the others)

Interchange fees are a feature of all major card platforms (Visa, Mastercard, Amex, etc), however the fees have been regulated and limited in Europe, with credit card interchange fee being capped at 0.3% and the total merchant cost for cards generally being <1%. But, of course, that also means that there really isn't free money for any meaningful "rewards game" for EU cards.

Are debit cards really not accepted online? I thought that save for some very specific applications, all Visa or MasterCard branded cards should work online. Never got a Visa refused, and it's a Visa Debit. I know that some places like Germany informally refer to any Visa or Mastercard as a "credit card", in contrast to true(?) debit systems such as Maestro or V-Pay. So if a place says "No credit cards", it means that Visa and Mastercard cards of any kind are not accepted.

It differs by banks and countries, but e.g. my Dutch debit card only has an IBAN number on it, so anything set up to accept credit card numbers won't accept it.

Almost every online web shop here will accept debit cards, but it's through a Dutch specific payment mechanism (iDEAL).

That's because in the Netherlands most banks used Maestro (owned by Mastercard) and Vpay (owned by Visa) as international debit circuit. The acceptance for Maestro and Vpay online is much lower than "normal" Mastercard Debit and Visa Debit. Acceptance for Mastercard Debit and Visa Debit is practically the same online as Mastercard Credit and Visa Credit.

Maestro is being sunset by Mastercard and no new card can be issued. Only Mastercard Debit. So the problem with the fact that Dutch debit cards (Maestro) are not accepted online will be solved in a couple of years.

Europe is huge, so it would help to be more specific.

In the UK, credit card use is widespread even for in person purchases. By legislation it provides extra protection, for example by Section 75 (https://www.experian.co.uk/consumer/credit-cards/guides/sect...)

The one case I'm aware of in Europe where debit vs. credit makes a real difference is car rental companies.

They will only accept credit cards, not debit cards. Unless you also agree to pay for their shady and useless insurance (useless because typically the broker already offers better and cheaper insurance, so in this case you double pay).

Required watching for you Europeans, by a man who became an expert on payment fraud (by mostly making up his background but then legitimately becoming famous and an expert LOL)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ga-M2CpRgY

In my experience (in France) everybody I know uses debit card and they are all accepted online anywhere.

In my experience (~31yrs US, ~2yrs Germany):

USA: debit cards and credit cards are both offered through banks. They operate on the same payment infrastructure (Visa, Mastercard, etc). They are all equally accepted. The only difference between them from a consumer standpoint is that a debit card immediately withdraws the money from your account and typically requires a PIN for purchases, whereas a credit card operates on credit -- ie you acquire debt when you make purchases but your bank account balance stays the same -- and usually requires just a signature, and not even always that. On a credit card, you have a (very high) interest rate, but only on balances that are carried over past the end of the month: if you pay off the entire statement balance by the due date, there's no interest. More concretely: an August statement contains all transactions for August, but you receive it during mid-September, with a due date by the end of September. So by the time you've paid your August credit, you've made more purchases, and the total balance is higher than the statement balance. You only get charged interest on the August debt that is left over after the due date; September debt continues on in limbo until its statement due date. Payment processors make money per transaction, banks make money by the ridiculously high (~20%) interest rates they charge when people don't actually pay off the statement. Both credit cards and debit cards are ubiquitous; you get a debit card any time you open a checking account, and almost everyone has a credit card (77%, and the average person has 3+ cards [1]). You do not need a savings/checking account to have a credit card account at a bank. Credit card debt is extremely widespread, currently over $1 trillion USD for the country as a whole. If a merchant says "No credit cards allowed", they may still accept debit cards, even though they operate on the same payment infrastructure.

Germany: the terms "debit card" (typically "Girokarte" or "EC Karte"; I've literally never heard someone outside of a finance context say "Debitkarte") and "credit card" ("Kreditkarte") are used almost exclusively to describe the payment infrastructure, and only the payment infrastructure. Girokarten operate on a completely different payment infrastructure and are accepted at most in-person merchants and government buildings. Meanwhile "Kreditkarte" is, at least in everyday language, only used to describe the payment infrastructure, and are not always accepted at in-person merchants, and only rarely at government buildings. If a government agency (or shop) says "No payment with Kredikarte is possible", they mean no payment with Visa/Mastercard/etc is possible. Whether it operates as an instant-debit or a revolving-credit basis is completely irrelevant. A Kreditkarte is always through Visa, Mastercard, etc, but a Girokarte never is. That's the primary difference here. Meanwhile, Kreditkarten that actually extend you credit are vanishingly rare in Germany; as a US citizen [2], I haven't even tried to find one, so I can't speak to the internal mechanics of actually having one. But I can say that the vast majority of people I've talked to here simply don't understand what the difference is in the US (I think this is compounded by the language barrier, because like many English -> German loanwords, "Kreditkarte" doesn't mean the same thing as its English root).

[1] https://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit-cards/credit-card-ow... [2] The US places large reporting requirements on foreign banks offering services to US citizens, making it very difficult to open accounts. Many foreign banks simply refuse to do business with US citizens. As with taxes, there are no exceptions for non-residents ("expats"). In some destination countries it can pose a significant burden to new immigrants.

Living since 2004 in Germany, Kreditkarte is definitly a known term and people known the difference.

I guess the biggest difference from US is that you need to earn the Kreditkarte, not everyone gets to own one if the bank account isn't that inspiring, and even after getting one, the limits depend on how healthy the bank account tends to be on average.

To be clear, people know the difference between Kreditkarte and Girokarte. Also, some nuance here: using the terms "Karte" and "Kreditkarte" interchangeably isn't the same thing as "people don't know the difference". I'm not making a statement about whether or not people understand the difference between direct debit and revolving credit as concepts. I'm making a statement on the language that is used to describe them, which is IMO a pretty strong indicator of how fundamentally different the attitudes towards card payment are in the two countries.

These things can and do vary regionally, but at least here (working class Berlin area), "Kreditkarte" or simply "Karte" is colloquially used for all plastic cards that are not Girokarten, when discussing in German (I'm a near-native speaker), regardless of whether or not it's revolving credit or direct debit. This could certainly be regional, but at least here, this includes in government buildings: "Keine Kreditzahlung möglich" (no payment with credit card possible) is used semi-interchangeably with "Keine Kartenzahlung möglich" (no payment with card possible -- note no explicit "credit"), and it means that they don't have any payment terminals that work with visa/mastercard payment processing, regardless of whether it's based on revolving credit or direct debit. Note that "Keine Kartenzahlung möglich" may also mean that Girokarten cannot be used, or it may say something like "Kartenzahlung nur eingeschränkt möglich" (card payment only limitedly possible). This can vary even from merchant to merchant and based on context: a grocery store that usually accepts Kreditkarten and Girokarten might say "Kartenzahlung nur eingeschränkt möglich" to note that their Visa/Mastercard PoS system is currently offline, but that they're still accepting Girokarten. But a bar that says "Keine Kreditzahlung möglich" is usually cash-only.

Again, I'm talking about the everyday colloquial language used by working-class people in German language (a chunk of the people I'm talking about have very limited English anyways). This is different in circles that have higher amounts of financial literacy, or more exposure to American culture. I'm not talking about the kinds of people who follow Finanzfluss (then it's a different story) or have studied/traveled to the US, and I'm also not claiming that people don't actually know the difference. I'm trying to highlight how different the two systems are based on what words are and are not in regular usage and how their meanings are different in the two countries.

I can only reply that west of Hamburg, Karte means any kind of card.

Credit card is explicitly Kreditkarte.

I also speak German fluenty, including partial knowledge of some dialects, and Swiss German.

Since my last time in Berlin was 10 years ago, I'll have to take it.

Even in the local Ämtern? In my experience they're the worst offenders here.

For example, Zahlungsmöglichkeiten on these two pages:

[1] "Am Standort kann bar und mit girocard (mit PIN) (ehemals EC-Karte) bezahlt werden." This means nothing with Visa/Mastercard, period. Doesn't matter if you have a direct debit account or revolving credit. If you try to pay with eg an N26 Debit Mastercard, they say "Leider akzeptieren wir hier keine Kreditkarten". This language is basically standard in Berlin. When I responded with "das ist doch keine Kreditkarte, sondern eine Debitkarte" they said "ne, kommt von Mastercard, ist ne Kreditkarte. Sorry."

[2] "Zahlungen sind auch mit Kreditkarte möglich (VISA, Mastercard und Maestro)." They don't differentiate between Kredit- and Debitkarte when you're actually there; the only difference at this location is that they have Zahlungsautomaten that are integrated with the payment processors. This is a perfect example: Kreditkarte here explicitly refers to the payment processing system and not to the way the payment is booked to your account.

[1] https://service.berlin.de/standort/121646/

[2] https://service.berlin.de/standort/121885/

When Kreditkarte are allowed, by definition, EC-Karte are as well.

When Girokarte/EC-Karte are accepted, there is no guarantee that Kreditkarte are as well.

Sure, but that doesn't answer my question. What I'm saying is, the Ämter in Berlin are explicitly using the term "Kreditkarte" to refer to all Visa/Mastercard/Maestro cards, including debit cards. In Berlin, only the locations that say they accept Kreditkarten, will accept debit cards that are backed by Visa/Mastercard/Maestro payment infrastructure. If they only say they accept Girokarte, then they will not accept debit cards. What I'm asking is, does Hamburg use the same language at Ämtern as Berlin, or does it differentiate explicitly between Girokarte, Kreditkarte, and Debitkarte? I've tried to find this myself online, but I don't see anything official.

Here's another example [1, page 116] from the BMI (so, federal now): "Haben Sie ein Konto bei einer Bank oder einer Sparkasse, wird Ihnen häufig eine Giro-card oder eine Kreditkarte ausgestellt (zum Teil gegen Gebühr), mit der Sie bezahlen können. Der bezahlte Betrag wird dann automatisch von Ihrem Konto abgebucht"

> If you have an account by a bank or a Sparkasse (special kind of bank), you will often be issued a Girokarte or a Kreditkarte (sometimes for a fee), with which you can pay. The paid amount will then be automatically deducted from your account.

Note that Debitkarte isn't even mentioned, and the behavior described for both kinds of cards is the same. This is not true of Kreditkarten that operate on a revolving credit basis; the amount is not automatically deducted from your account, but rather paid later. To me, this language is pretty clear: the federal government sees the system as "you either have a Girokarte or a Kreditkarte" and that Debitkarten are included in Kreditkarten.

And, actually, even better, this bit from wikipedia [2] is explicit: "Der Begriff Kreditkarte wird international nicht einheitlich verwendet. In den deutschsprachigen Ländern werden damit sowohl echte Kreditkarten als auch Chargekarten, Daily-Chargekarten, Scheck- bzw. Debitkarten und Prepaidkarten bezeichnet"

> The term Kreditkarte is not uniformly used internationally. In German-speaking countries it may refer to real credit cards, as well as charge cards, daily charge cards, check-cards or debit cards.

[1] https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikatione...

[2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreditkarte#Kartenarten

Girokarte is a synonym for Debitkarte, just like in France or Swiss Romade one would say carte bleue instead of carte debit, in Portugal Multibanco instead of cartão de débito,...

As for the rest, I guest we are wasting each other's time discussing this any furher.

> Girokarte is a synonym for Debitkarte

I'm not sure how to handle this because it's both incorrect in technical language (Girocards are exclusive to a particular payment infrastructure that only exists in Germany, unless partnered with a separate payment infrastructure, but the co-branded payment infrastructure is only used outside of Germany [1]) as well as incorrect with respect to my experience with everyday language, including all of the links I've provided including from official government sources.

But I agree on one thing: it's a waste of time to keep talking about this.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girocard

The Netherlands: the terms "debit card" (typically “pinpas”) and "credit card" ("creditcard") are used exclusively to describe the payment infrastructure, and only the payment infrastructure. In everyday language, ‘pinpas’ always refers to Maestro/VPay, which are networks run by resp. MasterCard/Visa but are nonetheless incompatible*, and are accepted almost everywhere, while ‘creditcard’ always refers to MasterCard/Visa, which are almost never accepted, except at touristic attractions.

However, as the Maestro and VPay networks are being shut down by MasterCard and Visa, things are in the process of changing. Most payment terminals now accept MasterCard/Visa as well as Maestro/VPay, though due to EU/EEA legislation, some may only accept debit cards as well as credit cards issued outside the EU/EEA (but not credit cards issued inside the EU/EEA).

At the moment, most banks are still issuing Maestro/VPay-based debit cards, likely because a small amount of payment terminals still doesn’t accept MasterCard/Visa. However, some smaller banks have already started to issue MasterCard/Visa-based debit cards.

* Historically, ‘pinpas’ referred to cards on the domestic PIN network, which were usually co-branded as Maestro for international use. With the introduction of EMV, the PIN network was retired, but debit cards are referred to as pinpassen to this day.

> Most payment terminals now accept MasterCard/Visa as well as Maestro/VPay, though due to EU/EEA legislation, some may only accept debit cards as well as credit cards issued outside the EU/EEA (but not credit cards issued inside the EU/EEA).

Why is this? If this is about the fee-capping rules, I would have expected that they’d disallow foreign credit cards and allow EU/EEA credit cards, since the foreign credit cards are not subject to the fee cap even when used within the EU.

Apparently it ends up being the intersection between the MasterCard/Visa ‘honor all cards’ rule (i.e. ‘if you accept MasterCard, you must accept all MasterCards’) and EU legislation saying ‘actually, you’re free not to accept cards with higher fees’.

I’m not really sure why said legislation doesn’t end up applying to foreign cards, though.

Another interesting point about fees is that when retiring the old domestic PIN network, Dutch banks ended up negotiating very low fees for domestic debit (then Maestro) transaction. Therefore, debit can end up being a lot cheaper than credit [1].

[1] https://www.mastercard.com/content/dam/public/mastercardcom/...

I’ve definitely seen some places in Europe that only take credit cards from within Europe, such as the French mobile phone provider SFR, and others that charge extra fees for non-European cards, such as the German airline Lufthansa. So whatever set of conditions leads to the outcome you’re describing might be specific to the Netherlands. Most merchants I’ve seen within Germany don’t treat European credit cards any differently from foreign ones, but some do reject cards without a 3D Secure system.

That's interesting; major Dutch banks ING [1] and Rabobank [2] say that acceptance of non-EEA credit cards will be mandatory, with ING explicitly stating that this is due to MasterCard and Visa rules:

> 5. What if I don’t want to accept credit card payments?

> While there is no immediate need to make this change, by the end of 2024 all merchants will be obliged to accept all card products from Mastercard and Visa, under the Honor All Cards Rule, which states that if a merchant accepts one type of that brand’s cards, they must accept them all. Merchants who accept Visa and Mastercards’ debit cards are also required to accept Visa and Mastercard’s credit cards (if they are issued outside EEA)

> This means that if you as a merchant accept any kind of Mastercard or Visa card, you must accept all Mastercards or Visa cards: debit, credit, prepaid and commercial. However, legislation does allow you, as a merchant, to refuse acceptance of credit cards issued in the EEA that are in scope of the Interchange Fee Regulation, article 10; if you wish to arrange this, you can reach out to your terminal supplier.

Strangely though, the third major bank (ABN AMRO) actually doesn't seem to mention this and only mentions EEA debit cards [3].

[1] https://www.ingwb.com/en/service/corporate-cards/debit-maste...

[2] https://media.rabobank.com/m/6ac771022c42bd61/original/Wat-g...

[3] https://www.abnamro.nl/nl/zakelijk/producten/betalen/winkels...

From your quote, it sounds like the ability to exclude EEA credit cards will only to ones "that are in the scope of the Interchange Fee Regulation, article 10", with other EEA credit cards still being mandatorily accepted. Am I misreading?

The advantage to the company with rewards is they get to keep your money while you think about how to spend it and you might never spend it. See gift cards & book tokens too, what a scam.

Right now, the bank that issued my credit card has just under $2000 worth of accumulated rewards that I haven't gone to push the buttons to convert to cash in my account.

If I'd consistently used a debit card instead to make those purchases, there wouldn't be any such balance, but I also wouldn't have any more money either.

I don't quite see this as being something where I should change my behavior in order to avoid this "scam".

One good thing that came from this thread is I went to my bank's website, clicked a few buttons, and $1990 is being converted from rewards points to cash that will hit my account next week. They really got me on that scam and I hope they'll get me again every couple of years.

Or, you know they could just pay it in without you doing anything. While that's sitting there as rewards you don't get interest on it but they can still use it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com