Finance
Dollar General, Dollar Tree and Kroger charge cash-back fees: CFPB
A Dollar General store in Germantown, New York, on Nov. 30, 2023.
Angus Mordant/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Three of the nation’s largest retailers — Dollar General, Dollar Tree and Kroger — charge fees to customers who ask for “cash back” at check-out, amounting to more than $90 million a year, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Many retailers offer a cash-back option to consumers who pay for purchases with a debit or pre-paid card.
But levying a fee for the service may be “exploiting” certain customers, especially those who live in so-called banking deserts without easy access to a bank branch or free cash withdrawals, according to a CFPB analysis issued Tuesday.
That dynamic tends to disproportionately impact rural communities, lower earners and people of color, CFPB said.
Not all retailers charge cash-back fees, which can range from $0.50 to upwards of $3 per transaction, according to the agency, which has cracked down on financial institutions in recent years for charging so-called “junk fees.”
More from Personal Finance:
The IRS method of ‘last resort’ to collect overdue taxes
How investors can prepare for lower interest rates
Why remote work has staying power
Five of the eight companies that the CFPB sampled offer cash back for free.
They include Albertsons, a grocer; the drugstore chains CVS and Walgreens; and discount retailers Target and Walmart. (Kroger proposed a $25 billion merger with Albertsons in 2022, but that deal is pending in court.)
“Fees to get cash back are just one more nickel and dime that all starts to add up,” said Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, an advocacy group.
“It just makes it harder and harder to get by,” he said. “It’s thousands of little cuts at a time.”
Luis Alvarez | Digitalvision | Getty Images
A spokesperson for Dollar General said cash back can help save customers money relative to “alternative, non-retail options” like check cashing or ATM fees.
“While not a financial institution, Dollar General provides cashback options at our more than 20,000 stores across the country as a service to customers who may not have convenient access to their primary financial institution,” the spokesperson said.
Spokespeople for Kroger and Dollar Tree (which operates Family Dollar and Dollar Tree stores) didn’t respond to requests for comment from CNBC.
Kroger, Dollar General and Dollar Tree were respectively the No. 4, 17 and 19 largest U.S. retailers by sales in 2023, according to the National Retail Federation, a trade group.
Cash back is popular
The practice of charging for cash back is relatively new, Rust explained.
For example, in 2019, Kroger Co. rolled out a $0.50 fee on cash back of $100 or less and $3.50 for amounts between $100 and $300, according to CFPB.
This applied across brands like Kroger, Fred Meyers, Ralph’s, QFC and Pick ‘N Save, among others.
However, Kroger Co. began charging for cash back at its Harris Teeter brand in January 2024: $0.75 for amounts of $100 or less and $3 for larger amounts up to $200, CFPB said.
Cash withdrawals from retail locations is the second most popular way to access cash, representing 17% of transactions over 2017-22, according to a CFPB analysis of the Diary and Survey of Consumer Payment Choice.
ATMs were the most popular, at 61%.
But there are some key differences between retail and ATM withdrawals, according to CFPB and consumer advocates.
For instance, relatively low caps on cash-back amounts make it challenging to limit the impact of fees by spreading them over larger withdrawals, they said.
The average retail cash withdrawal was $34 from 2017-22, while it was $126 at ATMs, CFPB said.
Banking deserts are growing
However, retailers may be the only reasonable way to get cash for consumers who live in banking deserts, experts say.
More than 12 million people — about 3.8% of the U.S. population — lived in a banking desert in 2023, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
That figure is up from 11.5 million, or 3.5% of the population, in 2019, it found.
Generally speaking, a banking desert constitutes any geographic area without a local bank branch. Such people don’t live within 10 miles of a physical bank branch. The rise of digital banking, accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic, has led many banks to close their brick-and-mortar store fronts, according to Lali Shaffer, a payments risk expert at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
These deserts “may hurt vulnerable populations” who are already less likely to have access to online and mobile banking, she wrote recently.
Retailers blame banks
Retail advocates say banks are to blame for cash-back fees.
Merchants must pay fees to banks whenever customers swipe a debit card or credit card for purchases. Those fees might be 2% to 4% of a transaction, for example.
Since cash-back totals are included in the total transaction price, merchants also pay fees to banks on any cash that consumers request.
The “vast majority” of retailers don’t charge for cash back, and therefore take a financial loss to offer this service to customers for free, said Doug Kantor, general counsel at the National Association of Convenience Stores and a member of the Merchants Payments Coalition Executive Committee.
“Banks have abandoned many of these communities and they’re gouging retailers just for taking people’s cards or giving people cash,” he said.
But consumer advocates say this calculus overlooks the benefit that retailers get by offering cash back,
“You’d think they’d see this as a free way to get customers: coming into [the] store because the bank branch isn’t there,” Rust said. “Instead they’re going ahead and charging another junk fee.”
Cybersecurity and enterprise software stocks have been market dogs in 2026, with fears that AI will wipe out a wide range of companies in the enterprise space dominating the narrative. But they snapped a brutal losing streak this past week, joining in the broader market rally that saw all losses from the U.S.-Iran war regained by the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500.
Cybersecurity has been “a victim of some of the AI-related headlines,” Christian Magoon, Amplify ETFs CEO, said on this week’s “ETF Edge.”
It wasn’t just niche cybersecurity names. Take Microsoft, for example, which was recently down close to 20% for the year. Its shares surged last week by 13%.
A big driver of the pummeling in software stocks was a rotation within tech by investors to AI infrastructure and semiconductors and some other names in large-cap tech, Magoon said, and since cybersecurity stocks and ETFs are heavily weighted towards software companies, they were left behind even as those businesses continue to grow on a fundamental basis.
But Wall Street now has become more bullish with the stocks at lower levels. Brent Thill, Jefferies tech analyst, said last week that the worst may be over for software stocks. “I think that this concept that software is dead, and then Anthropic and OpenAI are going to kill the entire industry, is just over-exaggerated,” he said on CNBC’s “Money Movers” on Wednesday.
“Big Short” investor Michael Burry wrote in a Substack post on Wednesday that he is becoming bullish about software stocks after the recent selloff. “Software stocks remain interesting because of accelerated extreme declines last week arising from a reflexive positive feedback loop between falling software stocks and changes in the market for their bank debt,” he wrote.
The Global X Cybersecurity ETF (BUG), is down about 12% since the beginning of the year, with top holdings including Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Akamai Technologies and CrowdStrike. But BUG was up 12% last week. The First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) is down 6% for the year, but up 9% in the past week.
Piper Sandler analyst Rob Owens reiterated an “overweight” rating on Palo Alto Networks which helped the stock pop 7% — it is now down roughly 6% on the year. Its peers saw similar moves, including CrowdStrike.
Performance of Global X cybersecurity ETF versus S&P 500 over past one-year period.
Magoon said expectations may have become too high in cybersecurity, and with a crowding effect among investors, solid results were not enough to to push stocks higher. But the down-and-then-back-up 2026 for the sector is also a reminder that when stocks fall sharply in a short period of time, opportunity may knock.
“Once you’re down over 10% in some of these subsectors, you start to see the contrarians start to say, ‘well, maybe I’ll take a look at this,'” Magoon said.
He said AI does add both opportunity and uncertainty to the cybersecurity equation, increasing demand but also introducing new competition. But he added, “I think the dip is good to buy in an AI-driven world,” specifically because the risks to companies may lead to more M&A in cyber names that benefits the stocks.
For now, investors may look for opportunity on the margins rather than rush back into beaten-up tech names. “I think investors are still going to remain underweight software,” Thill said.
But Magoon advises investors to at least take the reminder to keep an eye on niches in the market during pronounced downturns. “The best-performing are often the least bought and do the best over the next 12 months versus late-in-the-game piling on,” he said.
While that may have been a mindset that worked against the last investors into cybersecurity and enterprise software in mid-2025 when the negative sentiment started building, at least for now, it’s started working for the stocks in the sector again.
Meanwhile, this year’s biggest winner is also a good example of what can be an extended trade in either a bullish or bearish direction. Last year, institutional ownership of energy was at multi-year lows, Magoon said, referencing Bank of America data. “Reverse sentiment can be a great indicator,” he said.
But he cautioned that any selective buying of stocks that have dipped does have to contend with the risk that there is a potentially bigger drawdown in the market yet to come in 2026. That is because midterm election years historically have been marked by large drawdowns. “If you think it is bad right now, it could get a lot worse,” Magoon said. But he added that there’s a silver-lining in that data, too, for the patient investor. The market has posted very strong 12-month returns after midterm election drawdowns end. So, for investors with a longer-term time horizon and no need for short-term liquidity, Magoon said, “stick in there.”
Sign up for our weekly newsletter that goes beyond the livestream, offering a closer look at the trends and figures shaping the ETF market.
New innovation in the exchange-traded fund industry could come at a cost to investors during extreme conditions.
According to MFS Investment Management’s Jamie Harrison, ETFs involved in increasingly complex derivatives and less transparent markets may be in uncharted territory when it comes to violent downturns.
“Those would be something that you’d want to keep an eye on as volatility ramps up,” the firm’s head of ETF capital markets told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” this week. “As innovation continues to increase at a rapid pace within the ETF wrapper, [it’s] definitely something that we advise our clients to be really front-footed about… Lack of transparency could absolutely be an issue if we’re going to start seeing some deep sell-offs.”
His firm has been around since 1924 and is known for inventing the open-end mutual fund. Last year, ETF.com named MFS Investment Management as the best new ETF issuer.
“It’s important to do due diligence on the portfolio,” he said. “Having a firm that has deep partnerships, deep bench of subject matter experts that plays with the A-team in terms of the Street and liquidity providers available [are] super important.”
Liquidity as the real issue?
Harrison suggested the real issue is liquidity, particularly during a steep sell-off.
“We’ve all seen the news and the headlines around potential private credit ETFs. That picture becomes much more murky,” he added. “It’s up to advisors, to investors [and] to clients to really dig in and look under the hood and engage with their issuers.”
He noted investors will have to ask some tough questions.
“What does this look like in a 20% drawdown? How does this liquidity facility work? Am I going to be able to get in? Am I going to be able to get out? And if I’m able to get out, am I able to get out at a price that’s tight to NAV [net asset value], and what’s the infrastructure at your shop in terms of managing that consideration for me,” said Harrison.
Amplify ETFs’ Christian Magoon is also concerned about these newer ETF strategies could weather a monster drawdown. He listed private credit as a red flag.
“If your ETF owns private credit, I think it’s worth taking a look at, kind of what the standards are around liquidity and how that ETF is trading, because that should be a bit of a mismatch between the trading pace of ETFs and the underlying asset,” the firm’s CEO said in the same interview.
Magoon also highlighted potential issues surrounding equity-linked notes. The notes provide fixed income security while offering potentially higher returns linked to stocks or equity indexes.
“Those could potentially be in stress due to redemptions and the underlying credit risk. That’s another kind of unique derivative,” Magoon said. “I would very closely look at any ETF that has equity-linked notes should we get into a major drawdown or there be a contagion in private credit or something related to the banking system.”
What that means for consumer loans
Checks and Balance newsletter: Of God and MAGA
Why software stocks, 2026’s market dogs, have joined the rally
Armanino adds Strategic Accounting Outsourced Solutions
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
