2001/782/EC: Commission Decision of 9 August 2001 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/29.373 — Visa International) (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2001) 2425)
Date: 2001-08-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, electronic money, financial institution, international organisation, rules of procedure

L 293/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

II

(Acts whose publication is not obligatory)

COMMISSION

COMMISSION DECISION

of 9 August 2001

relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case No COMP/29.373 — Visa International) (*)

(notified under document number C(2001) 2425)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2001/782/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area,

Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, First Regulation implementing Articles 85
and 86 of the Treaty (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1216/1999 (2), and in particular Article 2
thereof,

Having regard to the application for negative clearance and the notification with a view to an exemption of
31 January 1977 submitted by Visa International pursuant to Articles 2 and 4 of Regulation No 17,

Having regard to the Commission decision of 6 May 1999 to initiate proceedings in this case,

Having published a summary of the application and notification and invited interested third parties to
submit their observations in accordance with Article 19(3) of Regulation No 17 with regard to the
Commission's intention to adopt a positive standpoint on the notified agreement (3),

Having consulted the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions,

Whereas:

I. THE FACTS

1. INTRODUCTION

(1)

On 31 January 1977 Ibanco Ltd, since 1979 known as Visa International, notified various rules and
regulations governing the Visa association and its members to the Commission, applying for
negative clearance or,

in the alternative, an exemption under Article 81(3) of the Treaty.

(*) See also OJ C 316, 10.11.2001.
(1) OJ 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204/62.
(2) OJ L 148, 15.6.1999, p. 5.
(3) OJ C 293, 14.10.2000, p. 18.

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/25

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

After having initially sent a comfort letter, on 29 April 1985 the Commission reopened the
investigation in the Visa case, following a complaint by the British Retail Consortium against the
‘multilateral interchange fee’ (4) in the Visa International payment scheme, and the comfort letter was
withdrawn on 4 December 1992. The reopened investigation also took into account a complaint
filed on 23 May 1997 by Eurocommerce, a retail, wholesale and international trade representation in
inter alia, the Visa International payment card
the Community, concerning various aspects of,
scheme (5).

2. THE PARTIES

2.1. VISA INTERNATIONAL

Visa International Service Association (Visa) is a privately-owned, for-profit corporation owned by
about 20 000 member financial institutions from around the world. Visa's turnover amounts to
USD 1 455 million worldwide, of which about USD [business secret] million in the Visa EU region
(1999 figures). Visa, which is incorporated in the USA, operates the Visa card system network. To
that end it manages trade marks, lays down the rules of the system and provides authorisation and
clearing services via a worldwide computer and telecommunication network, called VisaNet. Visa
itself does not issue Visa cards to cardholders nor does it contract merchants for Visa card
acceptance, but its member financial institutions, who have received a licence to that end from Visa,
do.

Visa has divided the territory in which it is active into six regions worldwide. In the Visa EU region,
which also covers Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Turkey, Israel, Cyprus, Malta and Switzerland, in
addition to the Community, there are over 5 000 Visa members. Decision-making is delegated to the
Visa EU regional board of directors (EU regional board), which is elected every two years from Visa
member financial institutions in the EU region. The EU regional board is responsible for intra-
regional affairs, such as for example the adoption of regional regulations like the Visa EU regional
operating regulations and the admission and expulsion of members established in its region. In
countries with so-called Visa national group members (see recital 7), the EU regional board has
delegated the power to develop and administer Visa card programmes to these members.

2.2. THE VISA MEMBERS

There are various classes of membership in the Visa corporation but broadly speaking all classes of
membership are open to any institution organised under the commercial banking laws of its own
country and authorised to accept demand deposits. However, Visa does not accept for membership
any applicant that is deemed by the board of directors to be a competitor of the corporation (6).

In some Member States there is a Visa group member. This is a Principal Visa member authorised to
exercise its membership rights and operate Visa card programmes through its owners or members.
Members of Visa group members are associated members. The Visa group member is responsible for
acts and omissions of its owners or members (7). With one exception (8), none of the group members
issues Visa cards itself. Most group members do not acquire (9) either (10). Instead (some of) their
members do.

(4) The Visa multilateral interchange fee is a fee per payment transaction that has to be paid according to the Visa rules
is paid by the merchant's bank to the

between the two banks involved in a Visa card payment. Currently,
cardholder's bank.

it

(5) The core of the Eurocommerce complaint is the interchange fee in,

inter alia, the Visa International payment card

rules. This provision is still under examination and is not the subject of the present decision.

(6) The Visa membership provisions are still under examination in the context of a complaint by Morgan Stanley Dean

Witter (case Comp/37.860) and not the subject of the present decision.

(7) The following Member States have a Visa group member: Austria (Visa Austria), Belgium (Visa Belgium), Denmark
(PBS), Finland (Luottokunta/Kreditlag), France (Groupement Carte Bleue), Luxembourg (VisaLux), Spain (Sistema 4B and
Visa España) and Sweden (Visa Sweden Association).

(8) Luottokunta in Finland.
(9) ‘Card acquiring’ involves contracting retail merchants for payment processing and other services related to Visa card

acceptance.

(10) The exceptions being Luottokunta, PBS and VisaLux.

L 293/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

Visa has delegated to certain Visa group members the power to develop and administer Visa card
programmes. These are referred to by Visa as national group members, and consist of practically all
Visa group members (11). These National group members act as a national Visa, authorised to adopt
rules applicable to the operation of Visa programmes in their country, provided these local arrange-
ments do not infringe the Visa by-laws and operating regulations.

The national group member decides on applications for licences to issue and acquire Visa cards in its
territory. Visa retains the right to accept an eligible institution as a direct member of Visa if a
national group member for some reason is unwilling to license that institution to carry out Visa card
activities. National group members also have to give their consent to the establishment of foreign
branches in their territory. The EU regional board can accept new members in all countries directly if
membership has been ‘unreasonably withheld’ by a national group member or if the national group
member consents to Visa granting direct membership.

3. THE AGREEMENTS

3.1. GENERAL

The notification by Visa concerns rules and regulations governing the Visa association and its
members, that is, the certificate of incorporation, international by-laws and regional board delega-
tions, as well as the international provisions relating to Visa's payment cards, that is, general
international operating regulations, European Union regional operating regulations, dispute resolu-
tion rules and card and marks specifications. All notified Visa rules and regulations will hereinafter
be referred to as ‘the Visa Rules’.

The Visa rules govern primarily the relationship between Visa and its members, meaning banks
issuing Visa cards and banks acquiring merchants for Visa card acceptance. In addition, the Visa rules
also contain clauses relevant for relations between Visa members (the inter-bank relationship).
Moreover, the Visa rules contain clauses with regard to the relationship between acquiring banks and
merchants (such as the ‘no-discrimination rule’ and the ‘honour all cards rule’). Visa says it does not
seek to prescribe the arrangements between issuers of Visa cards and cardholders, beyond laying
down the basic characteristics of the Visa card products.

3.2. SPECIFIC PROVISIONS

3.2.1. The no-discrimination rule

(11)

The no-discrimination rule in the Visa rules prohibits merchants from adding charges to cardholders
who pay with their Visa card (12). In addition, the no-discrimination rule prohibits merchants from
giving consumers discounts for paying with other means of payment, such as for example cash. The
rule does not apply in countries where it has been abolished by national competition authorities, that
is,

in the United Kingdom (for credit cards), Sweden and the Netherlands (13).

(12)

There is a similar rule for cash withdrawals: an acquirer is prohibited from adding any surcharge to a
manual or ATM cash disbursement transaction, unless local law expressly requires that a member be
permitted to impose a surcharge (14).

(11) Except VisaLux in Luxembourg and Sistema 4B in Spain.
(12) [business secret].
(13) [business secret].
(14) [business secret].

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/27

3.2.2. The principle of territorial licensing

(13)

Visa card issuing and merchant acquiring can only be carried out by members of the Visa payment
card system, having obtained a licence to that end. Visa applies a territorial licensing policy. This
means that, in principle, the Visa member's jurisdiction to carry out Visa card issuing and acquiring
activities is limited to the country where it has its principal place of business (15). However, under
some conditions members may carry out cross-border issuing and cross-border acquiring activities.
The possibilities for such cross-border activities have been gradually increased by Visa (see recital 14).

(14)

(15)

(16)

3.2.3. The modified rules on cross-border issuing

The Visa rules oblige banks wishing to carry out issuing activities outside their country of domicile in
principle to do so either through subsidiaries, which could join Visa in their own right, or through
the establishment of foreign branches in the territory concerned (16). There are two specific excep-
tions to this general rule, that is, in two situations the establishment of a subsidiary or branch is not
required: first Visa cards may be issued passively, without solicitation, to cardholders, provided that
the card account is with the issuing bank in its country of domicile (17). Secondly, Visa corporate
cards may be issued to employees around the world of multinational companies (18).

In its EU regional board meeting of 26 May 2000 Visa approved amendments to its cross-border
issuing rules, involving the abolition of the requirement that a Visa member should have either a
branch or subsidiary in a Member State in which it wishes to issue Visa cards. In order to ensure the
continued security and quality of the Visa system, Visa has adopted some minimum rules, for
example, cross-border issuing is now open for members which are already proven issuers, in their
principal place of business or in any country, which submit a business plan and comply with certain
registered domestic rules. The modified rules on cross-border issuing entered into force on 30 April
2001.

3.2.4. The modified rules on cross-border acquiring

The Visa rules allow Visa banks to contract international airlines and some other specific categories
of merchant for card acquiring services (19). Moreover, since 1994 the ‘Visa EU/EFTA cross-border
acquiring programme’ allows banks to acquire merchants cross-border without the establishment of
a subsidiary or branch in the territory, under similar conditions to those referred to in section 3.2.3
in the context of cross-border issuing.
In particular, [business secret]. Moreover, cross-border
transactions may be subject to certain registered domestic rules in six specific areas, [business secret].
Applicants for cross-border acquiring can obtain copies of registered domestic rules from Visa
International. Initially Visa limited the programme to certain categories of international merchants
only, namely car rental companies, hotels, ferries and cruise lines. Since 1 January 1999 cross-border
acquiring has been made possible by Visa for all categories of international merchants (20).

(17)

In its EU regional board meeting of 26 May 2000 Visa agreed to withdraw the requirement that in
order to be acquired cross-border, a merchant must have an outlet in more than one country. The
appropriate amendments to this effect in the Visa EU regional operating regulations were approved
in the Visa EU executive committee meeting of 7 July 2000. The modified rules on cross-border
acquiring entered into force on 1 October 2000.

(15) [business secret].
(16) [business secret].
(17) [business secret].
(18) [business secret].
(19) [business secret].
(20) [business secret].

L 293/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

3.2.5. The no acquiring without issuing rule

(18) Although according to the Visa rules, principal members are formally obliged to issue cards and to
acquire merchants, in practice Visa does not oblige its members to acquire. However, if they want to
acquire merchants for card acceptance, before starting acquiring activities in a particular country the
member has to issue a reasonable number of cards (21). The target is set on a case-by-case basis,
taking into account the number of cards issued at that time in the country in question by existing
Visa members and the potential for Visa cards within that market. In addition, the size and potential
of the applicant are considered. According to Visa, in order to determine whether a reasonable
number of cards has been issued before cross-border acquiring activities are allowed, cards issued in
any country of the Visa EU region are taken into account.

3.2.6. The honour all cards rule

(19) A merchant must accept all valid cards with either the Visa or the Visa Electron symbol which are
properly presented for payment (22). According to Visa, merchants whose agreement requires them to
accept Visa cards are not required to accept Electron cards, and merchants having an agreement to
accept Electron cards are not required to accept Visa cards. The honour all cards rule applies
irrespective of the nature of the transaction, the identity of the issuer, the type of card being used or
the personal characteristics of the cardholder.

4. THE FUNCTIONING OF THE VISA PAYMENT CARD SCHEME

(20)

(21)

The Visa notification concerns various rules and regulations with regard to the operation of the Visa
International payment card system. Broadly speaking, Visa cards can be used either to pay a
merchant for goods or services or to obtain cash, either from a bank counter or from an automated
teller machine (ATM). In the first case four parties are normally involved: the Visa cardholder, the
issuing bank (which issues the card to the cardholder), the merchant and the acquiring bank (which
acquires merchants for Visa card acceptance).
the Visa
cardholder, the issuing bank and the ATM operator, are involved.

In the latter case, only three parties,

Before being able to use a card for payment or cash withdrawal transactions, a consumer needs to
contract with an issuing bank to receive a card. This is done usually in exchange for an annual fee
paid by the cardholder to the issuing bank. Moreover, with regard to a payment transaction a
merchant has to conclude a contract with an acquiring bank for card acceptance. This contract sets
the merchant fee and other conditions.

(22)

In a payment transaction a distinction can therefore be made between two services, that is, on the
one hand issuing cards to customers and on the other hand acquiring merchants for cards
acceptance. In a four-party transaction the two services are often provided by different entities.

5. THE PROCEEDINGS

(23)

Following the reopening of the Visa case in 1992, the Commission sent between 1992 and 2000
several requests for information pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation No 17, in particular to Visa
and various of its members and to the complainant Eurocommerce. On 6 May 1999 a statement of
objections was sent to Visa with regard to the no-discrimination rule and the then still existing
restrictions on cross-border issuing and acquiring. Visa submitted its written observations to the
statement of objections on 17 January 2000 and an oral hearing pursuant to Article 19(1) of
Regulation No 17 took place on 15 March 2000. Following the results of market surveys on the

(21) [business secret].
(22) [business secret].

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/29

impact of the abolition of the no-discrimination rule following the national competition authorities
in some countries (see recital 53) and following modification by Visa of its rules on cross-border
services, the Commission published on 14 October 2000 a notice pursuant to Article 19(3) of
Regulation No 17 (‘the Article 19(3) notice’) (23), inviting interested third parties to provide their
observations on the Commission's intention to take a favourable position towards the no-discrim-
ination rule and the modified cross-border services rules as well as the other specific provisions in
the Visa rules referred to in recitals 18 and 19.

6. OBSERVATIONS BY THIRD PARTIES

(24)

(25)

(26)

The Commission received several observations from third parties in response to the Article 19(3)
notice. The vast majority of the reactions were from individual retailers and organisations of retailers.
One reaction was received from another payment card scheme and two from national competition
authorities in the EEA.

The reactions of the retailers relate mainly to the announced intention of the Commission to take a
favourable opinion on the no-discrimination rule in the Visa International payment card scheme. The
retailers complain about the merchant fees which they have to pay for the use of Visa cards and
several of them hold the view that the costs should be borne by the cardholders. Some of them make
a link between the no-discrimination rule and multilateral interchange fees — although these were
not the subject of the Article 19(3) notice — and conclude that the no-discrimination rule cannot be
cleared as long as there is a multilateral

interchange fee.

In its observations on the Article 19(3) notice Eurocommerce objects not only to the intended
clearance of the no-discrimination rule, but also to the intended clearance of the honour all cards
rules in the Visa International scheme and the intended clearance of Visa rules on cross-border
acquiring. Although Eurocommerce does not explain its position in its reaction to the Article 19(3)
notice in so far as the honour all cards rule is concerned, it has stated in proceedings concerning its
complaint against Visa that it considers that the honour all cards rule in the Visa International
scheme obliges merchants to accept different types of card with the Visa brand (for example, credit,
deferred debit or direct debit cards, classic or corporate cards), including new types of card that may
be introduced by Visa in the future. Eurocommerce opposes this since merchant fees are said to be
different according to the type of card being used, and Eurocommerce therefore regards the different
types of card as different products, which merchants should, in its view, have the choice to accept or
not. Eurocommerce fears that the honour all cards rule will be used to oblige merchants to accept
(present or future) types of Visa-branded cards with relatively high merchant fees.

(27)

Eurocommerce objects to the Visa rules on cross-border acquiring in so far as these lay down that
cross-border acquirers may be subject to (registered) domestic rules of Visa members relating to
(domestic) interchange rates. According to Eurocommerce, which objects to all interchange fees, not
only in the Visa International scheme but also more in general, this creates an impediment to
cross-border acquiring which is ultimately to the detriment of the merchant.

(28) However, in its letter of 2 February 2001, Eurocommerce informed the Commission that it had
decided to withdraw its complaint with regard to the no-discrimination rule and the honour all cards
rule in the Visa International payment card rules,
‘on the assumption that the Commission will
prohibit the multilateral interchange fees...’. Eurocommerce considers the essence of its complaint to
be the multilateral interchange fees. According to Eurocommerce, if multilateral interchange fees
were prohibited, a further prohibition of the no-discrimination rule and/or the honour all cards rule
would not add significantly to the objective of restoring competition in payment card markets.

(23) OJ C 293, 14.10.2000, p. 18.

L 293/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

(29)

The two national competition authorities which reacted to the Article 19(3) notice hold the view that
the no-discrimination rule is restrictive of competition. Both competition authorities prohibited that
rule in, among others, the Visa scheme in their respective countries, respectively in 1994 and in
1998. One of the competition authorities in question stated that the no-discrimination rule, in its
view, restricts competition between merchants,
freedom to determine prices
according to cost, restricts competition between different payment systems and restricts competition
between card companies. The other competition authority pointed out that the fact that most
merchants do not presently make use of the possibility to charge consumers in the absence of the
no-discrimination rule is not decisive but that the importance of the rule for competition conditions
on the payment card market should be considered.

limits merchants'

(30)

The domestic payment card scheme which submitted its observations to the Article 19(3) notice
agrees with the Commission's intention to clear the no-discrimination rule. Concerning the Visa rules
on cross-border issuing (see recital 16), it also remarked that in its view its members should be able
to apply all domestic rules, whether registered with Visa International or not.

(31)

For the assessment of the no-discrimination rule, the honour all cards rule and the Visa cross-border
acquiring rules under the Community competition rules, reference is made to recital 53.

II. LEGAL ASSESSMENT

7. ARTICLE 81(1) OF THE TREATY/ARTICLE 53 OF THE EEA AGREEMENT

7.1. THE RELEVANT MARKET

7.1.1. According to Visa

(32)

Visa argues that the relevant product market comprises all consumer payment instruments, that is,
apart from (all types of) payment cards (24) also cheques (25) and cash. To that end Visa refers in
particular to the opinion of several of its members. Moreover, Visa mentions two previous Commis-
sion decisions relating to cheques, in which the Commission allegedly recognised substitutability
between cheques and other means of payment (26). In addition, Visa refers to some judgments of US
Courts, stating, in the context of complaints against respectively the multilateral interchange fee and
the no-discrimination rule in the Visa International scheme, that the relevant market in which Visa
operates and competes is that for all consumer payment systems (27).

(33) As far as the relevant geographical market is concerned, Visa submits that in the light of global
e-commerce on the Internet and the introduction of the euro, the market is moving towards a
Community-wide or even worldwide market. This view is according to Visa shared by several of its
members.

7.1.2. The Commission's view

7.1.2.1. The relevant product market

(34)

Two types of competition relevant to payment cards can be distinguished. The first is between
different payment systems/networks (different payment card schemes/networks and possibly means
of payment other than cards), while the second is between financial institutions (usually banks) for
card-related activities (essentially issuing of cards to individuals and ‘acquiring’ of card payments

(24) For example, credit cards, deferred debit cards (also known as charge cards), direct debit cards, electronic purses,

proprietary cards (also known as store cards or own label cards), whether national or international cards.

(25) For example, eurocheques, traveller's cheques, national cheques.
(26) Decision of 30 June 1993 in Case IV/M.350 WestLB/Thomas Cook which states in paragraph 9 that ‘...it would seem
that traveller's cheques to a certain degree are in competition with other methods of payment, such as, e.g. credit
cards and eurocheques.’ Commission Decision 85/77/EEC in Case IV/30.717 — Uniform eurocheques (OJ L 35,
7.2.1985, p. 43) which states in recital 41 that a person travelling to a foreign country generally has a choice
between several means of payment, such as cash, traveller's cheques, postal payment orders, credit cards, ATM cards
and eurocheques.

(27) Nabanco Bancard Corporation v Visa USA (596 F. Supp.1231 (S.D. Fla. 1980)) affid 770 F 2d 592 (11th Cir. 1986)

and South Trust Corporation v Plus System (71.219 (N.D. Ala. 1995)).

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/31

from merchants). The former of these two types of competition is conventionally termed ‘system/
network market’ or ‘upstream market’, while the latter is conventionally termed ‘intra-system or
downstream market’. On the intra-system markets, within each payment system (Visa, for example),
financial
institutions compete with each other to issue cards bearing that brand or to acquire
merchants accepting that card.

(35) All these types of competition are affected by the Visa rules. Firstly, they affect the competitive
position of Visa with regard to other payment systems. Secondly they affect competition between
banks within the Visa system in so far as they lay down certain standard terms and conditions for
issuing or acquiring contracts, thus preventing banks from differentiating themselves from other
banks by offering different terms and conditions. However, the system market is the most important,
as it is the market on which Visa International itself is active, and from which it derives its revenues.

(36)

For a payment card to be widely used, it must be accepted by large numbers of merchants, and then
cardholders must choose to use that card among the different cards they hold and which are
accepted by the merchants in question. Demand from both merchants and cardholders must
therefore be analysed in order to determine the correct definition of the system market (28). This
demand is interrelated: even if a card is free to cardholders, it will not be used unless accepted by
merchants, and vice versa.

(37)

In light of the above, the Commission is not convinced by Visa's view that the relevant market
comprises all consumer means of payment. This can be explained as follows.

(38)

First of all, according to the Commission, cash can be excluded from the relevant market, for several
reasons. For merchants, cash is legal tender, and they are obliged to accept it wherever possible. The
costs of accepting cash are largely administrative costs, and hard to compare with the cost of
accepting cards. From the customer's point of view, cash is inconvenient and dangerous to carry in
large amounts, and unsuitable for expensive purchases. It frequently runs out and must be renewed
(normally by means of a cash withdrawal card). In all Member States, the average amount of a cash
purchase is far lower than the average amount of a card purchase, and although for some
medium-value payments either cash or cards are used, there is a clearly discernible distinction in the
use of cash and cards by the amount of the operation. It is therefore unlikely that a small but
significant price increase of either cards or cash (for either merchants or their customers) would lead
to a significant shift in usage from one to the other.

(39)

Secondly, according to the Commission, cheques can be excluded from the relevant market. In most
Member States, cheques are hardly ever used for over-the-counter purchases (being reserved for
In those Member States where cheques are often used for face-to-face
distance payments) (29).
purchases (mainly France, the United Kingdom and Ireland), the regulatory framework sometimes
differs (for example, in France, banks are currently prohibited by law from charging for issuing
cheques), and in any case, cheques have significantly different characteristics compared with cards (a
chequebook frequently runs out, a cheque is often only accepted in conjunction with either a cheque
guarantee card or an identity card, and a cheque must be filled in, thus losing time) (30).

(28) In a four-party payment card system such as Visa, both merchants (in their capacity as clients of the acquiring
services) and cardholders (in their capacity as clients of the issuing services) are to be considered as consumers, and
in order to determine which products are sufficiently substitutable to Visa cards, both the position of merchants and
cardholders will have to be taken into account.

(29) It is to be noted in this regard that the Commission decisions referred to by Visa, apart from the fact that they are
rather old and do not take into account the latest developments in the payment sector, relate to substitutability of
other means of payment to cheques and not the other way around. Moreover, the Commission in both decisions left
the exact definition of the relevant market open.

(30) At the moment eurocheques written in euro are guaranteed up to a maximum of EUR 170. As from 1 January

2002 the guarantee functionality of the eurocheque product will be abolished.

L 293/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

(40) Moreover, obviously all types of distance payments (giro transfers and so on) can be excluded from

the relevant market since they cannot be used to pay for items across the counter in shops.

(41)

(42)

(43)

It remains to be seen whether all types of card must be included on the relevant market. Possible
criteria for effecting a distinction between different cards are whether the card can be used
internationally or only within the State where it is issued, and the payment facility offered by the
card (immediate debit, deferred debit or credit). In practice, credit cards are normally (but not
exclusively) international, and debit cards are normally (but not exclusively) domestic. In many
Member States many individuals hold both the domestic debit card and an international credit card.
But international credit cards can also of course be used for domestic payments (a great majority of
payments with international cards are domestic payments), and for very many credit cards, the credit
facility is never used. Visa cards are always internationally usable cards, but their payment facility
varies, they can be credit or deferred debit cards, and sometimes even immediate debit cards (some
Visa/CB cards issued in France, and some Visa/Delta cards issued in the United Kingdom, for
example).

In the current Decision, the provisions in the Visa rules in question are found to be not restrictive of
competition, or not to have an appreciable effect, even on the narrowest possible market definition
(that is, that of international cards only). Therefore it is not necessary to determine whether the
relevant market should include other types of payment card than international cards.

It should also be briefly mentioned that the no-discrimination rule could potentially have an effect
on the markets on which merchants are active (that is the markets for the different goods and
services which they sell), since it limits the freedom of merchants to determine a marginal aspect of
their pricing on these markets. But, again since the effect of the no-discrimination rule is found not
to be appreciable (see recital 53), there is no need to define each of these very numerous markets in
any further detail.

7.1.2.2. Relevant geographical market

(44)

The relevant geographical market comprises the area in which the undertakings concerned are
involved in the supply of products or services, in which the conditions of competition are sufficiently
in particular,
homogeneous and which can be distinguished from neighbouring areas because,
conditions of competition are appreciably different in those areas.

(45) As far as the geographical market is concerned, the Commission believes that the relevant market to
be taken into account for assessing competitive issues relating to payment card schemes is still
national. The markets for issuing and acquiring payment cards are basically national markets (31).
This is still the case for domestic payment cards. Also for international payment cards the conditions
for issuing and acquiring are not yet sufficiently homogeneous between the different Member States.
For example, there are still important differences in merchant fees between different countries (32).
Moreover, the level of competition varies between Member States. For example, in some Member
States merchant acquiring is in the hands of one or only some acquirer(s) while in other Member
States the acquiring market is more competitive.

(31) See for example Commission Decision 96/454/EC — Banque Nationale de Paris/Dresdner Bank in Case IV/34.607
(OJ L 188, 27.7.1996, p. 37),
in which the Commission divided banking and other financial services into three
major categories: retail banking services, wholsesale banking services for undertakings and legal entities and activities
related to financial markets. As regard the relevant geographical markets,
the Commission concluded that retail
banking activities (under which payment cards fall) are national.

(32) Payment cards in Europe 1997, Retail Banking Research Ltd, International Overview p. 33, figure 29.

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/33

(46) However, although the relevant market is still basically national, international merchants in particular
(that is merchants with premises in several Member States) and international banks are increasingly
showing their interest in cross-border activities, in particular central acquiring, that is concluding a
contract with one Community bank who offers the best conditions, for card acceptance at retail
outlets throughout the Community. So far in particular international car rental companies and hotels
have actually concluded central acquiring contracts with internationally operating banks for Visa
cards. Moreover, at the Commission's request Visa has gradually removed remaining obstacles to
cross-border services (see recital 58). Therefore, the market is at least potentially a Community-wide
market. However, the exact market definition for the purposes of this case can remain open, having
regard to the fact that the purpose of the present Decision is to establish the absence of an
infringement of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and/or Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and that such
absence would be established even using the narrowest market definition.

7.2. THE STRUCTURE OF THE PAYMENT CARD MARKET

7.2.1. Inter-system competition

(47) Apart from Visa, the following major international payment organisations are currently active on the
European market: Europay International and MasterCard International
(through Europay), Japan
Credit Bureau (JCB) and the international three-party systems American Express and Diners Club
International. Of these international payment organisations Europay (in close cooperation with
MasterCard) is by far the most important competitor of Visa in Europe. The position of Visa is in
general stronger than that of Europay, but there are important differences between the Member
States (33). Visa is in particular strong in the United Kingdom, Spain, France and Italy. Europay on the
other hand is stronger in,

inter alia, Germany, the Netherlands and Austria (34).

(48) Apart from international payment card operators various national payment card operators are also
active in the different Member States. National debit cards are often the most used non-cash means
of payment in certain Member States.

7.2.2. Intra-system competition

7.2.2.1. Issuing Visa cards

(49)

In most Member States Visa cards are issued by several banks, either directly as a principal or
associate Visa member or as a member of a group member. The number of issuers varies per
Member State. Only in Finland is there just one Visa issuer, that is, the national group member
Luottokunta.

7.2.2.2. Acquiring merchants for Visa card acceptance

(50)

Visa acquiring activities are generally more concentrated, but the number of actual acquirers varies
from country to country. For example, in France there are many Visa acquirers, while there is de
facto only one single principal visa acquirer in Denmark (PBS, the sole acquirer for both Visa and for
Europay transactions) and Finland (Luottokunta, the sole acquirer for both Visa and Europay
transactions). In the other Member States with a Visa group member (that is, Austria, Belgium, Spain,
France and Sweden), not the group members themselves but several of their members acquire
merchants for Visa transactions. Nevertheless, in practice the acquiring business is often dominated
is by far the most
by one single acquirer. For example,
important acquirer, in Portugal Unicre is. Moreover, in Belgium around 90 % of all Visa transactions
are acquired by Bank Card Company.

in the Netherlands VSB International

(33) Moreover,
(34) Retail Banking Research Ltd, Payment cards in Europe, 1997.

it has to be kept in mind that cards are not available on a large scale in all Member States.

L 293/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

7.3. MARKET POSITION OF VISA

(51) On the national markets for cards (international cards like Visa and Eurocard/Mastercard, store cards
and main national debit schemes) Visa holds, in terms of number of cards in circulation a market
share varying between 4 % and 69 %. In terms of volume and value of Visa card transactions Visa's
market share varies respectively from 2 % to 95 % and 2 % to 93 % (35). However, the market power
of Visa should not only be measured in terms of market shares. In fact, Visa has developed and
operates a whole range of payment cards, including international credit and deferred debit cards
(Visa), international debit cards (Electron), ATM cards (Visa Plus) and an electronic purse (Visa Cash).
These cards are issued and merchants are acquired throughout the world through a network of
banks. In fact, like Europay, Visa has important network economies: almost all banks issue Visa cards
the
and Visa cards are accepted in an important number of merchant outlets throughout
Community. Moreover, a significant number of merchant categories, such as airlines,
Internet
retailers, mail order companies and restaurants, are dependent on international card networks such
as Visa with numerous users.

(52) Although there are no significant technical or legal/regulatory barriers for card systems to enter the
Community payment card market and banks are free to join competing systems such as American
Express and JCB, the Visa and Europay systems enjoy networking economies and represent sunk
investments on the part of the banks so that it is unlikely that a major new system could be
established. A very high proportion of banks in the Community is a member of one or both of those
systems, either directly or through a group. In such circumstances it would be commercially difficult
for any new product outside of those existing systems to establish itself in the market. However, the
presence of other credit and charge card companies such as American Express, Diners Club and JCB
shows that market entry is not impossible.

7.4. DECISIONS OF AN ASSOCIATION OF UNDERTAKINGS/AGREEMENTS BETWEEN UNDERTAKINGS

(53)

Visa and each of its members, whether credit institutions or entities owned by credit institutions,
engage in an economic activity and are hence undertakings within the meaning of Article 81(1) of
the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In addition, both Visa (a non-stock corporation
which is controlled by its member banks in particular by their representation in the international and
regional boards of directors) and its national group members are associations of undertakings within
the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. Hence, the rules
governing the Visa payment card systems can be regarded either as decisions of an association of
undertakings or as agreements between undertakings. The decisions/agreements in question are the
by-laws and the (international and EU) operating rules, the association/undertaking is Visa; and the
constituent members of the association/undertakings are the licensees under the Visa payment
systems.

7.5. RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION

7.5.1.1. The no-discrimination rule

(54)

The no-discrimination rule in the Visa rules restricts the freedom of merchants to act, in so far as it
prevents them from (sur)charging for Visa card use. This may have a restrictive effect on
competition. However, any such possible effect is not appreciable in the light of the results of the
market surveys (36) which were carried out at the Commission's request in countries where the
no-discrimination rule has been abolished (that is, Sweden and the Netherlands). This can be
explained as follows.

(35) See tables 1 to 3.
(36) ITM research on the effects of the abolition of the NDR in the Netherlands (March 2000) and IMA research on the

effects of the abolition of the NDR in Sweden (February 2000).

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/35

(55)

(56)

(57)

First, although the abolition of the no-discrimination rule restores merchants' freedom to set their
own prices as they see fit, only relatively few merchants (about 5 % in Sweden and 10 % in the
Netherlands) use this freedom by actually charging cardholders. The vast majority of merchants do
not use the possibility of surcharging in the absence of the no-discrimination rule. The main reason
for this is, according to the interviewed merchants, a foreseen negative cardholder reaction, leading
to loss of customers. This fact indicates a limited effect of the no-discrimination rule on competition
on the inter-system market between card systems, since (sur)charging is a factor which could
influence the decision of a consumer which card to use, but even after the abolition of the
no-discrimination rule this factor did not enter into play much.

Secondly, not only do most merchants not surcharge, they also say that the abolition of the
no-discrimination rule has had no effect on their merchant fees. Some merchants even say their
merchant fees have increased since the abolition of the rule. Therefore, the abolition of the rule had
only a very marginal impact on the intra-system acquiring market (it does not seem to increase
competition between acquiring banks so as to drive prices down).

Thirdly, as far as the impact of the abolition of the no-discrimination rule on competition between
merchants is concerned (on the markets for the different goods and services which merchants sell),
one has to note first that the ability to pay by card is an ancillary service to the merchants' core
commercial activity and that this service is never ‘sold’ in isolation. The pricing of this ancillary
service represents only a marginal component of the merchants' offer and the market studies do not
show that
the no-discrimination rule substantially affected price competition
between merchants on those markets, because little card (sur)charging has taken place, nor has it
increased price transparency for consumers because, in practice, only few merchants surcharge. Even
if they do surcharge, as such this does not inform consumers conclusively about the costs of the
card, since merchants may actually charge more than the merchant fee, for example in the taxi and
travel agencies sector in particular.

the abolition of

(58)

Therefore, in light of the empirical evidence obtained by the market surveys the no-discrimination
rule does not have an appreciable effect on competition and can therefore not be said to be
restrictive of competition within the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and/or Article 53 of the
EEA Agreement.

7.5.1.2. The modified rules on cross-border issuing

(59)

In their initial form the Visa rules on cross-border issuing raised several barriers for banks wanting to
issue Visa cards throughout the Community. First, the Visa rules did not — apart from the two very
specific exceptions — allow cross-border issuing in the real sense, since a branch or subsidiary had
to be established in the territory concerned. Such a requirement would be contrary to the mutual
recognition principle in Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20
March 2000 relating to the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (37) if imposed
by a public authority. Secondly, in those countries where Visa national group members exist (which
is presently the case in the majority of the Member States) these have to give their prior consent to
the establishment of the foreign branch and they may impose further conditions on the applicants.

(60)

The Commission considers that the modified Visa rules on cross-border issuing, which no longer
require the establishment of a subsidiary or branch and consequently the prior approval of a group
member, are not restrictive within the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and Article 53 of the
EEA Agreement.

(37) OJ L 126, 26.5.2000, p. 1. This Directive repealed, inter alia, Second Council Directive 89/646/EEC of 15 December
1989 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the taking up and pursuit of
the business of credit institutions and amending Directive 77/780/EEC (OJ L 386, 30.12.1989, p. 1).

L 293/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

7.5.1.3. The modified rules on cross-border acquiring

(61)

(62)

Like for cross-border issuing, the possibilities of cross-border acquiring were also initially very
limited under the Visa rules. Except for very specific categories of international merchants, the prior
establishment of a branch or subsidiary in the territory concerned was required and group members
had to give their consent to the establishment of a foreign branch. However, Visa International
extended its cross-border acquiring programme from 1 January 1999 to all categories of inter-
national merchants and, from 1 October 2000, also to national merchants.

The fact that, under the Visa rules, cross-border acquirers may have to respect certain domestic rules
which are applicable in the country concerned, provided that these have been registered with Visa
International, can as such not be considered as an impediment to cross-border acquiring by Visa
International, because otherwise, the Visa international rules would apply by default, and it is not
apparent why cross-border acquiring would be more difficult under national rules than under the
international rules of Visa International. This is without prejudice to the compatibility of these
domestic rules with the Community competition rules.

7.5.1.4. The principle of territorial licensing

(63)

The principle of territorial licensing in the Visa rules restricts the commercial freedom of action of
the banks participating in the Visa card payment systems: banks are in principle not allowed to issue
cards and to acquire merchants' transactions outside the area in which they have established a
branch or subsidiary and for which they hold a licence, which usually covers a single Member
State (38). Moreover, the Visa rules on cross-border services have a restrictive effect on the freedom to
act of potential cardholders and merchants, who are restricted in shopping around for the supplier of
payment card services of their choice.

(64) Although restricting the commercial freedom of the parties involved, the Commission does not
consider the principle of territorial licensing as such as an appreciable restriction of competition
within the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement since each
Visa member may obtain an amendment to the original trademark licence or an ‘additional licence’,
depending on local trademark law, for any other territory where it is authorised to carry on banking
activities.

7.5.1.5. The no acquiring without issuing rule

(65)

The requirement that all members of the Visa payment card system must issue cards before acquiring
and that they should issue a reasonable volume of cards restricts the commercial freedom of the
participating banks. However, the obligation to issue cards may be said to promote the development
of the Visa card system by ensuring a large card base, and thereby making the system more attractive
for merchants. The no acquiring without issuing rule does not in itself create significant barriers to
entry on the acquiring market. In particular, as far as cross-border acquiring is concerned, according
to Visa cards issued in all EC/EFTA countries are taken into account. Therefore, the no acquiring
without issuing rule does not in itself restrict competition in an appreciable way and therefore falls
outside the scope of Article 81(1) of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

(38) Except as between Ireland and the United Kingdom which is considered by Visa as a single territory.

10.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 293/37

7.5.1.6. The honour all cards rule

(66)

(67)

(68)

It should be noted that the honour all cards rule in the Visa payment card system, which requires
merchants to accept all valid cards with either the Visa or the Electron symbol which are properly
presented for payment, does not imply that merchants who accept a particular Visa card are obliged
to accept all other Visa products, e.g. the Electron debit card, under the same conditions. However,
merchants are obliged to accept every valid Visa card of a particular brand. For example merchants
accepting Visa cards have to accept all Visa cards, whether they are issued as credit cards (as is
normally the case in the United Kingdom), as deferred debit cards (for example, as is usually the case
in Belgium), or as immediate debit cards (which is occasionally the case in the United Kingdom and
France, for example) and whether they are issued as for example classic Visa cards or corporate Visa
cards.

The Commission agrees with Visa that the honour all cards rule promotes the development of its
payment systems since it ensures the universal acceptance of the cards, irrespective of the identity of
the issuing bank. The Visa payment system could not properly function if a merchant or an
acquiring bank were able to refuse, for example, cards issued by a bank established abroad (or, for
that matter cards issued by other domestic banks). The development of a payment system depends
on issuers being able to be sure that their cards will be accepted by merchants contracted to other
acquirers. Without such assurance, a brand or logo on a payment card loses most of its meaning and
utility, especially where an international card is concerned, and cards are often relied upon by
travellers for foreign payments.

The fact that under the honour all cards rule, merchants are obliged to accept all valid cards with a
certain brand, regardless of the type of card and regardless of the merchant fee, cannot be said to be
restrictive of competition. The fact that the fees that acquiring banks may charge to merchants may
be different does not demonstrate that different types of Visa cards are unrelated products. Moreover,
the merchant fee is decided by merchant acquirers, not laid down by Visa International, and in many
cases merchant fees are negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Leaving it up to an individual merchant
whether to accept or not a particular Visa card, solely on the basis of the merchant fee which it is
charged by its bank, would seriously endanger the universal acceptance of Visa international
payment cards. Cardholders would not know in advance whether their Visa card would actually be
accepted. It has also to be taken into account that the type of Visa card issued may vary from issuer
to issuer and in particular from one country to another. Clearly, if it were left to merchants whether
or not to accept a particular Visa card, solely on the basis of the merchant fee they may have to pay,
this would endanger the international function of the card. Finally, the Visa International honour all
cards rule does not oblige merchants to accept future types of Visa card, since merchants are free at
any time to stop accepting Visa.

(69)

The honour all cards rule (in the Visa rules) is thus found to fall outside Article 81(1) of the Treaty
and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

7.6. EFFECT ON TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES

(70)

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has consistently held that,
in order for an
agreement or a practice to affect trade between Member States, it must be possible to foresee with a
sufficient degree of probability on the basis of a set of objective factors of law or fact that it may
have an influence, direct or indirect, actual or potential, on the pattern of trade between Member
States, such as might prejudice the realisation of the aim of a single market in all Member States (39).
The effect on intra-Community trade is normally the result of a combination of several factors
which, taken separately, are not necessarily decisive (40). Moreover, the Court has constantly held that
the effect on intra-Community trade should be appreciable, although it has specified that a potential
effect suffices (41).

(39) See, for example, Case 42/84 Remia v Commission [1985] ECR 2545, paragraph 22.
(40) See, for example, Case C-250/92 Gøttrup-Klim Grovvareforeninger v Dansk Landbrugs Grovvareselskab AmbA [1994] ECR

I-5641, paragraph 54.

(41) See, for example, Case C-219/95 Ferriere Nord v Commission [1997] ECR I-4411-19 and Joined Cases C-215/96 and

216/96, Bagnasco [1999] ECR I-135).

L 293/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.11.2001

(71)

Visa cards are by their nature cross-border means of payment, that is, cards which can be used by
cardholders not only in the country where the cards are issued, but also for payments at merchant
outlets or for cash withdrawals in other Member States. According to Visa, in 1998 [business secret;
about 10 %] of all Visa transactions at merchants outlets in the Community were international
transactions. The Visa rules are applicable at least in the whole common market.

(72)

In view of the foregoing, the various provisions contained in the Visa rules have at least potentially
an effect on trade between the Member States,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

On the basis of the facts in its possession, the Commission finds no grounds for action under Article 81(1)
of the EC Treaty and/or Article 53 of the EEA Agreement in respect of the following provisions of the
notified rules and regulations governing the Visa International payment card scheme:
— the principle of territorial licensing in section 2.10 of the Visa International by-laws and regional boards

delegations (‘the by-laws’),

— the no-discrimination rule in section 5.2.C of the general rules — Visa international operating regula-

tions — volume 1 (‘the general rules’),

— the modified rules on cross-border issuing in section 2.10 of the by-laws, section 3.03 of the by-laws

and section 3.2.G of the general rules,

— the modified rules on cross-border acquiring in section 2.10 of the by-laws, section 4.2.A.2b of the

general rules and section 4.11 of the European Union — regional operating regulations,

— the no acquiring without issuing rule in sections 2.04 to 2.07 of the by-laws,
— the honour all cards rule in sections 4.2.A.1.C and 5.2.B.1 of the general rules.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to:

Visa International Service Association
European Union region
99 Kensington High Street
London W8 5TE
United Kingdom.

Done at Brussels, 9 August 2001.

For the Commission

Mario MONTI

Member of the Commission

Table 1: number of cards in circulation as at 31 December 1999 (where available) — POS capability (1)

ANNEX

Number of cards

Visa

MasterCard/Europay

American Express

Diners Club

Store/Private label

National bank
schemes and
proprietary bank
schemes (2)

Total

Estimated market
share Visa
(%)

All data in '000s

1998 data (3)

1998 data (3)

1998 data (3)

1998/99 data (4)

EU countries

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

711

2 133

1 498

1 270

15 896

5 769

1 402

811

9 257

212

1 520

8 060

22 815

3 136

50 957

4 255

5 414

284

34

11 507

81 139

2 707

390

11 965

65

17 770

896

17 215

1 557

31 911

Total EU countries

125 449

187 109

EFTA countries

Iceland

Norway

Total EFTA countries

301

2 300

2 601

153

1 251

1 404

50

145

11

25

889

1 200

50

35

695

220

52

285

177

1 630

5 464

70

70

115

140

140

70

84

340

226

10

500

160

80

150

310

2 325

135

135

400

1 950

995

1 124

29 453

4 000

150

15

4 317

1 330

556

16 781

2 815

18 586

82 472

620

620

795

8 291

2 525

3 500

6 262

25 000

2 426

588

21 200

230

17 500

2 188

28 689

730

21 791

141 715

4 421

4 421

6 326

18 073

5 453

6 023

64 091

117 448

6 961

1 849

47 934

507

38 500

11 752

85 865

8 565

125 185

544 534

454

8 797

9 251

Total EU and EFTA countries

128 050

188 513

5 534

2 460

83 092

146 136

553 785

Sources:
Visa quarterly operating certificate (completed by Visa members), Europay, Retail Banking Research Limited, Lafferty and as per accompanying data sheet for national bank schemes and proprietary bank schemes.
Excludes Visa commercial cards and, for European countries, business card data for MasterCard/Europay, but includes business card data for T & E organisations.
(1) This table excludes (where data is available) cards without POS capability (e.g. ATM only cards).
(2) Data for national bank card schemes and proprietary bank schemes may include cards also badged with a MasterCard/Europay mark or Visa mark.

The estimated market share of Visa does not include these cards and may therefore be higher.

(3) Data for 1999 was not available. 1998 figures may be substantially below the 1999 figures.
(4) All data 1998 unless otherwise specified on accompanying data sheet.

11,24

11,80

27,47

21,09

24,80

4,91

20,14

43,86

19,31

41,81

3,95

68,58

26,57

36,61

40,71

23,04

66,30

26,15

28,12

23,12

.

1
0
1
1
2
0
0
1

.

E
N

O

f
f
i
c
i
a
l

J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

t
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

L

2
9
3
/
3
9

Table 2: total number of card transactions at POS for year end 31 December 1999 (where available)

Visa

MasterCard/Europay

T & E organisation (1)

Store/Private label

National bank
schemes and
proprietary bank
schemes (2)

Total

Estimated market
share Visa
(%)

All data in '000s

1998 data (3)

1998 data (3)

1998/99 data (4)

EU-countries

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

Total EU countries

EFTA countries

Iceland

Norway

Total EFTA countries

15 349

45 927

167 103

43 425

1 455 590

89 277

19 324

33 144

152 924

9 066

13 788

169 265

445 063

153 832

71 678

113 715

10 381

4 636

953 732

645 990

7 838

13 562

166 192

2 490

767 934

6 579

187 233

68 345

1 845 905

1 179 613

9 900

7 100

5 250

3 400

37 000

30 000

7 480

2 500

17 400

0

5 745

936

19 000

8 200

68 000

500

28 500

1 990

30 000

343 000

33 000

20

0

7 900

0

2 600

1 072

60 915

56 500

82 000

656 000

236 400

341 970

17 000

746 600

97 427

195 242

840 724

317 861

3 131 292

798 267

34 662

66 206

1 091 016

11 556

790 067

177 852

712 211

286 877

1 510 000

4 685 518

4 658 981

4 199 918

221 911

647 997

3 507 970

13 236 777

37 828

165 458

203 286

15 022

58 599

73 620

3 800

3 800

1 000

1 000

473 000

52 850

701 857

473 000

754 707

Total EU and EFTA countries

4 862 267

4 273 539

225 711

648 997

3 980 970

13 991 484

15,75

23,52

19,88

13,66

46,49

11,18

55,75

50,06

14,02

78,45

1,75

95,17

62,49

53,62

39,40

35,20

71,58

23,57

26,94

34,75

Sources:
Visa quarterly operating certificate (completed by Visa members), Europay, Retail Banking Research Limited, Lafferty and as per accompanying data sheet for national bank schemes and proprietary bank schemes.
Excludes Visa commercial cards but includes business card data for MarterCard/Europay and T & E organisations.

(1) Retail Banking Research Limited does not define T & E organisations. It certainly includes American Express and Diners Club and may include JCB, which it mentions in its glossary as best known for issuing the JCB T & E card.
(2) Data for national bank card schemes and proprietary bank schemes may include cards also badged with a MasterCard/Europay mark or Visa mark.

The estimated market share of Visa does not include these cards and may therefore be higher.

(3) Data for 1999 was not available. 1998 figures may be substantially below the 1999 figures.
(4) All data 1998 unless otherwise specified on accompanying data sheet.

L

2
9
3
/
4
0

E
N

O

f
f
i
c
i
a
l

J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

t
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

.

1
0
1
1
2
0
0
1

.

Table 3: Total Value of Card Transactions at POS for year end 31 December 1999 (where available) (1)

Visa

MasterCard/Europay

T & E organisation (1)

Store/Private label

National bank
schemes and
proprietary bank
schemes (2)

Total

Estimated market
share Visa
(%)

All data in USD '000s

1998 data (3)

1998 data (3)

1998/99 data (4)

EU countries

Austria

Belgium

Denmrk

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

Total EU countries

Total EU countries

Iceland

Norway

1 485 004

3 960 382

8 051 908

2 116 461

74 044 891

7 417 655

1 354 157

2 502 968

4 834 448

6 504 033

1 148 949

394 844

45 490 585

56 341 610

445 447

1 063 128

1 386 659

1 251 523

369 218

248 860

14 745 901

3 326 300

624 901

245 633

178 053

4 278 715

139 951

1 723 556

10 794 559

7 884 164

15 994 653

9 710 026

15 278 280

39 391 484

149 134 524

322 807 385

4 465 266

28 150 590

99 701 421

1 928

0

902 866

2 426 433

4 714 595

13 753 304

13 558 653

2 464 285

1 277 237

103 813 753

134 867 232

862 608

1 032 651

7 008 553

21 894 655

9 193 646

298 549

0

39 724 553

1 077 140

386 208

8 943 151

5 410 209

88 671

1 969 373

936 847

131 139 750

77 369 785

10 906 528

0

493 491

78 239

3 659 130

2 330 107

4 037 063

1 161 157

42 327 835

7 561 671

36 466 309

17 870 809

90 375 016

313 828 142

285 818 595

261 914 152

39 641 838

62 054 220

383 171 309

1 032 600 114

3 160 854

9 571 372

700 673

4 075 513

342 763

1 599 562

36 853 394

3 861 527

52 442 604

Total EFTA countries

12 732 226

4 776 186

342 763

1 599 562

36 853 394

56 304 131

Total EU and EFTA countries

298 550 821

266 690 338

39 984 601

63 653 781

420 024 703

1 088 904 245

18,84

24,76

82,92

13,85

22,94

7,44

55,81

53,09

10,20

74,29

2,44

92,69

60,04

51,45

41,79

27,68

81,86

18,25

22,61

27,42

Sources:
Visa quarterly operating certificate (completed by Visa members), Europay, Retail Banking Research Limited, Lafferty and as per accompanying data sheet for national bank schemes and proprietary bank schemes.
Excludes Visa commercial cards but includes business card data for MasterCard/Europay and T & E organisations.
(1) Retail Banking Research Limited does not define ‘T & E organisations’. It certainly includes American Express and Diners Club and may include JCB, which it mentions in its glossary as best known for issuing the JCB T & E card.
(2) Data for national bank card schemes and proprietary bank schemes may include cards also badged with a MasterCard/Europay mark or Visa mark.

The estimated market share of Visa does not include these cards and may therefore be higher.

(3) Data for 1999 was not available. 1998 figures may be substantially below the 1999 figures.
(4) All data 1998 unless otherwise specified on accompanying data sheet.

.

1
0
1
1
2
0
0
1

.

E
N

O

f
f
i
c
i
a
l

J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

t
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

L

2
9
3
/
4
1