Page 27 - gs251202_Flipbook

Insights and Expertise

misidentified "unauthorized" transactions, later ad-
mitting the error. The accounts were restored, but
From MATCH to MATCH Pro MATCH listings remained. Once the disconnect was
documented, the acquirer withdrew both RC-04 en-
Launched decades ago as a shared risk database, tries.
Mastercard's MATCH was designed to flag merchants
terminated for serious issues such as fraud, excessive 2. When a merchant relied on acquirer-approved pro-
chargebacks or standards violations. Over time, cessing practices: A merchant MATCH-listed for de-
inconsistent interpretations, slow responses and scriptor violations was later cleared after evidence
opaque processes limited its usefulness. showed the ISO and gateway had promoted, approved
and enabled the exact descriptor settings used.
MATCH Pro modernizes the framework by clarifying 3. When RC-04 metrics don't satisfy Mastercard
reason codes, defining thresholds, especially for
excessive chargebacks, and imposing firm response thresholds: A merchant MATCH-listed for "Excessive
Chargebacks" was below Mastercard's required levels.
timelines. While still mandatory, MATCH is evolving
from a blunt instrument into a more structured, data- Once objective chargeback data was provided, the list-
ing was removed.
driven risk tool.
4. When reputational shutdowns are mislabeled as
fraud: A high-visibility merchant facing public con-
troversy was MATCH-listed for "fraud" even though
• 08 Mastercard Questionable Merchant audit no fraud, laundering or illegal activity was present.
program The acquirer ultimately withdrew the listing after
• 09 Liquidation/insolvency acknowledging the termination was strictly reputa-
• 10 Violation of Standards tional.
• 12 PCI Data Security Standard noncompliance MATCH use still mandatory
• 13 Illegal transactions MATCH Pro doesn't change the obligation to use MATCH,
• 14 Identity theft but it does raise the bar for accuracy, response timelines
and reason-code clarity. For the industry, this means:
Clarified chargeback standards
• Better submissions;
A significant change in MATCH Pro concerns Reason • Faster dispute resolution;
Code 04, Excessive chargebacks. Mastercard now
expressly defines the timeframe as "over the previous • More predictable underwriting outcomes; and
three months," eliminating the ambiguity that previously • Fewer erroneous MATCH listings that damage
led to inconsistent interpretations. merchant viability.

Under the clarified standard, a merchant must exceed a For acquirers and ISOs, the priority going forward is to
1.5 percent chargeback ratio and have at least $5,000 in ensure internal policies align with Mastercard's clarified
Mastercard chargebacks within that period. rules (especially RC-04) and to prepare for a rise in data-
driven challenges to MATCH listings that don't hold up
These explicit thresholds resolve long-standing confusion under MATCH Pro scrutiny.
and establish a uniform basis for applying RC-04.
Merchants should do all in their power to remain
While removal is still rare, MATCH Pro's clarified off MATCH. Acquirers should leverage MATCH in
standards are creating more opportunities for legitimate conjunction with their broader underwriting and risk-
corrections. In practice, several common categories of mitigation processes to adjudicate merchants and maintain
erroneous MATCH listings have emerged. awareness of merchant risk.

In speaking with Eugene Rome and Brad Cebeci of Rome As founder of Humboldt Merchant Services, co-founder of Eureka
LLP, who routinely handle MATCH disputes, I learned of
several recent cases—anonymized but representative of Payments, and a former executive for such payments innovators as
current industry patterns—that illustrate the scenarios in WePay, a division of JPMorgan Chase, Ken Musante has experience in
which they have successfully secured MATCH removals. all aspects of successful ISO building. He currently provides consulting
The cases are: services and expert witness testimony as founder of Napa Payments
and Consulting, www.napapaymentsandconsulting.com. Contact him
1. When an acquirer acknowledges internal error: A at kenm@napapaymentsandconsulting.com, 707-601-7656 or www.
processor mistakenly froze two active MIDs due to linkedin.com/in/ken-musante-us.

27