You’re Probably Paying Less in Overdraft Fees Than You Used To

Membership Ticker

You come to Mother Jones for unique journalism, and we love doing it for you—especially at a moment like this. That's really it. That's the upshot of our fall fundraising drive, and we're hoping to raise $250,000 in a much shorter than normal three-week window, by November 5, so we can keep right on doing it. Please pitch in early to help us get there.

$250,000

You come to Mother Jones for unique journalism, and we love doing it for you. That's it. That's the upshot of our fall fundraising drive, and we're hoping to raise $250,000 in a shorter than normal three-week window so we can keep right on doing it.

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.

The Wall Street Journal has an interesting short piece about overdraft fees today, including some facts and figures I haven’t seen before. Here are the trends between 2009 and 2013:

Average number of overdrafts per year: down from 9.8 to 7.1
Total overdraft revenue: down from $37.1 billion to $31.9 billion
Average overdraft charge: up from $27.50 to $30 (in 2013 dollars)

That’s a decrease of nearly a third in the annual number of overdrafts per checking account. This is likely because of new regulations, and banks have responded by raising the average fee in order to recoup some of their lost revenue.

Overall, this is a net benefit. The reduction in the number of overdrafts per year can probably be attributed to legal and regulatory actions that have reined in or flatly banned some of the worst abuses: clearing large payments first, refusing to let customers opt out of overdraft protection, slowing down payment credits, and so forth. These were the most outrageous fees, and eliminating them has helped consumers even if banks have partially made up for it with higher fees. In inflation-adjusted terms, the average person is now paying $213 in overdraft fees each year, compared to $269 in 2009. It’s a start.