Target profits boosted by $593M payout in antitrust credit card settlements

Target's latest quarterly profits would have been much worse if it had not received $593 million in settlements from an antitrust lawsuit against Visa and MasterCard that was filed a dozen years ago.
"When you look at the numbers, the profits don't look too bad," said Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail. "If you take [the settlement money] out, operating income is down by about a third, and net income is down by over half. That shows you the true picture of the real slide in profitability at Target, and that's a real issue for them."
The Minneapolis-based retailer disclosed the settlements, which were reached in March and April, in its first quarter earnings report last week.
Target and several large retailers, including Kohl's and Macy's, sued Visa and MasterCard in 2013, claiming anticompetitive practices drove up the cost of fees that merchants pay when customers use credit or debit cards.
Most of the more than 30 retailers have now settled the lawsuits, which were an effort by large retailers to break the control Visa and MasterCard exerted over card-based payments. The plaintiffs argued in the lawsuit that true competition among banks would result in lower swipe fees and fairer merchant agreements.
Bolstered by the $593 million settlement, Target's first quarter earnings grew 10% to $1 billion, or $2.27 a share. However, comparable sales fell 4% and, not counting the one-time boost, adjusted earnings were $1.30 a share when Wall Street analysts were expecting $1.65.
Target's Chief Financial Officer Jim Lee acknowledged the settlement's impact on the company's first quarter performance, noting the operating margin rate of 6.2% included about 250 basis points of benefit from the settlement.
With the settlement money in hand, analysts say Target needs to shift focus back to the sales floor, where lingering economic uncertainty, rising costs and weakened discretionary spending continue to challenge profitability.
Target declined to comment on the specifics of the settlements it reached in March and April, respectively, with Visa and MasterCard.
The federal judge sealed details of Target's settlement, but court documents from March 27 and April 17 say the retailer "fully settled all of its claims" against MasterCard and Visa.
The lawsuits were filed after big retailers rejected a $7.25 billion class-action settlement in 2013, which was the biggest of its kind at the time. Target and other major companies then filed their own separate lawsuits.
The rejected settlement said merchants in 2012 had paid $30 billion in interchange fees, also known as swipe or merchant fees.
The original class-action lawsuit was brought in 2003, challenging the "honor all cards" rule, which forced merchants to accept debit cards, which carried high signature-based fees, if they accepted credit cards.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was then amended in 2010 to rein in debit card interchange fees charged by large banks. But the amendment applied only to debit cards, not credit cards, and didn't prohibit Visa or MasterCard from continuing non-price-related rules that restrict competition.
However, the 2013 Target lawsuit argues interchange fees actually increased after this settlement.
American Signature, Chico's, and Premium Brands Services and Lane Bryant all reached settlements with Visa following Target's settlement.
Other companies including Macy's, Gap and Marathon Petroleum are continuing to push forward with a trial set for October.
Visa says it has not done anything wrong, arguing the retailers contract with companies that collect the fees and then pay credit card companies. Therefore the retailers don't directly pay the fees to Visa, it says.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Politico

34 minutes ago

• Politico

‘We can't wait forever': GOP frustrated but unwilling to act on Trump's TikTok extension

President Donald Trump's latest move to keep TikTok alive is yet again frustrating congressional Republicans, many of whom object to China's continued involvement in the popular app but just want to be done with the whole drama. 'Not my favorite thing,' Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along-time proponent of the ban, deadpanned, when asked about the president's plan to issue another extension. He spoke a day before the White House confirmed Trump signed a 90-day suspension of enforcement of the law requiring TikTok to divest from ByteDance, its China-based parent company, throwing another lifeline to the short-form video app. By Friday, some House lawmakers registered a note of resigned irritation. The extension — Trump's third since the law went into effect on Jan. 19 — is a unilateral decision not envisioned in the bipartisan law passed by Congress and upheld last year by the Supreme Court. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), a member of the House Intelligence and China committees, told POLITICO. 'The national security concerns and vulnerabilities are still there, and they have not gone away. I would argue they've almost become more enhanced in many ways.' But Trump's extension of the TikTok law largely boxed out Republicans in both chambers who have shown little inclination — beyond stern words — to prevent him from making these postponements almost routine. Many GOP lawmakers saw themselves as granting the president space to cut a promised deal while the White House deals with urgent priorities, like trade negotiations and the Israel-Iran conflict. 'In light of everything going on, I think he did the right thing,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a China hawk who voted for the ban, told POLITICO of Trump. 'I have concerns about all kinds of things — that [the extension] is on the list — but it's not at the top of the list.' Though Trump has promised his TikTok negotiations areclosely tied to trade talks with China, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testified last week to a Senate panel that TikTok's sale was not currently a part of the negotiations with China, raising a further potential obstacle to Trump inking a deal in the near future. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of the president and longtime national-security hawk said earlier in the week: 'The sooner we get that issue solved, the better,' without offering any ideas for further enforcement. 'I just want finality,' Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO. 'I want some certainty and just know that the Congress isn't being played when we make a decision [that the app] be sold.' Another member of the House China Committee, Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), told POLITICO, 'No more extensions. It's time to follow through.' Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), also a member of the China panel, noted in a post on X Thursday the law only allows one extension of the compliance deadline, adding, 'I was proud to support the ban of TikTok and believe the law should be implemented as written.' With their comments, the lawmakers echoed House China Chair John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who in early June called for the U.S. to 'let [TikTok] go dark' to bring China to the table to negotiate. He reiterated that stance on Friday. 'Delays only embolden the Chinese Communist Party,' Moolenaar said in a statement to POLITICO. 'I urge the administration to enforce the law as written and protect the American people from this growing national security threat.' Still, observers say Republicans are not exercising their leverage to demand the White House enforce the law they helped write, for example by withholding funding or congressional oversight hearings. 'I keep reading that Republicans are 'frustrated' and 'impatient' about their TikTok law being ignored, but they should stop complaining to reporters and take it up with Trump,' said Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the pro-tech Chamber of Progress. Among the Republicans being undercut by the president is his own secretary of state. Marco Rubio — who as senator was one of the loudest critics of TikTok's ties to China, and a huge backer of the app's ban — has been conspicuously silent as Trump has repeatedly granted more time to strike a deal for its sale. 'You have to decide what's more important, our national security and the threat that it poses to our national security,' Rubio told POLITICO in March 2023, as Congress was considering a ban. 'You have to weigh that against what you might think the electoral consequences of it are. For me, it's an easy balancing act. I mean, there is no balance. I'm always going to be for our national security.' A spokesperson for Rubio at the State Department did not respond to a request for comment. Democrats — even those who support keeping TikTok online — say Trump's approach is the wrong one. 'These endless extensions are not only illegal, but they also put TikTok's fate in the hands of risk-averse corporate shareholders,' Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) told POLITICO in a statement. 'This is deeply unfair to TikTok's creators and users. I'm prepared to work towards a solution, but Trump isn't coming to the table.'

USA Today

2 hours ago

• USA Today

Walmart to pay $10 million to settle FTC fraud lawsuit over money transfers

Walmart WMT.N has agreed to pay $10 million to settle a U.S. Federal Trade Commission civil lawsuit accusing the world's largest retailer of ignoring warning signs that fraudsters used its money transfer services to fleece consumers out of hundreds of millions of dollars. The settlement was filed on Friday in Chicago federal court, and requires approval by U.S. District Judge Manish Shah. Walmart also agreed not to process money transfers it suspects are fraudulent, or help sellers and telemarketers it believes are using its services to commit fraud. "Electronic money transfers are one of the most common ways that scammers tell consumers to send them money, because once it's sent, it's gone for good," said Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC consumer protection bureau. "Companies that provide these services must train their employees to comply with the law and work to protect consumers." Average worker pay: Walmart reveals its highest paying job, excluding managers The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer did not admit or deny wrongdoing in agreeing to settle. Walmart did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In its June 2022 complaint, the FTC accused Walmart of turning a blind eye to fraudsters who used its money transfer services to cash out at its stores. Walmart acts as an agent for money transfers by companies such as MoneyGram, Ria EEFT.O and Western Union WU.N. Money can be hard to trace once delivered. The FTC said fraudsters used many schemes that included impersonating Internal Revenue Service agents, impersonating family members who needed money from grandparents to avoid jail, and telling victims they won lotteries or sweepstakes but owed fees to collect their winnings. Shah dismissed part of the FTC case last July but let the regulator pursue the remainder. Walmart appealed from that decision. Friday's settlement would end the appeal. The case is Federal Trade Commission v Walmart Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, No. 22-03372. Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Marguerita Choy

Miami Herald

2 hours ago

• Miami Herald

Under Armour Doubles Down on HBCU Sports with CIAA Extension

In a move that reinforces its commitment to innovation, performance, and cultural impact in the HBCU community, the CIAA has extended its exclusive apparel partnership with Under Armour through 2029. The announcement comes on the heels of the CIAA Board of Directors meeting, where another major deal was also finalized: keeping the storied CIAA Basketball Tournament in Baltimore through the end of the decade. For the CIAA and its member institutions, it's more than just a jersey deal. 'Under Armour continues to be a powerful partner in our journey, elevating the look, feel, and performance of our student-athletes while reinforcing our identity across the national stage,' said CIAA Commissioner Jacqie McWilliams Parker. 'We are proud to move forward together with a shared commitment to innovation and impact.' Under Armour's relationship with the CIAA began in 2018 after Russell Athletic exited the collegiate uniform space. Facilitated through BSN Sports, the deal gave CIAA programs exclusive access to UA uniforms, gear, footwear, and training equipment. It was a timely and strategic move, especially as other HBCU conferences were locking in similar partnerships. Since then, Under Armour has not just dressed athletes-they've leaned into storytelling. Their "Sisterhood in Style" campaign, launched earlier this year, spotlighted HBCU women and Black Greek life, featuring members of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. on the campuses of Bowie State University and Morgan State University. With imagery by Baltimore-based photographer and activist Devin Allen, the campaign tied fashion, culture, and pride together, all wrapped in UA's pink-and-green UA Echo sneaker. This brand of authenticity isn't accidental. Under Armour's headquarters are just minutes from downtown Baltimore, and its ties to the community run deep. Morgan State, a flagship HBCU in Baltimore, has long been a partner institution. The renewed CIAA deal only strengthens the city's connection to both the brand and HBCU sports and culture. So when the CIAA announced that its hoops tournament-an economic and cultural crown jewel for the conference-would stay in Baltimore through 2029, it wasn't just a win for the city. It was synergy in action. A Baltimore-based brand. A Baltimore-hosted HBCU tournament. And a renewed focus on showcasing Black excellence, both on the court and in community storytelling. Beyond the CIAA, Under Armour also outfits HBCUs like Hampton, Howard, and Edward Waters. But this extended commitment with the nation's oldest historically Black athletic conference signals something deeper-a long-term investment in legacy, innovation, and visibility. For the CIAA, the fit remains perfect-on the court, in the culture, and with the City of Baltimore. The post Under Armour Doubles Down on HBCU Sports with CIAA Extension appeared first on HBCU Gameday. Copyright HBCU Gameday 2012-2025