IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedaer/y2000iq4p17-27nv.85no.4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economics of check float

Author

Listed:
  • James J. McAndrews
  • William Roberds

Abstract

Checks continue to dominate the market for noncash retail payments in the United States. Each year, U.S. residents write between 65 billion and 70 billion checks, an average of one check per business day per resident. This dependence on checks is unique among developed countries. It is also extremely costly: by switching from checks to other forms of payment, U.S. residents would save between $60 billion and $100 billion dollars per year. ; Why do checks continue to see such wide use within the United States? Economists' explanations have focused on check \"float,\" which is the interest earned by a check writer between the time a check is received as payment and the time the payment is settled. This article explains how check float arises within the U.S. payment system and how float can discourage the adoption of other types of payment. The authors also consider several proposals for reforming the U.S. payment system. While these proposals hold some promise, they are also subject to criticisms. The authors conclude that over the near future, policymakers will need to weigh the drawbacks of these proposals against the benefits of a faster transition to a more efficient payment system.

Suggested Citation

  • James J. McAndrews & William Roberds, 2000. "The economics of check float," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 85(Q4), pages 17-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedaer:y:2000:i:q4:p:17-27:n:v.85no.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.frbatlanta.org/-/media/documents/research/publications/economic-review/2000/vol85no4_mcandrews-roberds.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David B. Humphrey & Lawrence B. Pulley, 1998. "Retail payment instruments: costs, barriers, and future use," Proceedings 585, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    2. Jeffrey M. Lacker & Jeffrey D. Walker & John A. Weinberg, 1999. "The Fed's entry into check clearing reconsidered," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Spr, pages 1-32.
    3. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 2002. "Economic analysis of law," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 25, pages 1661-1784, Elsevier.
    4. Joanna Stavins, 1997. "A comparison of social costs and benefits of paper check presentment and ECP with truncation," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Jul, pages 27-44.
    5. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    6. David Humphrey & Lawrence Pulley & Jukka Vesala, 2000. "The Check's in the Mail: Why the United States Lags in the Adoption of Cost-Saving Electronic Payments," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 17(1), pages 17-39, February.
    7. Jeffrey M. Lacker, 1997. "The check float puzzle," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Sum, pages 1-26.
    8. Gilbert, R. Alton, 2000. "The Advent of the Federal Reserve and the Efficiency of the Payments System: The Collection of Checks, 1915-1930," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 121-148, April.
    9. William R. Emmons, 1996. "Price stability and the efficiency of the retail payments system," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Sep, pages 49-61.
    10. anonymous, 1998. "Issuance of the final report and recommendations of the Committee on the Federal Reserve in the Payments Mechanism," Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), issue Mar, pages 193-194.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kemppainen, Kari, 2003. "Competition and regulation in European retail payment systems," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 16/2003, Bank of Finland.
    2. Franklin Allen & James McAndrews & Philip Strahan, 2002. "E-Finance: An Introduction," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 5-27, August.
    3. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2003_016 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Kari Kemppainen, 2004. "Competition and regulation in European retail payment systems," Microeconomics 0404008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kemppainen, Kari, 2003. "Competition and regulation in European retail payment systems," Research Discussion Papers 16/2003, Bank of Finland.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen F. Quinn & William Roberds, 2008. "The evolution of the check as a means of payment: a historical survey," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 93(4).
    2. Gérard Mondello & Evens Salies, 2016. "Tort law under oligopolistic competition," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03459225, HAL.
    3. Gérard Mondello, 2012. "The Equivalence of Strict Liability and Negligence Rule: A " Trompe l'œil " Perspective," Post-Print hal-00727223, HAL.
    4. Gérard Mondello, 2013. "Ambiguous Beliefs on Damages and Civil Liability Theories"," Post-Print halshs-00929948, HAL.
    5. Paul Burrows, 1997. "A Deferential Role for Efficiency Analysis in Unravelling the Takings Tangle," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 24, pages 105-123.
    6. David Meintrup & Chang Woon Nam, 2009. "Shadow Market Area for Air Pollutants," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(4), pages 664-681, August.
    7. Gérard Mondello, 2022. "Strict liability, scarce generic input and duopoly competition," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 369-404, December.
    8. Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2003. "The Rise of the Regulatory State," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 401-425, June.
    9. Jaremski, Matthew & Mathy, Gabrial, 2017. "Looking Back On the Age of Checking in America, 1800-1960," MPRA Paper 78083, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Gérard Mondello, 2017. "Un modèle d'accident unilatéral: incertitude non-radicale et estimations différenciées," GREDEG Working Papers 2017-12, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    11. Jeffrey M. Lacker, 1997. "The check float puzzle," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Sum, pages 1-26.
    12. Daniel P. Kessler & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2004. "Empirical Study of the Civil Justice System," NBER Working Papers 10825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Lueck, Dean & Miceli, Thomas J., 2007. "Property Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 183-257, Elsevier.
      • Dean Lueck & Thomas J. Miceli, 2004. "Property Law," Working papers 2004-04, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    14. Loretta J. Mester, 2000. "The changing nature of the payments system: should new players mean new rules?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Mar, pages 3-26.
    15. Takaoka, Sumiko, 2005. "The effects of product liability costs on R&D with asymmetric information," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 59-81, January.
    16. Gérard Mondello, 2015. "Civil liability, Knight's UnCertainty and non-diCtatorial regUlator Documents de travail GREDEG GREDEG Working Papers Series," Working Papers hal-01251437, HAL.
    17. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    18. Qiuyue Xia & Lu Li & Jie Dong & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Reduction Effect and Mechanism Analysis of Carbon Trading Policy on Carbon Emissions from Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    19. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    20. Usher, Dan, 2001. "Personal goods, efficiency and the law," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 673-703, November.

    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:fip:fedaer:y:2000:i:q4:p:17-27:n:v.85no.4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Meredith Rector (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbatus.html .

    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.