Visa and Mastercard Interchange Fee Settlement: Quarterly Claims Update

Businesses long awaiting payments from the Visa and Mastercard antitrust case now have a recurring status update detailing disbursements and contested claims in the review pipeline.

For merchants, the damages settlement is primarily a backward-looking reimbursement process, while any forward-looking changes to acceptance rules or pricing typically depend on separate, court-approved injunctive relief and how it is implemented in practice.

Quarterly Status of Claims and Disputes

Tens of thousands of claim submissions tied to the interchange case are queued for examination by a court-appointed special master, per the inaugural quarterly report filed Friday.

As of June 30, the escrow totaled $5.17 billion after an initial $418.9 million was paid out, according to Epiq, the claims administrator.

• Most of the 40,208 submissions sent to Special Master James Orenstein involve issues other than tax identification number conflicts.
• In 1,255 matters, “the multi-step conflict resolution process has been exhausted,” the report noted.
• Roughly 13,000 business tax identification numbers remain contested, with multiple filers claiming authority over the same tax identification numbers, the administrator said.
• An additional 12,414 claimants await rulings on sales data that will determine their distribution amounts.

Orenstein, a retired New York City magistrate judge, was tapped in September 2024 to manage disputes.

Merchant Participation, Fund Updates, and Reporting Timeline

Court filings also track how many businesses registered for potential recovery, submitted claims, and received initial distributions.

The court ordered plaintiffs and the administrator to issue these updates after a class member sought more transparency earlier this year. The next quarterly report is scheduled for Oct. 9.

In May, plaintiffs asked United States District Judge Brian Cogan to authorize a second round of payments; that motion remains pending.

The settlement’s court-approved administrator manages claim intake, payment processing, and claimant communications.

1. Confirm eligibility based on whether the business accepted Visa or Mastercard during the covered class period and whether it is part of the class (including whether it opted out).
2. Submit a claim through the administrator’s official claims portal or via a paper claim form delivered to the administrator.
3. Provide identifying information needed to match the claimant to the claim record, including business details and a tax identification number.
4. Provide the sales and acceptance information requested for the claim, which may include card-sales data used to determine an allocation.
5. Certify the submission as required and respond to any administrator follow-ups, including requests to resolve duplicate filings, authority disputes, or data questions.
6. Meet the court-set filing deadlines; for this damages settlement, the main claim-filing window has generally closed, and new submissions typically would require court permission if late claims are allowed at all.

How much an eligible claimant recovers is generally calculated by allocating the net settlement fund across approved claims based on reported or validated payment card sales during the class period, with adjustments for issues such as overlapping submissions, contested authority over a tax identification number, and sales-data rulings. As a result, recoveries can vary widely: a business with modest card volume may receive a relatively small payment, while higher-volume merchants may receive larger distributions, and payments can also be affected by administrative deductions and the timing of additional payout rounds.

Case Background and Class Coverage

The damages settlement with the card networks was reached in 2018, though numerous class members opted out to pursue separate recoveries. A federal judge granted final approval the next year, triggering a series of appeals and related litigation that extended the timeline; ongoing disputes and court motions can delay when portions of the escrow are released, even after some payments have begun.

The accord addressed part of the long-running antitrust dispute over allegedly excessive payment card interchange fees. Covered class members are United States businesses that accepted Visa or Mastercard between Jan. 1, 2004, and Jan. 25, 2019.

On June 9, Judge Cogan granted preliminary approval for a separate phase focused on injunctive relief.

For small business owners, the damages settlement is largely a reimbursement for past interchange costs rather than an automatic reduction in future swipe fees. Any practical change in what a small merchant pays at the register is more likely to depend on whether injunctive-relief terms are finalized, how card-network rules and acquirer pricing respond, and what options the merchant can operationally use through its processor (for example, rule-compliant surcharging or discount programs where permitted, and negotiating pricing structure).

For credit cardholders, the effects are typically indirect. If merchants’ costs fall or merchants gain more flexibility in acceptance practices, some of that could flow through to consumer prices over time, but cardholders could also see changes in how merchants present payment choices. Separately, card issuers and networks may adjust cardholder pricing, rewards, or fees based on competitive and economic factors, so consumer outcomes can vary by issuer and card product.

More broadly for merchants, any shift in acceptance policies or fee structures would not be automatic under the damages settlement alone. Changes, if they occur, would generally follow final court action on the injunctive-relief phase and then require implementation by the card networks, processors, and merchants, which can take additional time and may require merchants to opt in, update point-of-sale settings, or coordinate with their acquirer before any new options affect real-world checkout pricing.