IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v92y2025i5p3067-3111..html

Who Bears the Welfare Costs of Monopoly? The Case of the Credit Card Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle F Herkenhoff
  • Gajendran Raveendranathan

Abstract

We measure the distribution of welfare losses from non-competitive behaviour in the U.S. credit card industry during the 1970s and 1980s. The early credit card industry was characterized by regional monopolies. Ensuing legal decisions led to competitive reforms that resulted in greater, but still limited, oligopolistic competition. We measure the distributional consequences of these reforms by developing and estimating a heterogeneous agent, defaultable debt framework with oligopolistic lenders. The transition from monopoly to oligopolistic competition yields welfare gains equivalent to a one-time transfer worth $3,600 (in 2016 dollars) for the bottom decile of earners (roughly 50% of their annual income) versus $1,200 for the top decile of earners. As the credit market expands, low-income households benefit more since they rely disproportionately on credit to smooth consumption. Greater competition also explains rising bankruptcies, chargeoffs, and credit to income ratios. Lastly, we bound the welfare gains from competition by computing a perfectly competitive benchmark. Aggregate welfare gains are 40% larger from perfect competition but distributed similarly to oligopolistic competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle F Herkenhoff & Gajendran Raveendranathan, 2025. "Who Bears the Welfare Costs of Monopoly? The Case of the Credit Card Industry," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 92(5), pages 3067-3111.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:92:y:2025:i:5:p:3067-3111.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdae098
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Gajendran Raveendranathan & Georgios Stefanidis, 2025. "The Unprecedented Fall In U.S. Revolving Credit," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 66(1), pages 393-451, February.
    3. J. Carter Braxton & Nisha Chikhale & Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Gordon M. Phillips, 2024. "Intergenerational Mobility and Credit," NBER Working Papers 32031, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Jacob D. Leshno & Elaine Shi & Rafael Pass, 2024. "On the Viability of Open-Source Financial Rails: Economic Security of Permissionless Consensus," Papers 2409.08951, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2025.
    5. Natalia Kovrijnykh & Igor Livshits & Ariel Zetlin-Jones, 2026. "Building Credit Histories," Working Papers 26-17, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    6. Raveendranathan, Gajendran, 2020. "Revolving credit lines and targeted search," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Li, Quan & Zha, Yong & Dong, Yu, 2023. "Subsidize or Not: The Competition of Credit Card and Online Credit in Platform-based Supply Chain System," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(2), pages 644-658.
    8. Tal Gross & Raymond Kluender & Feng Liu & Matthew J. Notowidigdo & Jialan Wang, 2021. "The Economic Consequences of Bankruptcy Reform," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(7), pages 2309-2341, July.
    9. Florian Exler & Michéle Tertilt, 2020. "Consumer Debt and default: A Macro Perspective," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2020_153v2, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    10. David Berger & Kyle Herkenhoff & Andreas R. Kostøl & Simon Mongey, 2024. "An Anatomy of Monopsony: Search Frictions, Amenities, and Bargaining in Concentrated Markets," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 1-47.
    11. Exler, Florian & Tertilt, Michèle, 2020. "Consumer Debt and Default: A Macroeconomic Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 14425, Centre for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
    • E44 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Money and Interest Rates - - - Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:92:y:2025:i:5:p:3067-3111.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.