US Bank 4% Smartly Visa Credit Card

[jeffyscott]

I wonder if the new top tier, Platinum Plus, will get some of the Pinnacle benefits, specifically unlimited wire transfers.

Well, free wire transfers are not listed among the things being eliminated, so I'd think Platinum Plus will either get unlimited or whatever "premium" offered (apparently 1 per month). In either case, it doesn't appear that there will be any benefit to going beyond $100K?

These Smart Rewards benefits and tier qualification are being discontinued:
The Safe Deposit Box annual rental fee discount (this benefit will remain for the Senior Customer Group)
The Home Equity Line of Credit Annual Fee discount
The Financial Consultation with a Wealth Management professional
The credit account qualification for the Primary tier

Personally the only benefits that I care about are the credit card rebates and the higher interest rate on savings (and account fee waivers, of course). Free ATM withdrawals is the only other one that's of even some potential value to us, though we've not used an ATM for about 4 years or so.

[EricGold]

I wonder if the new top tier, Platinum Plus, will get some of the Pinnacle benefits, specifically unlimited wire transfers.

Well, free wire transfers are not listed among the things being eliminated, so I'd think Platinum Plus will either get unlimited or whatever "premium" offered (apparently 1 per month). In either case, it doesn't appear that there will be any benefit to going beyond $100K?

These Smart Rewards benefits and tier qualification are being discontinued (my Italics):
... ...
The Financial Consultation with a Wealth Management professional

Welp, they fooled me. I figured that the 'free' wealth management consultation was one of the few ways USBank could monetize their generous rebate card. My personal experience was that they funneled me into the 'wealth advisor' on the flimsiest of excuses. That person quickly realized I was not interested in his services and did not press, but I was not surprised by the screening. Those folks charge a 1.65% AUM, and who knows what awful funds on top and/or garbage annuity sales.

As a gossip detail, the 'advisor' asked me why I wasn't interested in actively managed funds. I gave the question some thought because I was on my best behaviour (never that great in general) and eventually responded "because I am cheap, and I am competent."

[jeffyscott]

^ Yeah, that one surprised me also. I'd have been less surprised had they made it mandatory .

[SilenceAttack]

Anybody hear of this? Smartly might get discontinued?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/s/lFEzd8OpVj

[Walkure]

Anybody hear of this? Smartly might get discontinued?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/s/lFEzd8OpVj

Surprising, if true. Went ahead and did an online application just in case.

[EricGold]

I'm feeling better about the $30 fee I was charged by USBank for a returned payment. Perhaps it places me in the select group of Smartly customers who have actually contributed to the USBank welfare fund. Surely USBank will want to continue our mutually beneficial relationship, right ?!

</joking>

[MBB_Boy]

And now this change. I'm in a group that gets the savings waived anyway and am also at Platinum tier and getting the 4%, but interesting to see all the scrambling in their side.

Did you mean the checking account fee? The only group waiver for savings appears to be minors:
The $5 monthly maintenance fee is waived with the presence of a Bank Smartly® Checking, Safe Debit account, Bank Smartly™ Visa Signature® card, or for accounts with a minor under the age of 18. Per footnote 2 at:
https://www.usbank.com/bank-accounts/sa ... vings.html

There's no mention of removing the savings account fee waiver for having a credit card. But this notice was on the checking account statement, so it's possible that there will be a notice relating to that on the next savings account statement.

It's interesting that they actually lowered the top tier to $100K, Pinnacle at $250,000+ is eliminated. I'm happy to see that only because I'd rather that they not raise the asset requirement for the 4% credit card rebates, not that those tiers necessarily need to match these but it's at least a good sign.

Veterans don't pay the fee either

[MBB_Boy]

Anybody hear of this? Smartly might get discontinued?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/s/lFEzd8OpVj

Yes, I mentioned in my post yesterday that they had stopped accepting applications in branch

[tj]

Anybody hear of this? Smartly might get discontinued?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/s/lFEzd8OpVj

Yes, I mentioned in my post yesterday that they had stopped accepting applications in branch

"in branch" is a big caveat. They probably have to compensate bankers for selling those cards. They are cutting costs wherever they can. People obviously can still apply online.

[Lastrun]

Yes, I mentioned in my post yesterday that they had stopped accepting applications in branch

"in branch" is a big caveat. They probably have to compensate bankers for selling those cards. They are cutting costs wherever they can. People obviously can still apply online.

There was also a recent rumor that they have suspended product changes to the Smartly. https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/c ... ?rdt=55536

[jeffyscott]

Did you mean the checking account fee? The only group waiver for savings appears to be minors:
The $5 monthly maintenance fee is waived with the presence of a Bank Smartly® Checking, Safe Debit account, Bank Smartly™ Visa Signature® card, or for accounts with a minor under the age of 18. Per footnote 2 at:
https://www.usbank.com/bank-accounts/sa ... vings.html

There's no mention of removing the savings account fee waiver for having a credit card. But this notice was on the checking account statement, so it's possible that there will be a notice relating to that on the next savings account statement.

It's interesting that they actually lowered the top tier to $100K, Pinnacle at $250,000+ is eliminated. I'm happy to see that only because I'd rather that they not raise the asset requirement for the 4% credit card rebates, not that those tiers necessarily need to match these but it's at least a good sign.

Veterans don't pay the fee either

But only with also having a checking account, right?

Veterans get "Automatic enrollment in minimum tier of Plus", that gets the checking account fee waived. Having the checking account gets the savings account fee waived.

[tj]

"in branch" is a big caveat. They probably have to compensate bankers for selling those cards. They are cutting costs wherever they can. People obviously can still apply online.

There was also a recent rumor that they have suspended product changes to the Smartly. https://www.reddit.com/r/CreditCards/c ... ?rdt=55536

The product change has always been YMMV. I had to call Mike 3 times.

[EricGold]

If I was the economist in charge of making the Smartly credit card profitable for the bank, my first step would be to probably eliminate, but surely cap, all federal and state tax payments.

[tj]

If I was the economist in charge of making the Smartly credit card profitable for the bank, my first step would be to probably eliminate, but surely cap, all federal and state tax payments.

People sure have a weird obsession with this. I'd be absolutely shocked if they carved something out for taxes vs other types of purchases. It seems way more likely to just see a monthly cap on 4% spend.

I've redeemed a whopping $31 from this card. Sure glad it was just a PC and not a wasted new account.

[Leesbro63]

If I was the economist in charge of making the Smartly credit card profitable for the bank, my first step would be to probably eliminate, but surely cap, all federal and state tax payments.

People sure have a weird obsession with this. I'd be absolutely shocked if they carved something out for taxes vs other types of purchases. It seems way more likely to just see a monthly cap on 4% spend.

I've redeemed a whopping $31 from this card. Sure glad it was just a PC and not a wasted new account.

I think I agree with EricGold on this. Capping the 4% spend hurts wealthier customers who they are courting. The tax thing is somewhat of a free lunch for the diner (cardholder), and free lunches get progressively more expensive for the chef as more and more people show up to eat. Buying a new sofa actually costs the card holder money. Paying tax costs the card holder zero (beyond the tax bill that has to be paid anyway). There's no incentive to NOT use it. Whereas the sofa buyer has to decide if that new sofa is really worth $4000 to them or not. True, Bank of America has never limited their 2.625% rebate for taxes. But there's much less incentive for big taxpayers to jump through the Bank of America hoops to get a net rebate on paying taxes of just under 1%.

[tj]

People sure have a weird obsession with this. I'd be absolutely shocked if they carved something out for taxes vs other types of purchases. It seems way more likely to just see a monthly cap on 4% spend.

I've redeemed a whopping $31 from this card. Sure glad it was just a PC and not a wasted new account.

I think I agree with EricGold on this. Capping the 4% spend hurts wealthier customers who they are courting. The tax thing is somewhat of a free lunch for the diner (cardholder), and free lunches get progressively more expensive for the chef as more and more people show up to eat. Buying a new sofa actually costs the card holder money. Paying tax costs the card holder zero (beyond the tax bill that has to be paid anyway). There's no incentive to NOT use it. Whereas the sofa buyer has to decide if that new sofa is really worth $4000 to them or not. True, Bank of America has never limited their 2.625% rebate for taxes. But there's much less incentive for big taxpayers to jump through the Bank of America hoops to get a net rebate on paying taxes of just under 1%.

I really don't think the bank cares whether the paid bill is mandatory or discretionary to the buyer. $ is $.

Carving out something special for taxes is arbitrary. Plenty of people in California and Florida have home insurance premiums that are absolutely massive, more than I've ever paid in taxes.

[HooCares]

I think I agree with EricGold on this. Capping the 4% spend hurts wealthier customers who they are courting. The tax thing is somewhat of a free lunch for the diner (cardholder), and free lunches get progressively more expensive for the chef as more and more people show up to eat. Buying a new sofa actually costs the card holder money. Paying tax costs the card holder zero (beyond the tax bill that has to be paid anyway). There's no incentive to NOT use it. Whereas the sofa buyer has to decide if that new sofa is really worth $4000 to them or not. True, Bank of America has never limited their 2.625% rebate for taxes. But there's much less incentive for big taxpayers to jump through the Bank of America hoops to get a net rebate on paying taxes of just under 1%.

I really don't think the bank cares whether the paid bill is mandatory or discretionary to the buyer. $ is $.

Carving out something special for taxes is arbitrary. Plenty of people in California and Florida have home insurance premiums that are absolutely massive, more than I've ever paid in taxes.

It is not arbitrary as different merchants have different processing agreements/different interchange fees. The tax services are charging ~1.75% for CC payments -- Uncle Sam surely is not taking a haircut for you to pay with a CC, and there is a cost to process CC -- so it is safe to assume that US Bank and Visa are getting less than 1.75% in interchange fees. Depending on the split between US Bank and Visa, US Bank may only be earning <1% on interchange fees on this transaction but paying out 4%. A huge loss. Compare to say an up and down the street merchant using Square who is paying 2.9% + transaction fee. Maybe that transaction is only costing US Bank 1-1.5%.

[Leesbro63]

I think I agree with EricGold on this. Capping the 4% spend hurts wealthier customers who they are courting. The tax thing is somewhat of a free lunch for the diner (cardholder), and free lunches get progressively more expensive for the chef as more and more people show up to eat. Buying a new sofa actually costs the card holder money. Paying tax costs the card holder zero (beyond the tax bill that has to be paid anyway). There's no incentive to NOT use it. Whereas the sofa buyer has to decide if that new sofa is really worth $4000 to them or not. True, Bank of America has never limited their 2.625% rebate for taxes. But there's much less incentive for big taxpayers to jump through the Bank of America hoops to get a net rebate on paying taxes of just under 1%.

I really don't think the bank cares whether the paid bill is mandatory or discretionary to the buyer. $ is $.

Carving out something special for taxes is arbitrary. Plenty of people in California and Florida have home insurance premiums that are absolutely massive, more than I've ever paid in taxes.

I think the bank will care once they analyze the data. (And I hope they aren't reading this!!). And I'm guessing that you have taxes mostly withheld via W2 employment. This type of card incentivizes those of us with no withholding and relatively large tax estimates to charge taxes where we previously would not have. Buy, hey, let the free lunch continue! I'll have the surf and turf!

[zhiwiller]

It will be a pain (and a s-show) if they decide to pull the rug this early, but nothing to do except cross that bridge when we get there and then join the inevitable class action.

[EricGold]

From the bank's POV, there may indeed be a negative purchase arbitrage going on when comparing tax payment Vs ordinary purchases. My take on this is more centered on the notion that this card scheme can only be profitable to the bank if customers pay enough interest charges in aggregate to more than offset the rebates. Are retirees with estimated tax bills paying them with the Smartly and then incurring interest charges ? Is there a single Bogler in that boat ?

I'll guess not. And then there are the people like me, with estimated tax payments inflated by Roth conversion strategies. I cannot see any of us paying tax with credit card debt.

How about small businesses ? Maybe, but USBank goes out of its way to dissuade use of the card for small business activities for rather obvious reasons.

All told, I'm really skeptical that estimated tax payments are paid with credit card debt. I'll be happy to be wrong since I am mighty pleased with the card as it stands right now.

[Leesbro63]

It will be a pain (and a s-show) if they decide to pull the rug this early, but nothing to do except cross that bridge when we get there and then join the inevitable class action.

I don't see a successful class action suit. I'm sure the fine print gives them the right to change whatever, whenever.

[Leesbro63]

From the bank's POV, there may indeed be a negative purchase arbitrage going on when comparing tax payment Vs ordinary purchases. My take on this is more centered on the notion that this card scheme can only be profitable to the bank if customers pay enough interest charges in aggregate to more than offset the rebates. Are retirees with estimated tax bills paying them with the Smartly and then incurring interest charges ? Is there a single Bogler in that boat ?

I'll guess not. And then there are the people like me, with estimated tax payments inflated by Roth conversion strategies. I cannot see any of us paying tax with credit card debt.

How about small businesses ? Maybe, but USBank goes out of its way to dissuade use of the card for small business activities for rather obvious reasons.

All told, I'm really skeptical that estimated tax payments are paid with credit card debt. I'll be happy to be wrong since I am mighty pleased with the card as it stands right now.

"Bogler". I've always used "Boglehead", but I kinda like "Bogler" too.

[Gadget]

I feel like everyone is focusing on the wrong profit margin that US Bank really is looking for. They probably don't care about tax payments and credit cycling all that much.

Surely they know most people who can afford to do this card won't be paying high interest rates. They pay off the card monthly in full. That's probably already been established by most reward credit cards.

What they really want, is a list of potential customers who are wealthy enough to transfer $100k to a brokerage account. Especially taxable accounts. Those lists are valuable, and banks probably pay other banks just to get that data. And while this bogleheads forum would never let themselves get ripped off by a US Bank wealth management sales pitch, their wealth advisors now have a list of some of the most profitable customers in the country that they can cold call and convince to manage their money. It probably doesn't take that many to turn a profit overall. They just need to convince a few whales to manage their money for outrageous fees. And if they play the long game, how many on this forum, if they passed away, have a spouse who might be conned by their sales pitches?

I think that's what US Bank is counting on. Merrill Edge's program is likely the same. Even though I've told Merrill I am not interested in their wealth management services, I still get a call once a year. And no matter how much I tell my spouse that financial advisors like the Fidelity and Merrill people who always call us are a rip off, I think if I suddenly died it wouldn't take all that much to convince her to sign up with one of them. She just has no interest in dealing with finances, and I have a sneaking suspicion that sentiment is shared by the majority of Americans. The boglehead way of thinking about financial management is likely a small minority.

[criticalmass]

It will be a pain (and a s-show) if they decide to pull the rug this early, but nothing to do except cross that bridge when we get there and then join the inevitable class action.

What would predicate a class action? Changing terms of a credit card program? The Smartly cardholders have accepted a card agreement that explicitly allows the bank to change card agreement terms.
Also see the class action Arbitration waiver, in the agreement.

[jeffyscott]

What they really want, is a list of potential customers who are wealthy enough to transfer $100k to a brokerage account. Especially taxable accounts. Those lists are valuable, and banks probably pay other banks just to get that data...

Actually, they claimed they were seeking the "young affluent" when the card was on the launch pad:

A key target for U.S. Bank’s new combo is the young affluent customer, people who are beginning to make money but who don’t have huge deposits yet. As their business builds, cashback and deposit interest rates can both improve.
...
What comes next for Bank Smartly? Farrar says the company has done research on the young affluent market’s needs in home finance, as well as in the investment area.
https://thefinancialbrand.com/news/bank ... nt-181627/

[Gadget]

What they really want, is a list of potential customers who are wealthy enough to transfer $100k to a brokerage account. Especially taxable accounts. Those lists are valuable, and banks probably pay other banks just to get that data...

Actually, they claimed they were seeking the "young affluent" when the card was on the launch pad:

A key target for U.S. Bank’s new combo is the young affluent customer, people who are beginning to make money but who don’t have huge deposits yet. As their business builds, cashback and deposit interest rates can both improve.
...
What comes next for Bank Smartly? Farrar says the company has done research on the young affluent market’s needs in home finance, as well as in the investment area.
https://thefinancialbrand.com/news/bank ... nt-181627/

The cynic in me just translates that to US Bank wanting to find out what customers they can make the most managing their wealth early on. They want to manage young people's money early who have large incomes, get them used to paying fees that seem small early on, then hope that their wealth accelerates as they get older so US Bank can rake in their management fees.

[EricGold]

What they really want, is a list of potential customers who are wealthy enough to transfer $100k to a brokerage account. Especially taxable accounts. Those lists are valuable, and banks probably pay other banks just to get that data...

Actually, they claimed they were seeking the "young affluent" when the card was on the launch pad:

A key target for U.S. Bank’s new combo is the young affluent customer, people who are beginning to make money but who don’t have huge deposits yet. As their business builds, cashback and deposit interest rates can both improve.
...
What comes next for Bank Smartly? Farrar says the company has done research on the young affluent market’s needs in home finance, as well as in the investment area.
https://thefinancialbrand.com/news/bank ... nt-181627/

This all makes fine sense to me. NOT retirees with fat IRA's and no desire to take on credit card debt or use USbank financial services. Thus I expect a targeted thinning of the flock, or at least mitigation at the edges (where we boglers live.) I gave some thought to whether I should try and become a consumer of a USBank service to make myself a less noxious customer (in their eyes, obviously) but I couldn't find anything even remotely appealing. Perhaps a "business" relationship ? Nah .... I'll just sign up for the BOA 2.6% card for tax payments if USBank pulls the rug out from under me and call it a day. Even at my $100k estimated tax payments a year, it is not worth it to me to try (and perhaps fail anyway) to stay in the good graces of US Bank.

[jeffyscott]

Actually, they claimed they were seeking the "young affluent" when the card was on the launch pad:

The cynic in me just translates that to US Bank wanting to find out what customers they can make the most managing their wealth early on. They want to manage young people's money early who have large incomes, get them used to paying fees that seem small early on, then hope that their wealth accelerates as they get older so US Bank can rake in their management fees.

Exactly, they'd maybe get 2.5% credit card rebates for a while and by the time they're getting more they are paying 1-2% advisory fees. And/or maybe they've got a savings account balance that US Bank earns a 1% or so spread on (and much more if they carry a checking account balance). Maybe they get a mortgage or two at some point.

[TheEternalVortex]

There’s a rumor they are getting rid of this card soon: https://www.doctorofcredit.com/rumor-u- ... continued/

[guppyguy]

They will get less buy-in if they keep changing the offer.

This is why the simple 2% cash back strategy of many BH is wiser long term. It's stable and predictable.

[midwest_bound]

I guess as long as I payed my tax bill with it, I won't consider it a complete waste of time to have had this card. I wonder if they will let existing cardholders hang on to it... I think USBAR cardholders still have their cards.

[Leesbro63]

They will get less buy-in if they keep changing the offer.

This is why the simple 2% cash back strategy of many BH is wiser long term. It's stable and predictable.

I disagree for two reasons:

1. The Bank of America 2.625% on everything card will reap a lot extra, over time, if you have the $100,000 in a Merrill Edge account that you'd have elsewhere anyway.

2. This offer was too good to refuse. We don't yet know how this will play out. Perhaps those in early will continue to get the 4% for a while. Perhaps it will reduce but still be better than 2.625% or your 2%. Perhaps they'll "tier up" so that people with the assets can maybe get the 4% for $250,000 in their brokerage, or something like that. Perhaps they'll end 4% for tax payments, which will kill the best part of this for many of us, but will still keep 4% for everything else.

It's too soon to declare simple 2% (or even simple 2.625%) "wiser", long term.

[Leesbro63]

I guess as long as I payed my tax bill with it, I won't consider it a complete waste of time to have had this card. I wonder if they will let existing cardholders hang on to it... I think USBAR cardholders still have their cards.

Along those lines I made my April tax estimate today, after reading this. Yeah, I could have waited until after my April 3rd USBank Smartly Card monthly cutoff, and gotten another 3 weeks of float. But I the 2.25% net tax rebate guaranteed is still better than 3 weeks of float with the risk of no more 2.25% rebate.

[LuckyInLife]

There’s a rumor they are getting rid of this card soon: https://www.doctorofcredit.com/rumor-u- ... continued/

This could be a lot of fuss over nothing. All the hand wringing is based on the fact that the card can no longer be opened inside a branch. It is still the first credit card that appears on their list on the website, and US Bank is still accepting applications online. I applied the first day it was available and have been using the card for a lot of my spending since I received it on 11/27. I have redeemed over $1600 worth of rewards during that time. I do hope that the card is not canceled, but boy has there been a lot of speculation just based on a somewhat spurious data point. That being said, I did just make a large property tax payment a few weeks early, just in case there are limits, but also to have credit available for estimated taxes next month.

[slickwillbo]

They will get less buy-in if they keep changing the offer.

This is why the simple 2% cash back strategy of many BH is wiser long term. It's stable and predictable.

I disagree for two reasons:

1. The Bank of America 2.625% on everything card will reap a lot extra, over time, if you have the $100,000 in a Merrill Edge account that you'd have elsewhere anyway.

2. This offer was too good to refuse. We don't yet know how this will play out. Perhaps those in early will continue to get the 4% for a while. Perhaps it will reduce but still be better than 2.625% or your 2%. Perhaps they'll "tier up" so that people with the assets can maybe get the 4% for $250,000 in their brokerage, or something like that. Perhaps they'll end 4% for tax payments, which will kill the best part of this for many of us, but will still keep 4% for everything else.

It's too soon to declare simple 2% (or even simple 2.625%) "wiser", long term.

Strongly agree. For example, my kids' daycare has a 3% credit card fee - the Smartly earns me cash back on things I previously paid by check, even with the 2.625% from BoA. Plus the additional 1.375% on everything else I was charging before. I don't pay estimated taxes, but this card saves me >$1k per year over BoA PH.

[EricGold]

I don't doubt that that customers seek out the Smartly without any need for a salesperson to sell the card and gain a commission. That could easily explain USBank nixing a commission, but it doesn't explain a dictate that *blocks* branches from opening the card.

Too much unknown and too many variables to even take a stab at a guess.

[EricGold]

This is why the simple 2% cash back strategy of many BH is wiser long term. It's stable and predictable.

Nothing prevents you from having both, or all three (2%, 2.63%, 4% rebates) , so long as you have the assets to spread around or move as needed. <<shrug>>
I personally don't see any great advantage to having this stable of cards. If the Smartly dies I'll move on to the next best. And perhaps oddly, my chief motivation to pay taxes by credit card is not the rebate, it is because I hate PULL transactions with a passion due to their inherently much greater fraud risks, and that goes double for the Gov.

Net rebates and sign-up bonuses that accrue from using a credit card are just icing on the cake for me.

[EricGold]

Duplicate post, deleted

[HooCares]

I know everyone likes the Smartly card for paying taxes, but check your emails and wallet app because I just received an offer from Apple Card:

Spend $5000 by April 30 receive 3% cash back to dollar 1

Spend $10,000 by April 30 receive 4% cash back to dollar 1

Spend $15,000 by April 30 receive 5% cash back to dollar 1 up to $50,000 in spend

So this is better than Smartly if you’re paying between $15,000 and $65,000 in taxes.

[jeffyscott]

This could be a lot of fuss over nothing. All the hand wringing is based on the fact that the card can no longer be opened inside a branch. It is still the first credit card that appears on their list on the website, and US Bank is still accepting applications online. I applied the first day it was available and have been using the card for a lot of my spending since I received it on 11/27. I have redeemed over $1600 worth of rewards during that time. I do hope that the card is not canceled, but boy has there been a lot of speculation just based on a somewhat spurious data point. That being said, I did just make a large property tax payment a few weeks early, just in case there are limits, but also to have credit available for estimated taxes next month.

Agree, there are now reddit posts where other people have been told the card is going anywhere. And even if they stopped issuing the card that doesn't mean existing cards will be canceled. They did not cancel people's USBAR cards when they stopped issuing that one.

I think everyone expects some changes, like no rebates for tax payments and/or a cap on the higher rebates. As a low spender any caps are unlikely to affect my usage of the card much. Losing the tax rebates would be a loss, but a pretty small one for me, it'll only be worth about $100 next year (it's quite a bit more this year, due Roth conversions). In fact, overall the card is not worth that much to me, maybe $400-500 per year. The convenience of less card juggling is of some value also.

[EricGold]

I know everyone likes the Smartly card for paying taxes, but check your emails and wallet app because I just received an offer from Apple Card:
... ....

By invitation only

[jeffyscott]

This could be a lot of fuss over nothing. All the hand wringing is based on the fact that the card can no longer be opened inside a branch...

This seems to confirm that:



https://www.reddit.com/r/USbank/comment ... utm_term=1

[Leesbro63]

This could be a lot of fuss over nothing. All the hand wringing is based on the fact that the card can no longer be opened inside a branch...

This seems to confirm that:

https://www.reddit.com/r/USbank/comment ... utm_term=1

Can anyone think of a reason they'd kill in-branch applications but still allow it online? Maybe to take control from local branch people? To force big brother, where maybe big brother was not before, to eyeball stuff? It would seem to me that the branch people have very little authority to do anything to begin with. Truthfully bank branch people are merely polite order takers.

[EricGold]

This seems to confirm that:

https://www.reddit.com/r/USbank/comment ... utm_term=1

Can anyone think of a reason they'd kill in-branch applications but still allow it online? Maybe to take control from local branch people? To force big brother, where maybe big brother was not before, to eyeball stuff? It would seem to me that the branch people have very little authority to do anything to begin with. Truthfully bank branch people are merely polite order takers.

Apparently the Smartly product summary has been updated. I suppose the 'temporary' change could be to bring the branches up to speed.

[tj]

This seems to confirm that:

https://www.reddit.com/r/USbank/comment ... utm_term=1

Can anyone think of a reason they'd kill in-branch applications but still allow it online? Maybe to take control from local branch people? To force big brother, where maybe big brother was not before, to eyeball stuff? It would seem to me that the branch people have very little authority to do anything to begin with. Truthfully bank branch people are merely polite order takers.

To stop paying commissions to bankers on the card applications?

[jeffyscott]

Can anyone think of a reason they'd kill in-branch applications but still allow it online? Maybe to take control from local branch people? To force big brother, where maybe big brother was not before, to eyeball stuff? It would seem to me that the branch people have very little authority to do anything to begin with. Truthfully bank branch people are merely polite order takers.

Apparently the Smartly product summary has been updated. I suppose the 'temporary' change could be to bring the branches up to speed.

Based on additional screens posted by that same person on reddit, that update seems to just change the language to say where you can apply (saying something like "online or by mail" where it presumably used to also say "in branch").

[Lastrun]

Can anyone think of a reason they'd kill in-branch applications but still allow it online? Maybe to take control from local branch people? To force big brother, where maybe big brother was not before, to eyeball stuff? It would seem to me that the branch people have very little authority to do anything to begin with. Truthfully bank branch people are merely polite order takers.

To stop paying commissions to bankers on the card applications?

My two cents:

1. They are obviously re-evaluating
2. Change is coming
3. So don't have people "sell" something in the branch that will change in 30 days (active)
4. Online is still OK (passive)

I am thinking a classic "nerf" as I understand the definition and not a cancellation.

[gruesome]

Last week I was unable to get a credit limit increase from US-Bank and was wondering if you have any recommendations on how to get one.

My current credit limit at US-Bank for the Smartly card is $15K. I got the card when it launched in mid-November (so less than 6 months ago).

I was hoping to make a $40K purchase in April (Federal + State Taxes). I guess I should've paid quarterlies. 4% Cash Back - 1.75% Processing Fee = ~$900. That might cover my not-paying-quarterlies fine!

Last week I did an online request for a credit limit increase and it was immediately rejected. After the web response I got a follow up email saying "you'll get the reason why via snail mail."

I got the snail mail rejection today. The reasons given were "the usual super generic" reasons:

• "too many recently opened bankcard accounts"
• "too few joint accounts"
• "length of time accounts have been established is too short"
• "too many inquiries"

More importantly, the letter says Transunion reported my "Rapid Default Model Version 1 Score" as 569 (300-850 range) which surprised me.

On US-Bank's site there's a link to "view your Transunion-supplied Vantage score" and that is 820+ (same 300-850 range) for the past 5 months of history.

You can click through to some "creditviewdashboard" site from US Bank's credit score page that gives more details on my score:

• 0 late payments
• 1% of credit used
• 21 years of credit history
• Balances across all accounts $700
• Recent credit checks: 7 in past 2 years (is that a lot? I can't think of anything I've done (aside from applying for Smartly card) that would've triggered checks).
• Available credit: $175,000

I just did "annualcreditreport" to get a free Transunion report and while it is long (100+ pages) and doesn't offer a score, I see nothing called out as "unpaid" or "late" or any outstanding balances (except for the $700 that is not yet due).

Given that info, do you have any idea how would it be possible for me to get a 569 score?

I called US-Bank to ask about the score the letter claims was reported by Transunion. They said I'd have to take that up with Transunion. I was unable to successfully communicate "I don't think this is Transunion's fault - they don't have anything bad to say about me. I think US-Bank made some kind of mistake to link that 569 score to me" to the rep.

The rep said the only course of action I'd have with US-Bank is to Fax or Snail-Mail a letter to US-Bank explaining my problem. Sounds like a black hole, right?

FWIW, I have ~$500K in a brokerage (but no trading activity, all VTI) to safely qualify for the 4% cash-back perk and would be happy to increase if it makes them consider me less of a risk. I don't know if the "Credit Card" side of the company considers assets in the "Banking/Brokerage" side when making these kinds of decisions.

What are the chances of me getting a credit increase in time for April 15th if I go into a branch and have a banker negotiate with their underwriting department?

[tj]

I'd say no chances.

[Optimuswave]

Last week I was unable to get a credit limit increase from US-Bank and was wondering if you have any recommendations on how to get one.

My current credit limit at US-Bank for the Smartly card is $15K. I got the card when it launched in mid-November (so less than 6 months ago).

I was hoping to make a $40K purchase in April (Federal + State Taxes). I guess I should've paid quarterlies. 4% Cash Back - 1.75% Processing Fee = ~$900. That might cover my not-paying-quarterlies fine!

Last week I did an online request for a credit limit increase and it was immediately rejected. After the web response I got a follow up email saying "you'll get the reason why via snail mail."

I got the snail mail rejection today. The reasons given were "the usual super generic" reasons:

• "too many recently opened bankcard accounts"
• "too few joint accounts"
• "length of time accounts have been established is too short"
• "too many inquiries"

More importantly, the letter says Transunion reported my "Rapid Default Model Version 1 Score" as 569 (300-850 range) which surprised me.

On US-Bank's site there's a link to "view your Transunion-supplied Vantage score" and that is 820+ (same 300-850 range) for the past 5 months of history.

You can click through to some "creditviewdashboard" site from US Bank's credit score page that gives more details on my score:

• 0 late payments
• 1% of credit used
• 21 years of credit history
• Balances across all accounts $700
• Recent credit checks: 7 in past 2 years (is that a lot? I can't think of anything I've done (aside from applying for Smartly card) that would've triggered checks).
• Available credit: $175,000

I just did "annualcreditreport" to get a free Transunion report and while it is long (100+ pages) and doesn't offer a score, I see nothing called out as "unpaid" or "late" or any outstanding balances (except for the $700 that is not yet due).

Given that info, do you have any idea how would it be possible for me to get a 569 score?

I called US-Bank to ask about the score the letter claims was reported by Transunion. They said I'd have to take that up with Transunion. I was unable to successfully communicate "I don't think this is Transunion's fault - they don't have anything bad to say about me. I think US-Bank made some kind of mistake to link that 569 score to me" to the rep.

The rep said the only course of action I'd have with US-Bank is to Fax or Snail-Mail a letter to US-Bank explaining my problem. Sounds like a black hole, right?

FWIW, I have ~$500K in a brokerage (but no trading activity, all VTI) to safely qualify for the 4% cash-back perk and would be happy to increase if it makes them consider me less of a risk. I don't know if the "Credit Card" side of the company considers assets in the "Banking/Brokerage" side when making these kinds of decisions.

What are the chances of me getting a credit increase in time for April 15th if I go into a branch and have a banker negotiate with their underwriting department?

Ah yes, the Trans Union Rapid Default model (T.U.R.D. model). It's a black box. Were your credit files frozen? This is usually the bank's default go-to when files are frozen and you're within less than 6 months since issue or last CLI. You will most likely have to wait out the 6 months and I recommend calling to request an increase rather than using the online route. Once you've been successful receiving a CLI, you'll be able to go back to the online route if you wish.

Basically their model currently thinks you are a bust-out risk - meaning you'll run up a large balance and then default leaving the bank holding the bag.

Btw, my favorite reason description of that model is "too few joint accounts". Most issuers don't issue joint accounts these days.

This is US Bank being US Bank unfortunately.