GS Logo
The Green Sheet, Inc

Please Log in

A Thing
View Archives

View PDF of this issue

Care to Share?

Table of Contents

Lead Story

Square: Passing fad or market changer?

Patti Murphy
ProScribes Inc.


Industry Update

PCI update addresses holes in wireless security

SmartMetric initiates suit against Visa, MasterCard

Eight payment companies on Inc. 500

Is self learning the next step in the fraud fight?

Trade Association News


An interview with Alex Goretsky

Ken Musante
Eureka Payments LLC

Research Rundown

Alternative payments in the mobile space

Alex Grinberg

Envisioning an advertising-sponsored mobile payment network

Richard K. Crone
Crone Consulting LLC

Website in your pocket

Selling Prepaid

Prepaid in brief

Mobile prepaid builds bridge for underbanked

FTC redresses consumers for prepaid card scam


Debit after Durbin

Patti Murphy
ProScribes Inc.

A fresh perspective on POS innovation

Brandes Elitch
CrossCheck Inc.


Street SmartsSM:
PCI essentials for MLSs

Bill Pirtle
MPCT Publishing Co.

How to plan your dream life

Dale S. Laszig
Castles Technology Co. Ltd.

ISOs and social media: Staying in compliance

Adam Atlas
Attorney at Law

10 tips for building a stronger LinkedIn profile

Marc W. Halpert
Your Best Interest LLC

Making use of receipt real estate

Stephen Enfield
POS Supply Solutions

Peering into payments' not so crystal ball

Nicholas Cucci
Network Merchants Inc.

Company Profile

Point of Sale System Services Inc.

New Products

A gateway to profit

Nationwide Payment Solutions LLC


Your merchant ground control unit



Resource Guide


A Bigger Thing

The Green Sheet Online Edition

September 26, 2011  •  Issue 11:09:02

previous next


1099 reporting fees

I am so disappointed at companies charging merchants $4.95 a month for collecting the data for 1099 reporting. It is my understanding from your article that the IRS does not allow this. While I understand it's a new regulation and extra work on the merchant service providers and acquirers, why is someone not policing our industry? When is it going to stop?

First Data Merchant Services is charging $4.95 a month per merchant. Considering the size of the FDMS merchant book, this is becoming a money-maker for them. They should be ashamed of themselves and investigated. I can understand a minor monthly fee of some kind ($1.00), but this is highway robbery. The merchants are becoming more and more aware of our industry, and with fees like this, it's going to put an even bigger damper on our industry.

Bruce I. Reisman
Focus Financial Solutions LLC


Thank you for sharing your opinion on this important issue. First Data Corp. spokesman Andy Payment confirmed in an interview for "IRS says no merchant fees for 1099K reporting: Who's listening?" The Green Sheet, Aug. 22, 2011, issue 11:08:02, that First Data instituted a fee "for a new suite of services related to IRS 6050W regulations, as well as proposed legislative changes, which encompass much more than processing the 1099 forms."

Payment also indicated First Data's pricing is tiered from $3.95 to $1 per merchant per month, based on the number of merchants in an ISO's portfolio. Some ISOs are adamant they will not charge merchants for 6050W compliance. Payment professionals are indeed divided on whether charging new compliance fees will serve the long-term interests of individual payment companies and the industry as a whole.


From GS Online's MLS Forum

The premier online network for payment pros

Registration merits

GS Online MLS Forum member JDECKARD asked GS Online's MLS Forum for help understanding the ISO registration process. He said, "Let's say I have ISO A, who I prefer to send my everyday, vanilla, brick-and-mortar merchants to; ISO B, who I like for e-commerce/POS systems; and ISO C, who thinks outside the box and will take higher risk merchants. If I step up and register once, say through ISO A, can I still contract with all three ISOs to provide the same service, but branded with my info? Or do I have to send all deals through the ISO that I registered through?"

Here are some of the responses JDECKARD received:

  • You can register under ISO A to get your own app and statement branding. You can still send deals to ISO B and ISO C anytime you want; you just won't have your branding at B and C.


  • You could choose to co-brand through two of them, or even all of them, without registering.


  • Registering through one is all that is needed if you are concerned about full branding. Co-branding can be done through them all. But I have yet to see a reason to register with many, especially if you are a sales engine. ... Ask yourself, is branding (not co-branding, but solely branding) worth the first $10,000 investment and ongoing registration fees. Plus the added marketing costs? If the answer is yes, then that goes a long way in helping you make your decision. If it is, "wow, probably not," then co-branding or some other form of marketing is your direction.


  • In my opinion the greatest value asset obtained by registering is [this link] ... Take for instance Acquiring Solutions, Capitol Payment Systems and Electronic Payments (as examples). All of these companies use their own name when trading. Imagine a sales rep under one of these companies opening his own company and visiting a merchant and presenting a business card for Bob's Card Processing or Mike's Merchant Services. Being able to have a merchant actually see that we are registered to do what we say we can do ... is a valuable asset especially when you are, or might be, in a competitive situation.


To see all the responses to this question, click on the "Understanding Registering" thread in the MLS Forum, which can be accessed via the Forums link at

Notice to readers: These are archived articles. Contact names or information may be out of date. We regret any inconvenience.

previous next

Spotlight Innovators:

North American Bancard | USAePay | Board Studios