Difference between EFTPOS and Visa Debit

The news that Woolworths is no longer accepting payments via debit Visa and MasterCard stirred up a lot of debate amongst Lifehacker readers. While it's clear that many plan to change supermarkets as a result, it's also clear that some people don't understand how those transactions are costed or what their options when it comes to free EFTPOS transactions are.

I must admit I was surprised by the intensity and volume of the comments when I posted about this topic yesterday. From the reactions to this issue, it's clear that Woolworths could have done a much better job of explaining the change (and in training its staff on how to communicate with customers about it).

While Woolworths says on its own site that debit card transactions will likely account for less than 1% of its total sales volume, evidently many people who have elected to use a debit card have done so in order to minimise their own bank fees and other expenses. While that may be a sensible choice, some of the comments on that post suggest that it isn't always an informed choice.

The most persistent theme in the comments (both on Lifehacker and elsewhere online) was that using a debit card was the preferred choice because it didn't count against monthly limits on the number of EFTPOS transactions that could be made without charge. There's an apparently widespread belief that all bank accounts work this way: "99.9 % of banks charge fees for the use of EFTPOS", Ben (which includes an option to identify accounts with free EFTPOS transactions) turned up dozens of accounts which offered unlimited EFTPOS transactions, including some with no monthly fees. My conclusion? If the only reason you've been using a debit card to pay your grocery bills is to avoid EFTPOS charges, switching banks to get more free EFTPOS transactions might be just as useful a strategy as switching supermarkets (especially if you end up travelling further in order to do that).