Credit card holders unduly whacked?

As the enactment of new federal legislation nears, a survey says 42% of US cardholders are getting hit with higher interest rates and fees and/or lower credit limits.

More than two out of five U.S. credit card holders report getting whacked by negative changes to their accounts in the past 12 months, according to a new CreditCards.com poll. The survey comes amid rising criticism of banks for raising interest rates and fees and slashing credit limits on millions of accounts in the months just before a tough new credit card law takes effect.

The scientific telephone poll, conducted in June on behalf of CreditCards.com by GfK Roper, also highlights a less-talked-about aspect of the current credit crunch: Some credit card users with high incomes are getting higher -- not lower -- credit limits as banks compete to win over high-end borrowers.

"It is common for issuers to lower limits and/or raise fees and APRs on the weakest of their FICO-scored cardholders, and at the same time raise credit limits on the best FICO-scored customers, those with stellar usage and repayment histories (say, 760 FICO+)," Robert Hammer of R.K. Hammer Investment Bankers, a California card industry consultant, writes in an e-mail. "It is, as one might suspect, a very delicate balancing act."

That balancing act -- of giving to some while taking away credit from others -- may be the reason one-third of cardholders in the survey said they had actually gotten increases in their credit limits over the past 12 months. Credit industry analysts say those contrasts are likely to grow as the industry looks to develop a new and profitable business model in the upcoming era of credit card regulation.

Poll results

The poll contacted 1,004 adults through random-digit dialing. Of the total sample, 824 had credit cards.

The poll asked respondents with credit cards if any of a number of changes in terms had happened to them in the past 12 months. Getting an increase in their credit limits topped the list (33%), followed closely by negative changes such as getting an interest rate (APR) increase (30%) and having a credit card limit lowered (14%). Other changes include being switched to a variable rate card (11%), being offered an incentive to close a card account (8%) and being asked to submit a pay stub or tax return in order to qualify for a credit card (4%).




include:
  • More than two in every five cardholders (42%) reported some negative change in their credit card accounts.
  • Cardholders reporting credit limit increases were disproportionately higher wage earners. More than two out of five (42%) of people earning $50,000 a year or more said their limits had been increased, and 40% of people earning $75,000 or more a year reported increased credit limits in the past 12 months. The lower wage earners had less success: Only 19% of cardholders making $30,000 to $39,999 a year said their limits had been increased.
  • Nearly 40% of respondents with credit cards said they did not know or had no response to whether they had seen changes in their credit card accounts.

All the major credit card issuers have engaged in one or more of the practices cited in the poll. Annual fees and increased balance transfer and foreign transaction fees are also hitting millions of credit card holders.

Equifax, one of the three major consumer credit reporting agencies, recently revealed that average credit limits declined 3% to $4,594 in 2009 from $4,747 the year before. New credit card issuance dropped 38% during the first four months of 2009 compared with the same time period in 2008, according to Equifax data.

Citi offered cardholders up to $550 in bonuses if they reduced their credit limits and agreed to stop using their cards for up to 11 months.

American Express had a similar strategy, offering $300 in gift cards to entice certain users to pay their balances in full and close their accounts by April 30. Other issuers shut customers off by closing unused or dormant accounts. AmEx also began a policy of requesting pay stubs and income tax returns as proof that cardholders have sufficient income to pay their charge card bills.

Fixed no more

Bank of America and Chase are both shifting large numbers of cardholders from fixed-rate accounts to variable rates tied to an index or prime rate plus a fixed rate (known as a margin) of, for example, 8.99%. Discover has also notified some of its customers they would be switched to variable rate accounts. Other card issuers are likely to follow. The reason: Come February 2010, when major provisions of the Credit CARD Act of 2009 take effect, credit card companies will be limited in when they can increase interest rates on existing balances.

According to the new law, one of the acceptable ways to jack up rates on existing credit card balances is when accounts have variable APRs. The move from fixed rate to variable APRs may not affect many consumers now -- because the prime rate is at a historically low 3.25% (as of July 28). When the prime rate begins to rise again, credit card issuers will be able to pass the increase on to consumers with variable rate accounts -- regardless of the card users' payment histories.

Upping the minimum payments

Chase announced that starting in August, minimum monthly payment amounts would increase from 2% to 5% on some accounts. For example, a person who owes $5,000 on a credit card and was paying $100 as the minimum would have to pay at least $250 a month in order to avoid additional fees and keep the account in good standing.

"Many cardholders were already living on the financial edge, struggling to make their minimum payments each month. More than doubling the minimum payment has literally pushed many over the edge," according to Gail Cunningham, spokeswoman for the National Foundation for Credit Counseling, a national association of nonprofit credit counselors.

Cunningham suggests cardholders negotiate with their card issuers: "The first thing the consumer should do is find out why the bank imposed this change to his account. If there's been a sketchy pay history, then he doesn't have a leg to stand on. However, if he's been a longtime customer with a good pay history, I suggest building my case with the bank, proving that I'm just the type of customer they want to have."

Hammer, the card industry consultant, notes that many banks are weighing their options on how to handle these customers. "Banks must necessarily walk a pretty narrow tightrope," according to Hammer. "Earning enough on the bad accounts, many of whom will go to charge-off, with offering enough value at the right price points to attract and retain the better customers. You cannot chase away all your accounts and stay in business very long."

Giving and taking away

Representatives of several major credit card issuers contacted by CreditCards.com confirm that they are increasing and decreasing interest rates and credit limits as warranted by customers' credit records.

Chase spokeswoman Stephanie Jacobson says via e-mail: "As a standard operating practice, Chase is continuously evaluating whether our customers' credit lines are most appropriate for the customer and his or her needs, and will make adjustments accordingly. For example, we will lower credit lines for customers who are showing signs of increased risk or inactivity, and we may raise lines for our most creditworthy customers."

Jacobson reports that over the past 12 months Chase has:

  • Opened more than 1 million new credit card accounts each month for a total of more than 14 million customers.
  • Extended an average of more than $6 billion in new credit each month.
  • Increased the credit lines of more than 500,000 customers a month.

Citi, which has been under fire for raising interest rates on millions of accounts, conducts periodic reviews of accounts, according to spokesman Sam Wang: "We have adjusted pricing and card terms for some customers as part of our regular account reviews. This is an ongoing process to ensure we offer terms, interest rates, credit lines and products based on individual needs and risk profiles. These changes also reflect the dramatically higher cost of doing business in our industry as we work to preserve the broad availability of credit."

Interest rate increases

It's no secret that credit card lenders are tightening lending standards and dramatically cutting back on card lending -- even to customers who pay their bills on time each month. Many of the major banks have cited increased risk and uncertainty over the bad economy as reasons for many of the changes.

Members of Congress -- who passed tough credit card reforms in May -- are now bristling over interest rate increases they say are designed to squeeze more profits from consumers before the new law takes effect. U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked the Federal Reserve to use its emergency powers to halt the current spate of rate increases.

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, also asked regulators to intervene and force banks to begin early implementation of a provision of the Credit CARD Act. Dodd wants card issuers to review interest rate increases dating to Jan. 1 and, if warranted, lower APRs. Under the new law, a requirement for six-month reviews of accounts does not take effect until August 2010. Regulators must issue guidelines on how card issuers should implement the APR reviews.

According to a Fed spokeswoman, regulators have not released a response to the senators' requests.

Cunningham, from the credit counseling association, notes that the poll did not indicate why credit limits had been increased for respondents.

"I wonder if they requested it or if the bank simply increased it," Cunningham says. "If a person requests an increase, it could indicate they need more access to credit, thus are in a financial bind. If the bank independently increased it, then they were using this as a tool to encourage the consumer to spend more. Presumably the bank thought the individual could responsibly handle the increase. Either way, the consumer needs to be prudent when using his credit card, not charging more than 30% of the available credit, and paying the balance in full when the bill arrives."

Poll methodology

The survey was conducted June 26-28 by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media on behalf of CreditCards.com. Random-digit dialing phone interviews were completed with 1,004 adults ages 18 and up. The raw data were then weighted by a custom designed computer program that automatically developed a weighting factor for each respondent, employing five variables: age, sex, education, race and geographic region.

The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points on the full sample and plus or minus 4 points on the subsample of credit card holders.

Rust Belt loves 'cash for clunkers'

Fittingly, the states nicknamed for corroded metal are rushing to exchange older gas guzzlers for shiny, new, more-efficient vehicles.

With about two-thirds of the $1 billion allocated for the first wave of "cash for clunkers" vouchers accounted for, sales are concentrated heavily in states north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Per capita, Minnesota drivers have traded in the most clunkers, bringing in $5.78 of Car Allowance Rebate System cash for every resident of the state. At a voucher average of $4,205, that's 7,178 vehicles. North Dakota and South Dakota were close behind, followed by upper Midwest and New England states.

Whether it's because of less salt on the roads or economies in rough shape, drivers in the Sun Belt and West are trading in far fewer old vehicles. Residents of California, the most populous state, handed over the keys to just 9,495 vehicles, bringing in only $1.09 of clunker cash for each citizen.

(Roll your cursor over the map below to find out how much clunker cash has been remitted to your state.)

The current fund is considered exhausted; a backlog of applications is expected to consume all of what's left and more. A $2 billion refill of the program's coffers is expected to fund an additional 500,000 vehicle purchases.

The mad rush has left dealer lots barren, with inventories at their lowest level since Automotive News began tracking data in 1992. Automakers had been cutting back production for months, and shutdowns during Chapter 11 procedures had already greatly thinned inventory at General Motors and Chrysler.

According to Automotive News, Chrysler had 40 days' worth of cars on Aug. 1, down from 71 on July 1. Ford had shrunk to 48 days, down from 57; GM's inventory was down to 64 days from 82; Toyota was at 29, a drop from 47; and Hyundai was at 43, down from 49.

A 60-day supply of cars is considered optimum for giving buyers a reasonably good selection.

Why are company insiders selling?

The recovery is supposed to be under way, right? But insider sales are at levels not seen in almost 2 years, which suggests there's still a bear out there.

A few tidbits of good economic data and generally better-than-expected profit reports have heated up the market once again on speculation the worst is really over.

Company insiders may be telling us the opposite.

While investors have lifted stocks even higher off the March lows, insiders have been quietly selling lots of shares of their own companies into the strength in the past month.

Ominously, insider sales now stand at levels not seen since late 2007, right before the current bear market began. And history shows that insiders are worth paying attention to, because they're the ones on the front lines.

The good news is that inside selling hasn't yet reached levels that portend a prolonged bear market. Instead, they could be signaling pullbacks that give you a chance to put money into stocks at lower prices.

But several sectors do appear destined for serious trouble, including consumer-oriented stocks and technology. Specifically, negative trends combined with insider selling suggest to me that First Solar (FSLR, news, msgs), J.M. Smucker (SJM, news, msgs), Moody's (MCO, news, msgs), Pulte Homes (PHM, news, msgs), Riverbed Technology (RVBD, news, msgs), CKE Restaurants (CKR, news, msgs) and Texas Roadhouse (TXRH, news, msgs) are particularly vulnerable.

The inside story

First, here's the big picture:

  • An insider gauge tracked by Market Profile Theorems, a Seattle research shop, moved into bearish territory July 31 for the first time since November 2007.
  • An insider sell-buy ratio tracked by Thomson Reuters has been hovering around bearish levels not seen since November 2006. It recently registered 53, meaning insiders pulled $53 out of the market for every $1 in stock they purchased.

Another insider sell-buy ratio, tracked by Vickers Stock Research, is now "well within the bearish range," says David Coleman, who analyzes insider activity for Vickers. It hasn't been so high since November 2007

Does this mean you should sell all your stocks and hide? Not necessarily. Insiders -- company executives and huge stockholders close to them -- don't always get it right, and market timing is tricky. If you are a long-term investor, it's probably better to wait out near-term turbulence.

The markets could resolve this insider bearishness by moving sideways for a while or with small and temporary corrections, says Michael Painchaud of Market Profile Theorems. We've seen few significant down days, offering better prices, during this summer rally. "Now you may have that opportunity," Painchaud says.

But he says several sectors are now look particularly vulnerable to bigger corrections. They include consumer discretionary stocks, technology, media stocks, software services, semiconductors, industrial products, business services and construction.

Troubled stocks

Not all insider selling spells bad news for any given company. After all, insiders may simply be selling stocks to raise money for tuition for their kids or some other need.

So to find stocks with significant insider selling that look vulnerable, I polled several investors and analysts who have been good at suggesting stocks to avoid in the past. They include Gradient Analytics, a research shop that uses earnings-quality analysis and other tools to spot troubled companies, and Whitney Tilson, a co-portfolio manager of the Tilson Focus Fund (TILFX) and co-author of "More Mortgage Meltdown: 6 Ways to Profit in These Bad Times." I also checked in with John Tabacco Jr. of LocateStock, a service that helps investors find stocks to borrow so they can go short. (Investors go short by borrowing stocks and selling them, hoping to replace them cheaper, later. Stocks in high demand by shorts often fall.)

First Solar: Too much of a 'good thing'

The company: First Solar is a low-cost producer of solar-energy panels that use a thin layer of cadmium telluride semiconductor material to convert sunlight into electricity.

The selling: Members of the Walton family, heirs to the Wal-Mart Stores (WMT, news, msgs) fortune, have a huge stake. They sold $580 million worth of First Solar stock in late April and early May. The company's finance chief and a director also sold $4 million worth, according to Thomson Reuters. All sold in the $200-a-share range; the stock is now around $157.

The concerns: A global glut of solar-energy panels is putting downward pressure on pricing, Tabacco says. First Solar announced July 31 that it will offer rebates on equipment in Germany, sparking a 10% decline in the stock. Tabacco had a negative call on the stock before last week's decline, and he thinks there's more downside to come.

With credit still tight, it's tough to fund alternative-energy projects. Germany and Spain have cut subsidies for solar, which hurts demand. Warning that First Solar's rebate program could start a price war, Credit Suisse analyst Satya Kumar last week cut his price target on the stock to $135 a share. But he said it could trade as low as $120 as earnings expectations fall.

First Solar's finance chief sold to diversify his investments; the sales were just a small portion of his overall holdings, and he still has large exposure to the stock, a spokeswoman said.

J.M. Smucker: Smart sellers lightening up, again

The company: Besides brands such as Jif and Smucker's peanut butter and jams, J.M. Smucker sells lots of popular foods, including Pillsbury baking products, Folgers coffee and Crisco oils and shortening.

The selling: Three executives with great records for timing sold more than $1.2 million worth of stock in late June and mid-July for around $48 to $48.50 a share.

The concerns: J.M. Smucker's last quarter was as smooth as peanut butter without the chunks. Smucker enjoyed strong coffee sales, as consumers opted for Folgers over $5 coffees from Starbucks (SBUX, news, msgs). Sales of other products were up 3%, mostly on price increases.

The real worry about the stock is that insiders have shown great timing for getting out of the stock during summer strength. Last summer, they sold more than $2 million worth of stock for $47 to $55 a share. By March, the stock was near $34. In summer 2007, insiders sold $16.5 million worth of stock in the low $60s. Six months later, the stock was near $45.

J.M. Smucker policy limits insider trading to two business days after quarterly earnings releases and prohibits trading when insiders have material information not available to the public, a company spokeswoman said.

AutoZone: Riding for a fall

The company: AutoZone is the nation's leading auto-parts retailer, with more than 4,000 stores in the U.S.

The selling: In mid-July, savvy hedge fund manager Eddie Lampert of ESL Investments sold $118.2 million worth of stock for $157 to $160 a share. He sold $8.9 million worth in June for about $156 a share. Lampert has been a smart trader of the stock, purchasing $49 million worth as recently as October for around $100 a share.

The concerns: Everyone loves free money, so the federal "cash for clunkers" program has been an enormous hit. Car buyers ran through the first $1 billion in less than a week -- money that was supposed to last through November. Now, Congress is rushing to add more.

None of this is good for AutoZone, which sells parts that keep older cars -- clunkers -- on the road. "There is so much government incentive to buy a new car, why would people be going to AutoZone?" LocateStock's Tabacco asks. At his Web site, demand to borrow AutoZone stock for shorting has been brisk, which is a negative sign. Lampert still owns 20 million shares, or 37.6% of the company.

Pulte Homes: '3rd wave' may swamp prospects

The company: Pulte Homes is a nationwide homebuilder with exposure to some of the worst real-estate markets in California, Arizona, Florida and the Rust Belt.

The selling: Executives sometimes reduce exposure to their stocks by using financial tools such as options or "forward sales" -- agreements to sell their stock in the future at prearranged prices. These transactions don't show up as sales in the common insider databases. Pulte Chairman William Pulte used forward sales to reduce exposure to an enormous 4.75 million shares of his company's stock in February, according to Thomson Reuters.

The concerns: Housing stocks look cheap, but homebuilders face so many problems that they aren't good buys. Many analysts expect a third wave of foreclosures by homeowners who had decent credit but are now losing their jobs. This will add to already high inventories of houses on the market, making it tougher for homebuilders to move their houses.

"Homebuilder companies may look cheap . . . but their earnings are collapsing," investment adviser Gary Shilling wrote in the August issue of his newsletter Insight. Another problem: "Excessive inventories and write-offs of surplus land are destroying their balance sheets," Shilling says.

Moody's: Buffett throwing in the towel

The company: Moody's provides credit ratings on company debt and debt instruments.

The selling: Warren Buffett famously says his favorite holding period for a stock is "forever." So when he throws in the towel on a stock that is weak, you know there must be trouble. In July, the Oracle of Omaha filed notice on sales of 8 million shares of Moody's for prices between $26.60 and $28.70 a share. He initially purchased the stock about nine years ago at lower prices and bought more along the way.

The concerns: Critics fault Moody's and the other rating agencies for contributing to the current financial mess by stamping "AAA" ratings on unsound structured finance instruments backed by dubious, low-quality mortgages. "Moody's AAA rating was the gold standard, but they have almost destroyed the credibility of that AAA rating," Tilson says. "They have tarnished the brand substantially and perhaps permanently."

Another challenge: Moody's got more than half its profits during the housing bubble from rating structured finance products backed by mortgage debt. "That business is gone, we think permanently," Tilson says. So earnings will continue to be very weak, he says. Tilson is short the stock.

Riverbed Technology: High-octane sales

The company: Riverbed Technology sells devices that help companies use their wide-area networks more efficiently.

The selling: Since early May, insiders have sold $12.4 million worth of stock, according to Thomson Reuters.

The concerns: Almost all of the sales were done under special Rule 10b5-1 plans. These are prearranged sales meant to exempt insiders from selling ahead of any potential bad news, because they are planned far in advance. The problem here is that research shows these kinds of sales are actually more predictive of stock declines than straight sales.

The company also faces some challenging business trends, because it recently reported the lowest level of new-customer sales in two years, says Chad Potter of Gradient Analytics. Since the company needs new customers to see increases in sales from service and support, Riverbed "may struggle to meet growth expectations later in 2009 and into 2010," Potter says.

Restaurant stocks: Smaller portions ahead

The companies: CKE Restaurants operates restaurants under the Carl's Jr., Hardee's, Green Burrito and Red Burrito names. Texas Roadhouse is a casual-dining chain with more than 300 restaurants in 46 states.

The selling: Insiders with great records for knowing when to exit were selling at CKE Restaurants in May and July, while insiders with good records were selling Texas Roadhouse stock in May and June. The sales at Texas Roadhouse "were for diversification and estate planning, and represent a small portion of their holdings," a company spokesman said.

The concerns: I don't have any knocks against these two companies per se; it's more of a sector call. Consumer discretionary stocks have had some of the most significant selling of late, and in that group, restaurants look particularly vulnerable, says Painchaud, of Market Profile Theorems. So these two, with selling by especially smart insiders, look like they might face problems. This should be no surprise. Economists expect only a modest recovery at best, and consumers are likely to continue to be in a savings mode as they repair their finances.