View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

The 2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study
Analysis of Noncash Payments Trends in the United States: 2000 – 2003

Research Sponsored by the Federal Reserve System

Updated December 15, 2004

Copyright 2004, Federal Reserve System

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

Federal Reserve Project Team Members
Geoffrey R. Gerdes
Economist, Payment System Studies Section
Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Stephen A. Levy
Director, Strategic & Financial Planning
Retail Payments Office of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
May Liu
Statistician, Micro Statistics Section
Division of Research and Statistics
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Namirembe E. Mukasa
Research Assistant, Payment System Studies Section
Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Richard Oliver
Senior Vice President and Retail Product Manager
Retail Payments Office of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
Darrel W. Parke
Chief, Micro Statistics Section
Division of Research and Statistics
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Melinda J. Rushing
Assistant Vice President
Retail Payments Office of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
Jack K. Walton II
Assistant Director
Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Consultant Team Members
Edward Bachelder
Director, Research & Analytics
Dove Consulting, Boston, MA
David C. Stewart
Senior Vice President
Global Concepts, Inc., Atlanta, GA

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

1

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

Table of Contents

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 3

2

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ......................................................................................... 5
2.1

2.1.1

Checks Returned Unpaid Declined ........................................................................ 6

2.1.2

On-Us Checks Declined ....................................................................................... 6

2.1.3

The Number of Checks Paid by Type of Depository Institution................................... 6

2.2

3

CHECK PAYMENTS DECLINED ............................................................................... 5

ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS GREW RAPIDLY ................................................................... 7

2.2.1

Debit Cards Grew Most Rapidly ............................................................................ 8

2.2.2

ACH Growth Continued ....................................................................................... 8

2.2.3

Credit Cards Grew Moderately.............................................................................. 9

2.2.4

Cash Withdrawals at ATMs .................................................................................10

CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 10

APPENDIX A: TABULAR RESULTS ................................................................................. 11
APPENDIX B: HOW THE STUDY WAS CONDUCTED ............................................................ 12

Table of Exhibits

EXHIBIT 1: ANNUAL NUMBER OF NONCASH PAYMENTS IN 2003 AND 2000..................................... 3
EXHIBIT 2: DISTRIBUTION OF THE NUMBER OF NONCASH PAYMENTS FOR 2003 AND 2000 .................. 4
EXHIBIT 3: NUMBER OF CHECKS PAID IN 2003 AND 2000 ....................................................... 5
EXHIBIT 4: NUMBER OF ON-US AND INTERBANK CHECKS IN 2003 AND 2000 ................................. 6
EXHIBIT 5: CHECKS PAID BY TYPE OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION IN 2003 AND 2000 ........................ 7
EXHIBIT 6: NUMBER OF ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS IN 2003 AND 2000 ............................................ 7
EXHIBIT 7: NUMBER AND VALUE OF DEBIT CARD TRANSACTIONS IN 2003 AND 2000 ........................ 8
EXHIBIT 8: NUMBER AND VALUE OF ACH PAYMENTS IN 2003 AND 2000....................................... 9
EXHIBIT 9: NUMBER AND VALUE OF CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS IN 2003 AND 2000 ...................... 9
EXHIBIT 10: NUMBER AND VALUE OF ATM WITHDRAWALS IN 2003........................................... 10

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

2

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

1

December 2004

Executive Summary

This report summarizes the findings of the 2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study. The
study included the two research efforts noted below to estimate the annual number and
value of significant types of noncash payments in the United States. The study estimated
the number and value of payments by check, automated clearing house (ACH), credit card,
debit card, and electronic benefits transfer (EBT).1 The study also estimated the number
and value of ATM withdrawals. Estimates of check payments and ATM withdrawals were
based on findings from the 2004 Depository Institutions Payments Study (2004 DI study).
Electronic payments volume estimates were based on findings from the Electronic Payment
Instruments Study (2004 EP study) and supplemented by the 2004 DI study.
The number of noncash payments in the United States has grown since 2000. Checks are
the only payment instrument being used less frequently now than three years ago.2 The
annual number of payments initiated by cards (credit card, debit card, and EBT) increased
11.0 billion between 2000 and 2003, for an annual growth rate of 13.2 percent. Debit
cards, in particular, have experienced even greater growth rates, illustrated in Exhibit 1
below.34
Exhibit 1: Annual Number of Noncash Payments in 2003 and 2000
2000 Estim a te
(billion)

2003 Estim a te
(billion)

CAGR4

Nonca sh Pa ym e nts

72.5

81.2

3.8%

Check

41.9

36.7

-4.3%

Credit Card

15.6

19.0

6.7%

ACH

6.2

9.1

13.4%

Offline Debit

5.3

10.3

24.9%

Online Debit

3.0

5.3

21.0%

EBT

0.5

0.8

15.4%

1
The study does not include Fedwire funds transfers and funds transfers processed by the Clearing House Interbank Payment System CHIPS. Such payments are large in value but small in number.
2
The check estimates represent checks paid, not checks written. See section 2.1 for details.
3
Debit card payments include online debit (PIN-based), which includes purchases at the point of sale with ATM
cards, and offline debit (signature-based).
4
CAGR is the compound annual growth rate.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

3

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

As a group, the number of electronic payments increased more rapidly than the total, while
the number of check payments declined. Exhibit 2 illustrates the change in the distribution
of noncash payments from 2000 to 2003.
Exhibit 2: Distribution of the Number of Noncash Payments for 2003 and 2000
2000

2003

Credit Card
22%

Check
57%

Credit Card
23%

Check
45%

ACH
11%
ACH
9%

EBT
1%

Offline Debit
7%
Online Debit
4%

Offline Debit
13%
EBT
1%

Online Debit
7%

Many factors, such as growth in economic activity and population, contributed to the
increase in electronic payments. Some of the increase is likely also due to the replacement
of some cash and check payments with electronic payments. While, by number, checks
remain the largest single noncash payment type, the majority of noncash payments made in
the United States are now initiated electronically, using one of the three major electronic
payment types: debit cards, credit cards, or ACH.
The results in this report reflect the efforts of hundreds of organizations across the industry.
The estimates from the 2004 DI study are based on survey data from a nationally
representative, stratified random sample of 1,501 depository institutions (DIs). The
estimates from the 2004 EP study were based on data provided by 68 payment networks
and card issuers that process the vast majority of electronic payments in the United States.
The Federal Reserve Payments Study is part of an ongoing effort by the Federal Reserve
System to measure trends in noncash payments in the United States. In 2001, the Federal
Reserve System undertook the Retail Payments Research Project to estimate the annual
number and value of retail payments in the United States. To measure changes in the use
of different payment instruments in the United States, the same methodologies used in
2001 were also used in 2004. In some cases, adjustments were made to estimates
reported in 2001 to ensure consistency with the 2004 estimates.
© 2004, Federal Reserve System

4

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

2

December 2004

Summary of Findings

The number of noncash payments in the United States increased at an annual rate of 3.8
percent since 2000. This growth was greater than the growth in real gross domestic
product (1.9 percent) but lower than the growth in real personal consumption expenditure
(4.5 percent) over the same time period. The growth of total noncash payments may have
accelerated in recent years. Based on Federal Reserve estimates, the annual growth in
noncash payments averaged 3.1 percent between 1979 and 2000.

2.1 Check Payments Declined
The number of checks paid declined 5.2 billion between 2000 and 2003, an annual decrease
of 4.3 percent. In 2003, the annual number of checks paid is estimated to have been 36.7
billion, for a value of $39.3 trillion. The estimate for the number of checks paid in 2000 was
revised downward to 41.9 billion from 42.5 billion, and the value was revised upward to
$39.8 trillion from $39.3 trillion.5
Exhibit 3: Number of Checks Paid in 2003 and 2000
36.7

billion

41.9

2000

2003

The number of checks paid differs from the number of checks written. By agreement
between the payer and the payee, consumer checks can be converted into electronic
payments by merchants at the point of sale and by billers that receive check remittances.
The number of checks written declined less rapidly than the number of checks paid.
The average value of checks increased from $950 in 2000 to $1,070 in 2003. This increase
likely reflects a more rapid displacement of consumer checks than business checks by
electronic payments. Use of the debit card by consumers, which exhibits a low average
value, has grown dramatically in the past three years. ACH “eCheck” payments by

5

Several depository institutions revised their 2000 data. See the detailed report for a discussion of revisions to the

2000 estimates.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

5

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

consumers have also grown dramatically since 2000.6 They now account for a significant
number of ACH payments.

2.1.1 Checks Returned Unpaid Declined
The number of checks returned unpaid declined at an annual rate of 7.7 percent, a sharper
decline than the decline in the number of checks paid. In 2000, the number of checks
returned unpaid was 0.6 percent of checks paid by depository institutions, compared to 0.5
percent in 2003. The value per returned check has remained relatively unchanged: $756
compared to $747 three years ago.
The faster decline in the number of checks returned unpaid may reflect better money
management by check writers, changes in DIs’ practices for posting payments, or greater
use of overdraft protection programs.

2.1.2 On-Us Checks Declined
The number of on-us checks – checks that are deposited or cashed at the same DI on which
they are drawn – declined from 11.4 billion in 2000 (27% of checks paid by DIs) to 8.7
billion in 2003 (24% of checks paid by DIs).
Exhibit 4: Number of On-Us and Interbank Checks in 2003 and 2000

billion

11.4

8.7

On-Us Checks
Interbank Checks

30.5

28.0

2000

2003

2.1.3 The Number of Checks Paid by Type of Depository Institution
In 2003 commercial banks paid 79.4 percent of checks by number and 93.1 percent by
value. Credit unions and savings institutions paid 11.5 percent and 7.9 percent by number,
respectively, and 2.3 percent and 3.7 percent by value, respectively. The proportion of the
6

ACH “eCheck” entries (identified by their three-letter “standard entry class code”) are initiated from checks
written at the point of sale (POP) and for bill payment (ARC). In addition, ACH eChecks include transactions
manually initiated over the phone (TEL) or online (WEB) by the accountholder.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

6

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

number and value of checks by type of institution has not changed significantly since the
previous study. The average value of checks has increased across all types of DIs.
Exhibit 5: Checks Paid by Type of Depository Institution in 2003 and 2000

Number
(billion)

2000
Value
(trillion)

U.S. Ma rke t

41.9

$39.8

Commercial Banks
Credit Unions
Savings Institutions

32.9
4.7
3.8
0.2
0.3

Postal Money Orders
U.S. Treasury Checks

Number
(billion)

2003
Value
(trillion)

$950

36.7

$39.3

$1,070

$37.2
$0.9
$1.4

$1,133
$183
$365

29.1
4.2
2.9

$36.5
$0.9
$1.5

$1,255
$218
$505

*
$0.3

$130
$1,080

0.2
0.3

*
$0.3

$146
$1,154

Avg Value

Avg Value

*The value of postal money orders was $30 billion in 2000 and $29 billion in 2003.

2.2 Electronic Payments Grew Rapidly
Electronic payments grew rapidly between 2000 and 2003. There were 13.8 billion more
electronic payments in 2003 than in 2000.7 During the same time period, checks paid
declined 5.2 billion, suggesting that some check payments were replaced by electronic
payments. Electronic payments are also likely replacing some cash payments or reflecting
general increases in payment activity.
Exhibit 6: Number of Electronic Payments in 2003 and 2000
0.8

billion

5.3
0.5
3.0
5.3

10.3
9.1

6.2

EBT
Online Debit
Offline Debit
ACH

15.6

2000

19.0

Credit Card

2003

7
This calculation includes revised estimates for payments by ACH and credit card in 2000. See the detailed report
for a discussion of revisions to the 2000 estimates.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

7

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

2.2.1 Debit Cards Grew Most Rapidly
Increases in the number of debit card transactions account for over half of all growth in
electronic payments.8 In 2003, there were 15.6 billion debit card transactions compared to
8.3 billion in 2000. The number of debit card transactions grew at an annual rate of 23.5
percent.
Exhibit 7: Number and Value of Debit Card Transactions in 2003 and 2000
2000
Number (billion)
Offline Deb it
Online Deb it
Dollar Value (trillion)
Offline Deb it
Online Deb it
Average Value
Offline Deb it
Online Deb it

2003

CAGR

8.3
5.3
3.0

15.6
10.3
5.3

23.5%
24.9%
21.0%

$0.3
$0.2
$0.1

$0.6
$0.4
$0.2

21.9%
26.7%
13.9%

$42
$40
$46

$40
$42
$38

-1.3%
1.4%
-5.9%

The use of offline debit has increased more rapidly than that of online debit over the past
three years. The number of offline debits card transactions increased 5.0 billion from 2000
to 2003 compared to an increase of 2.3 billion online debit card transactions for the same
period. The number of offline and online debit transactions has grown at an annual rate of
25 and 21 percent respectively. The value per debit card transaction ($40) has declined
somewhat since 2000 ($42). The decline was greater for online debit – from $46 to $38 –
over the 2000 to 2003 period.

2.2.2 ACH Growth Continued
The number of ACH payments grew 2.9 billion between 2000 and 2003, from 6.2 billion to
9.1 billion, for an annual growth rate of 13.4 percent. ACH debits grew faster than ACH
credits. Debits made up 39 percent of all ACH payments in 2000 compared to nearly half
(47 percent) in 2003.9 The growth in the number of ACH debits is due largely to the
conversion of some check payments to ACH payments.

8
References to transactions in this report refer specifically to payment transactions or cash withdrawals at ATMs.
The study’s estimates do not include non-value transactions.
9
Third-quarter 2004 statistics from NACHA indicate that the number of ACH debits now exceeds the number of
ACH credits.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

8

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

On-us ACH payments – those cleared in-house (i.e. not sent over the network) – make up
17 percent of all ACH payments.10 This estimate is based on a nationally representative
survey of DIs. Previous industry estimates were based on more limited surveys.
Exhibit 8: Number and Value of ACH Payments in 2003 and 2000
2000
Total Numbe r (billion)

2003

CAGR

6.2

9.1

13.4%

3.8
2.4

4.8
4.3

8.0%
21.0%

$18.6

$25.1

10.5%

ACH Credits
ACH Deb its

$9.0
$9.6

$12.7
$12.4

12.2%
9.0%

Average Value

$2,989

$2,767

-2.5%

ACH Credits
ACH Deb its

$2,365
$3,967

$2,651
$2,896

3.9%
-10.0%

ACH Credits
ACH Deb its
Total Dollar Value (trillion)

2.2.3 Credit Cards Grew Moderately
The number of credit card transactions grew from 15.6 billion in 2000 to 19.0 billion in
2003, an annual growth rate of 6.7 percent. The relatively moderate growth in credit card
transactions makes credit cards the slowest growing of all electronic payment instruments.
Credit cards, however, are also the most often used electronic payment instrument in the
United States.
Exhibit 9: Number and Value of Credit Card Transactions in 2003 and 2000
2000

2003

CAGR

Number (billion)
General Purpose
Private Lab el

15.6
12.3
3.3

19.0
15.2
3.8

6.7%
7.3%
4.4%

Dollar Value (trillion)
General Purpose
Private Lab el

$1.3
$1.1
$0.2

$1.7
$1.4
$0.3

9.9%
9.5%
11.5%

$82
$87
$62

$89
$93
$76

2.9%
2.1%
6.8%

Average Value
General Purpose
Private Lab el

10
This is a weighted average of ACH credits and debits: 14.4 percent of credits and 20.6 percent of debits are
estimated to be in-house on-us payments. The percentage of on-us ACH payments was reported as
18% in the previous version of the summary document.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

9

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

2.2.4 Cash Withdrawals at ATMs
There were 6.1 billion ATM withdrawals in 2003 for a value of $520 billion. (ATM
withdrawals were not measured by the 2001 DI study). Commercial bank customers made
64.7 percent of all ATM withdrawals by number and 68.8 percent by value. Credit union
members made 23.6 percent of ATM withdrawals and 19.4 percent by value. Savings
institutions’ customers made 11.7 percent of all ATM withdrawals by number and value.
Exhibit 10: Number and Value of ATM Withdrawals in 2003
Num be r
(billion)
U.S. Ma rke t
Commercial Banks
Credit Unions
Savings Institutions

3

Va lue
(billion)

Ave ra ge
Va lue

6.1

$520

$85

4.0
1.4
0.7

$358
$101
$61

$91
$70
$85

Conclusions

Most noncash payments in the United States were made by electronic instruments in 2003,
whereas most were made by check in 2000. If current growth rates are sustained, credit
cards and debit cards will each exceed the number of paid checks before the end of the
decade. Such rapid change presents new opportunities for innovation in the payment
system. It also poses serious challenges in achieving a cost-effective, efficient payment
system.
The Federal Reserve System wishes to thank the hundreds of organizations
and perhaps thousands of individuals who contributed to the estimates
discussed in this report. We recognize that studies such as these shift
resources from other important initiatives. We appreciate the commitment of
time and energy by all who were involved. Their efforts have provided
tremendous benefit to the industry.
– Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., Vice Chairman, Federal Reserve Board of Governors

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

10

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

Appendix A: Tabular Results
2000
Num
72.5

Total Noncas h Paym e nts
Che ck s

Val ($) Avg ($)
60.0
827

41.9
1.6
0.3
0.2
41.4
1.6
11.4
0.7
17.2

39.8
1.1
0.3
0.0
39.5
0.5
15.9
1.1

0.2
0.0
0.2

0.2
0.0

30.6

20.2

6.2
Debits
Credits

+/US Tre as ury Che ck s
Pos tal M one y Orders
Com m e rcial Che ck s
+/On-Us
+/Reserve Bank
Che ck s Re turne d Unpaid
+/Reserve Bank
Electronic Paym e nts
ACH

De bit Card
Signature (Off line)
PIN (Online)
Credit Card
EBT
ATM Cas h Withdraw als

950
29
1,080
130
953
29
1,398
29

Num
81.2

Val ($) Avg ($)
66.7
822

36.7
0.7
0.3
0.2
36.2
0.7
8.7
0.3
15.3

39.3
0.9
0.3
0.0
38.9
0.9
12.8
0.6

0.2
0.0
0.1

0.1
0.0

660

44.5

27.4

18.6

2,989

9.1

2.4

9.6

3,967

3.8

9.0

8.3
5.3
3.0

Val ($) Num Val ($)
6.7
3.8
3.6
-0.5
1.4
0.0
0.0
-0.6
1.0
-3.1
1.3

-0.1
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0

617

13.8

7.2

13.2

10.7

25.1

2,767

2.85

6.51

13.4

10.5

4.3

12.4

2,896

1.87

2.82

21.0

9.0

2,365

4.8

12.7

2,651

0.98

3.69

8.0

12.2

0.3
0.2
0.1

42
40
46

15.6
10.3
5.3

0.6
0.4
0.2

40
42
38

7.3
5.0
2.3

0.3
0.2
0.1

23.5
24.9
21.0

22
27
14

15.6

1.3

82

19.0

1.7

89

3.4

0.4

6.7

10

0.5

0.0

26

0.8

0.0

26

0.3

0.0

15.4

16

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

85
3
89
2

n/a

n/a

0.5
0.0
0.3
0.0

n/a

n/a

6.1
0.3
3.6
0.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

747
41

+/-

1,070
24
1,154
146
1,074
24
1,478
78

Num
8.6

CAGR(%)

-5.2
1.7
0.0
0.0
-5.2
1.7
-2.7
0.7
-1.9

+/On-Us

Total change
(ove r 3 ye ars )

2003

756
25

-4.3

-0.4

0.6
-4.9
-4.4

2.9
-1.1
-0.5

-8.7

-7.0

-3.8
-7.7

-7.3

-3.8

Note:
Nominal GDP ($ trillion)
9.8
11.0
1.2
3.9
Real GDP ($ trillion)
1.9
9.8
10.4
0.6
Real PCE ($ trillion)
6.4
7.4
0.9
4.5
Population (million)
282.4
291.0
8.6
1.0
Numbers in billions. Values in trillions of USD. Dif ferences are due to rounding.
CAGR is the compound annual growth rate.
Each estimate is +/- the number below it in parentheses, the half-width of the 95% confidence interval (which
reflects the uncertainty surrounding an estimate based on a sample of 1,501 respondents rather than a census of
all depository institutions).
A zero in the estimate or confidence interval half -width means the actual value is lower than can be
reported in the scale used.
Confidence intervals are not available for electronic payments estimates.
Socioeconomic figures, provided for comparison, obtained f rom U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
Economic Analysis as of October 29, 2004.

© 2004, Federal Reserve System

11

2004 Federal Reserve Payments Study

December 2004

Appendix B: How the Study Was Conducted
The Federal Reserve Payments Study consists of two studies: a sample-based survey of
depository institutions and a census-style survey of payments network operators and
payments card issuers. Detailed reports of the methodology and findings of each study will
be made available on www.frbservices.org.

Depository Institutions Payments Study
The Depository Institutions Payments Study estimated the annual number and value of
payments in the United States from a March and April, 2004, survey of a representative,
random sample of DIs. The study estimated payments made by check, ACH, offline debit,
and online debit. The study also estimated the number and value of ATM withdrawals.
Global Concepts and its subcontractor, ICR, assisted the Federal Reserve with the study.
A stratified random sample of 2,700 of the 14,117 DIs in the United States was drawn. The
largest DIs were sampled at a higher rate in an effort to count as many transactions as
possible and estimate as few as possible. The sample included commercial banks, savings
institutions, and credit unions. A total of 1,501 DIs provided data for the survey.
Although the survey period was March and April, 2004, the estimates were annualized and
reported as 2003 estimates. This approach allows for comparison to the data on electronic
payments. Readers may wish to consult the more detailed report of findings for additional
information on the study’s methods and results.

Electronic Payment Instruments Study
The Electronic Payment Instruments Study estimated the number and value of electronic
payments in the United States for calendar year 2003. Data were collected by surveying
payment networks and card issuers. Of the 86 organizations asked to participate 68
provided data, accounting for the vast majority of electronic payments in the United States.
Dove Consulting assisted the Federal Reserve with the study.
Survey forms were distributed to the payment organizations that process, clear and settle
electronic payments in the United States to collect data for the calendar year 2003. The
survey data were collected during February through June, 2004. Respondents to this
voluntary study collectively accounted for an estimated 98% of the transactions and 99% of
the dollar volume in the United States.
© 2004, Federal Reserve System

12