JPMorgan Spooks Fintechs With Plans To Charge For Access To Customer Data (ft.com) 85
JPMorgan's proposed fees for customer data access would cost fintech startups between 60 and 100% of their annual revenue "just from one bank," according to a trade group representing the affected firms. Steve Boms, executive director of the Financial Data and Technology Association, said the charges would apply across all 30 companies in his group that received pricing notices from the nation's largest bank. The trade association, whose members include Plaid, Fiserv and Intuit, called JPMorgan's move a "pure and simple" attempt to kill competition that would "put third parties out of business altogether."
The fees could take effect in September, ending more than a decade of free data access that fintech companies have used to build their business models. JPMorgan can now charge for data access after the Trump administration changed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rules that previously prohibited such fees. The Financial Technology Association has taken the dispute to federal courts seeking to restore the Biden-era protections, while crypto trade groups have written directly to President Trump warning the fees would hurt digital currency companies.
The fees could take effect in September, ending more than a decade of free data access that fintech companies have used to build their business models. JPMorgan can now charge for data access after the Trump administration changed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rules that previously prohibited such fees. The Financial Technology Association has taken the dispute to federal courts seeking to restore the Biden-era protections, while crypto trade groups have written directly to President Trump warning the fees would hurt digital currency companies.
Too bad, so sad, (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
shut the fuck up you retard.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I don't normally go for these kinds of comments, but in this case, I think it's appropriate.
Re: (Score:1)
I am sure you have a well reasoned and intelligent comment just waiting in the wings to address my concerns related to antitrust and the formation of fintec monopolies. I can hardly wait to be destroyed with facts and logic.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Enjoy this nice hold music while you wait.
Re: So I see you are just a right wing troll but (Score:3)
FFS, this is an article about a bank that wants to charge a fee for information it provides other financial institutions, nothing more.
If the entirety of western civilization relies on JPMorgan providing other bankers information for free, we have much bigger problems than either you or I can imagine.
I just wish the story didn't link to a paywalled story, but hey, I'm cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
Good post.
A few threads down from the top thread, I did link to a non-paywall source.
Okay I get it you can't think about complex topics (Score:3)
I don't know how much clearer I can make this. The justice department and the CFPB goes to a company and says you have a unfair market advantage. They then give them the choice of either being broken up so that the unfair market advantage goes away or they have to make concessions to the market. JP Morgan was making a conc
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care about techno-feudalism. Probably because I don't care much about consumer high-tech.
Sure, I want advanced robotics making cheap stuff.
But I don't care much about "Fintech" companies finding new and innovative ways to chisel money out of consumers.
Re: (Score:3)
That's roughly $7 trillion dollars.
If we talk about lifetimes, your claim becomes even more absurd- as growth is of course compounded.
The next decade, it'll grow $8 trillion dollars, if growth remains the same on average (yes, yes, i know, Trump is going to turn the US into a third-world country somehow)
So I don't think anyone with 2 brain cells should listen to anything you keep saying.
Line go up (Score:2, Insightful)
It's a big club and you ain't in it.
Try to imagine what it means to have 2,000 people, that's the number of billionaires, all vying to be trillionaires.
There's about 20 or 30 of them that actually have a shot at it. They can easily devour that 7 trillion and they have and more. In the last 50 years we have shifted around 55 trillion to them, actually now that I think about it it's u
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care what the GDP is when I'm not getting a piece of it.
If you're not, then get a fucking job.
It's a big club and you ain't in it.
I'm absolutely in the club that "gets a piece of the GDP growth".
My real wages have not dropped for the last 20 years.
If yours have- go to school.
And even that didn't turn them into trillionaires.
Last 50 years?
FUCK, man. You can't get any fucking dumber.
The GDP 50 fucking years ago was $1.8T dollars, 6.7% of what it is today.
You're fucking stupid beyond words- it's fucking aggravating.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The US economy has grown by 29.8% since 2020.
That's roughly $7 trillion dollars.
Why are real wages falling [bls.gov] while the economy is growing?
Followup, why should workers care about GDP under these conditions? [epi.org]
(yes, yes, i know, Trump is going to turn the US into a third-world country somehow)
People in some third world countries have affordable health care. The quality of life in the USA is already worse than in those.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Workers should never care about the GDP while wages are falling.
Wages are not falling, while the GDP is increasing. That's a stupid fucking thing to claim.
No one should give a shit about it, when the largesse is held by such a small percent of the population.
There are only a couple of income brackets that have remained stagnant for the last 10 years. If you have been in one of those income brackets the entire time, and thus haven't moved (in real dollars- your wages have kept up with inflation) then I must ask, why the fuck do you think you deserve more? You're clearly a loser.
You want more money to flip those burgers, or what?
Re: (Score:2)
Did you just google for "real wages falling US" without actually reading the fucking thing you linked to?
I'll quote from it for you:
From June 2024 to June 2025, real average hourly earnings increased 1.3 percent
Re: (Score:2)
Did you think you deserved real effort spent on conversation with you?
Re: (Score:2)
Fascinating.
Re: (Score:2)
People in some third world countries have affordable health care. The quality of life in the USA is already worse than in those.
This is also a fucking dumbshit thing to assert.
Health care is definitely better in those countries vs. people here who do not have health care.
I have fantastic fucking health care, because I have a high paying job.
The quality of life here for me is definitely not worse than it is there.
Like your above dumbshit posts, you seem to think that measurements that affect fractions of the population represent the whole. You're always a little fucking slow, but this is extra stupid for you.
Re: (Score:2)
"I have fantastic fucking health care, because I have a high paying job"
what happens when you lose that marvelous job?
Re: (Score:2)
I'll continue this line of stupid reasoning for you.
What happens if I can't get a new one?
Then I get Medicaid.
What happens if you become disabled and the Government doesn't recognize it and you can't for some reason look for a job?
Well, then I'm fucked, going into debt, and using the Emergency Room which can't deny me as my healthcare.
You see- I'm in no way defending our system which has a very visible gap that leaves ~10% of the US without medical insurance.
I'd love to see that gap
Re: (Score:2)
I have aging relatives in America, Canada, England, France, Spain & Germany.
All whine about their growing health issues - i have a growing list of my own to whine about.
The only ones who are worried about going into serious debt because of health conditions live in the USA.
"a very visible gap that leaves ~10% of the US without medical insurance"
a gap that every advanced nation - with one glaring exception - "zipped right up" DECADES ago.
if only it had enough money....
"I get a new one.
I'll continue this
Re: (Score:2)
I tried looking it up and couldn't find any stats close to your 29.8%.... the most i found was a 13.5% Economy growth since 2020, and a 24% inflation rate over same period.
But the time period is interesting to pick, it's right as the markets started to rebound from Covid effects.
If you were invested in the S&P, you would have seen an 81.3% growth in that period. But that growth is out of reach of most people in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried looking it up and couldn't find any stats close to your 29.8%.... the most i found was a 13.5% Economy growth since 2020, and a 24% inflation rate over same period.
Simple math.
GDP in 2020: 21.35T
GDP today: ~27.72T.
(27.72-21.35)/21.35 = ?
CPI-U in 2020: 258.8
CPI-U today: 322.3
That one is actually 24%.
Of course, the increase in CPI is orthogonal to GDP. We can add them together if we want to pretend that it means something, but it doesn't, really.
It's not like the basket of goods increased by 24% of peoples incomes. There'd be bread lines if that were the case.
So weird number to throw out, really.
But the time period is interesting to pick, it's right as the markets started to rebound from Covid effects.
Why is it an interesting point to pick?
The nominal GDP only de
Re: (Score:2)
Why in the fuck should any bank be required to provide third parties with direct access to its customer financial systems, for any reason? That's just completely idiotic.
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if that was illegal until recently.
Because it encourages and creates competition (Score:2)
When you have a dominant player in a market they are given two choices, they can break up into smaller players or they can give concessions to up and coming competitors.
If you do not regulate your markets like that then you very quickly have monopolies and capitalism collapses completely.
Which is exactly what we are seeing right now. The total collapse of everything in our economic system and civilization.
It's going to take about 6 to 8 year
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. Fuck that. Go start your own bank.
Half the country wouldn't have to be worried about boys being in girls' sports if the other half were not worried about putting them there.
Re: (Score:2)
No shill here. Just a happy customer.
Re: (Score:2)
That was very polite of you, but don't let them pretend it was a close issue.
Re: (Score:2)
It's never been 80%. If you manage to continue current rates of growth of people espousing your viewpoint on transgender sports, you'll hit 80% sometime around 2040.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you're losing.
Re: (Score:2)
I fall neither into the camp of "anybody should be able to play in any sport as the gender they identy as", or "reducing humans to a binary classification is useful".
The latter- your camp, is definitely dumber than the former camp, though they're dumb too.
There are women with naturally more testosterone than some men, and some men with naturally less than some women.
The solution to this problem, is to fuck you bigoted shitbags in the
Re: (Score:2)
You are the one who said you were losing, I told you why. You insult people who tell you when you are clearly wrong. Not only do you continue to be wrong when you do that, you piss everyone else off.
Re: (Score:2)
Now come on. The left picked that fight and lost. 80-20. You don't get to pretend otherwise it wasn't your side that caused the problem just because y'all didn't realize how stupid you were being. And you sure as hell don't get to just walk away from it.
It's like an arsonist complaining about the firefighte
Re: (Score:2)
Like the motherfucker standing on the corner of the street telling us that the end times are coming, your bullshit endtimes is always just around the corner.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you kidding me?
People posting on this site are virtually NOTHING BUT "the end times are coming".
Holy b'jezuz.
I've not seen so much doom and gloom since accidentally landing on CrazyLiberalLGBQTIIndigenousNon-binaryThrouplesAnti-WhiteMenNoGunsAllowedWeLoveCommiesFuckDaPolice.com.
Re: (Score:2)
"I've not seen so much doom and gloom since accidentally landing on CrazyLiberalLGBQTIIndigenousNon-binaryThrouplesAnti-WhiteMenNoGunsAllowedWeLoveCommiesFuckDaPolice.com"
??? Conservative & rightwing groups have been going on about the collapse of Western civilization for as long as I've been alive & I remember when LBJ was POTUS
Re: (Score:2)
However, its disappointing to see self-proclaimed liberals playing that part now just because they're pissing their pants over the moron in the Oval.
Most of my life, I tried to tell myself that they were better than that.
Re: (Score:2)
But in this case their fears have not been merely Chicken Little & in some cases has been worse than predicted
Re: (Score:2)
Complete and utter bullshit.
rsilvergun has predicted the demise of the US in no less than a hundred fucking posts, with a time frame for that demise slowly adapting to the fact that reality keeps showing them to be wrong.
The US is in a weird funk right now, and economically, we're not doing super amazing, but we're also not doing bad. There's no impending collapse of the US on the horizon. We are still the most powerful country on the planet. Our people are still the most productive in any lar
Re: (Score:2)
"Bullshit.
Complete and utter bullshit."
is a very good description of what's been spewing from the Right.
For all the dire warnings about trans & drag queens, it's good ol' Gawd-fearin' Christians who've been busted for preying on the younglings.
It'll be interesting to see how this Epstein brouhaha plays out.
Looks like a lot of MAGA are not letting this one go. Trump has managed to hit himself in the nuts with his own ball which is impressive for a golfer of his purported skill.
No longtime ally - except p
Re: (Score:2)
Also which his tariff and "treated so unfairly nonsense", Trump has eroded nearly all the soft power the US has accumulated since the 1950s.
Yup. Probably the dumbest fucking thing the asshat in the Oval has done.
I suppose many true patriots believe all you need is hard power & America has plenty of that but they're also the ones who claimed to want "no more wars"
Don't know what "true patriots" have to do with anything, or what the wants of this particular polity matters.
Times change, as do political leanings.
US hard power, and US economic power will rebuild its soft power once fuckface is gone.
Ask yourself, did the Great Depression remove America from its status as the largest economy on the planet? Did it make us no longer the wealthiest country on the planet?
No. It didn't.
The US will s
Re: (Score:2)
With the financialization of the U.S. economy it is impossible to shed a tear for really any YAFS (yet another financial start-up) allowing the biggest guys to control access to data is not going to fix anything. It is the big guys that need to be brought to heel, broken up, subjugated to historically proven effective regulations (just for starters).
No, not like that! (Score:2)
How it all works (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How it all works (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm OK with the new path, as long as the FinTech companies are allowed the forward the data charges back to the consumer. It'd make a nice page on their website:
Access Charges by Bank
Bank of Assholes: 6.9%
Podunk FCU: 0.5%
There's nothing better than sunshine for reducing stink. I'd really love to see the same thing for Merchant fees for credit cards:
Credit Card Surcharge:
Visa: 4.3%
Mastercard: 4.1%
Discover: 6%
Amex: 10%
(Note that I've got no idea what the real percentages are)
Re: (Score:3)
I'd like to subscribe to your hopes and dreams.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not any more.
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly it's heading in the opposite direction. The EU has banned credit card surcharges. Australia currently permits credit card surcharges, but they're moving to banning them and instead lowering the cap on what the credit card issuers can charge. I still think allowing the merchant to pass on the cost to the customer is fairer.
Re: (Score:2)
I just got a call from a company offering me just that. There are plenty of merchant services who offer such a setup. I've seen it at restaurants around town where they offer a cash discount.
Re: (Score:3)
As someone who runs a small business and uses a credit card processing company, I can tell you that the fee structure is FAR more complicated than that. My monthly summary of charges lists 10 different versions of visa charges, five for mastercard, THREE for Discover and one for Amex. The charges range anywhere from .5% + 22 cents all the way up to 2.94 + 10 cents (which isn't Amex or Discover).
terms of service (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The old rule is effectively, the customer owns their own data (...) The new rule is (...) the bank owns the customer data and if they want to charge folks to access it, so be it.
In Carpenter vs US (2018) Justice Thomas said company records of clients were property of the business. Is this 'new rule' fallout from that SCOTUS ruling?
Already discussed July 11th (Score:5, Informative)
This was posted and discussed on July 11th.
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Oh No! (Score:1)
Oh no, all those poor grifters leeching money out of the economy while producing nothing of value! What will we do!
So this is a massive Monopoly problem (Score:1)
All of that is eventually going to make it into the general consumer economy as higher costs for everything basically inflation.
This is one of the ways they're planning on extracting your property from you so that a handful of billionaires can become trillionaires.
Keep in mind by your property I mean your house. That's the main thing that you have that
Re: (Score:3)
I really have no idea why big banks have any small customers.
If you're just a person, or maybe even a small business, the big commercial banks offer you no value.
I joined a local credit union when I saved up some lawn-mowing money about age 11. It's the only financial institution I've ever needed.
Savings, checking, CDs, car loans, mortgage. ATMs, credit card, debit card when that became a thing, online banking when that became a thing.
I even used Zelle on the credit union website to send a coworker money a
Re: (Score:1)
> If you're just a person, or maybe even a small business, the big commercial banks offer you no value.
Big bank offers me 2% back for everything plus extra on travel/dining. Local credit union - 1.5% at the best, usually 1% on everything and some extra categories.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Big bank doesn't charge me anything for my checking or savings accounts, and I derive a lot of conscience by having a credit card issued by the same bank.
I'd use them for my mortgage too, if it were more convenient.
Only losers pay fees on checking or savings accounts. I mean, seriously man.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only losers pay fees on checking or savings accounts. I mean, seriously man.
What "restrictions" are you talking about?
Only shitty business models need free user Data. (Score:2)
Instead of collecting my data go collect an unemployment check.
Dupe? (Score:2)
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Your post is a dupe of the third thread in this discussion:
Already discussed July 11th (Score:5, Informative)
by registrations_suck ( 1075251 ) on Wednesday July 30, 2025 @07:34AM (#65555370)
This was posted and discussed on July 11th.
https://news.slashdot.org/stor [slashdot.org]... [slashdot.org]
Channeling a certain Sith Lord (Score:1)
JP Morgan: "I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further."
Slashdot: "I am duping the alteration of the deal, pray I don't dupe it any further." (thank you schwit1 for spotting the dupe [slashdot.org])
Re: (Score:2)
The dupe was spotted much earlier.
Look on the bright side (Score:2)
You could move all your accounts over to Wells Fargo.
Banks have the power to fix this (Score:1)
Banks do incur large costs in supporting billions of API calls from companies like Plaid and Inuit. But only because their current financial data access model is so inefficient, requiring polling for updates, often continuously in the background. Banks have it in their power to make this more efficient by adopting modern approaches: event-driven systems such as webhook/event notifications, and standardized open banking APIs like those used in Europe that don't involve so many redundant queries.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah? None of that updating stuff is free either.
Banks obviously don't need to update it to support their own needs or they would do so. That being the case, these "Fintech" companies should be prepared to bear the entire cost of such updates.
First sentence makes no sense (Score:3)
JPMorgan's proposed fees for customer data access would cost fintech startups between 60 and 100% of their annual revenue "just from one bank," according to a trade group representing the affected firms.
"...cost fintech startups between 60 and 100% of their annual revenue..."
What? How small are these fintech startups?
"just from one bank,"
What is the point of that statement?
So, in other words, a group representing people that built business models around free stuff from JPMorgan want the stuff to remain free? That's quite surprising! /sarcasm
the company town, reborn (Score:2)
Between people starving from the impending famine and people becoming slaves as a result of t
Good (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because the article is about fees charged by JPMC and not Stripe's data practices.
My banking problems (Score:2)
My primary bank is USAA. Its on-line software is very good. I believe they were an early adopter and have a number of patents in this area. It's certainly better than any of the online banking software I've used by maybe....6 or 7 other banks and credit unions.
I recently had three issues with them, neither of which can be solved by any amount of "fintech":
1). They refuse to send a a certified check to any address but my home address on my file. I mean, WHAT THE FUCK?!?! Talk about stupid.
2). Even "expedite