Of Two Minds on EMV: Consumers Like the Security, but Many Are Annoyed at Checkout

New findings about the public’s attitudes toward EMV chip cards and their disruptive potential show consumers appreciate the improved security over magnetic-stripe card payments. Still, many consumers are bothered by the new transaction processes, enough so that some will avoid stores where they know they have to insert a chip card into a point-of-sale terminal or turn to mobile payments.

The June study of 3,008 consumers by Mercator Advisory Group Inc. found that 29% had a chip credit, debit, or prepaid card, nearly three times the 10% who had a chip card in a similar 2014 study. The growth reflects the run-up to the card networks’ Oct. 1 U.S. EMV liability shift as well as heightened consumer concerns about data protection. “In light of security breaches and re-issuance of cards in recent years, consumers are interested in payment cards with EMV for better security,” says the report, titled “U.S. Consumers and Credit: Potential Disruption to Issuers.”

Some 35% of respondents who had a chip card said they were not bothered by using EMV readers, even if it took longer. And 34% said they appreciate stores that allow them to use their chip card as designed for EMV transactions as opposed to swiping the back-up mag stripe.

On the other hand, 16% of chip card holders were bothered by using a chip card reader. The annoyance factor rises to 31% among young adults and 27% among those who use mobile payments. And when Mercator aggregated affirmative responses to statements that “the process is confusing,” “the process was longer and I was bothered,” and “I avoid stores that force me to dip my chip rather than swipe it,” it found that 29% of users were bothered by it, especially young adults (52%) and users of mobile payments (58%).

“People like EMV but they don’t want to be bothered by it,” report author Karen Augustine, manager, primary data services, at Maynard, Mass.-based Mercator, tells Digital Transactions News.

While EMV contact transactions, in which the card is inserted or dipped into the POS terminal, take a bit longer than mag-stripe transactions, this so-called bother factor may arise from factors other than just time, according to Augustine. “It’s not necessarily that it’s longer, it’s longer out of their hand,” she says. “When you swipe it, you don’t have to sit and wait for it.” In addition, the transaction may not start properly if the card isn’t dipped quickly enough, and consumers “have to be aware that they have to get it back.”

EMV is expected to give a big push to mobile payments because most EMV terminals also can support near-field communication (NFC) contactless transactions involving smart phones. But, unintentionally on the part of merchants or card issuers, the desire to avoid the annoyance of contact EMV transactions also might spur mobile payments, especially if a consumer knows she can get points or other rewards by using a mobile-pay service.

“I think [EMV] may push some people to use mobile payments that are more technologically savvy,” says Augustine. “They’re also rewards-driven.”

Mercator also asked the survey group about Apple Inc.’s Apple Pay mobile-payment service, and the responses produced some insights about credit versus debit card usage. Some 80% respondents who signed up for Apple Pay said they had loaded at least one credit card into it, and 60% had loaded a debit card. Twice as many people designated a credit card as their primary card as designated a debit card.

But when asked which card was linked to their last Apple Pay transaction, 55% said said credit and 45% said debit. That finding indicates debit may be more popular for everyday purchases such as in supermarkets, according to Augustine.

Mercator says the results have a margin of error of plus or minus 1.8% at the 95% confidence level.