A retail group which was not a party to the original anti-trustfight between retailers and major card brands and card issuers overcredit card interchange said it is moving closer to taking legalaction to try and block a settlement in that case.

The National Retail Federation, one of the largest and best knownof the associations of retailers, has announced that its board hasauthorized the group to take some action in an attempt to block theproposed agreement.

“The National Retail Federation categorically opposes theproposed settlement,” NRF President/CEO Matthew Shay said. “It doesnothing to curb the anticompetitive behavior of Visa andMasterCard, and instead ensures that swipe fees paid by retailersand their customers will continue to rise while barring any futurelegal challenges.

“The proposal is a lose-lose-lose for merchants, consumers andcompetition. NRF will take any and all steps necessary to opposethe settlement as it is currently proposed and will work towardreal reform of the swipe fee system.” A resolution approved by theNRF board authorizes the association to take steps including“intervention in pending actions” in order to reach a solution“equitable to the broad merchant community.”

The federation is exploring what form the legal action mighttake. NRF is not a party to the lawsuit, and U.S. District CourtJudge John Gleeson has not yet fully outlined how outside groupswill be allowed to intervene, or if the case qualifies as a classaction, the association said.

Under the terms of the settlement, which was proposed in July, Visa and MasterCardalong with some of the biggest card issuers would pay retailers atotal of roughly $8.25 billion. The settlement also allows forretailers to surcharge, with certain restrictions, consumers whochoose to pay with credit cards.

Credit unions were not directly involved in the settlement buthave been members of different payment industry coalitions formedto protect credit and debit card interchange and which have hadinput into the settlement.

The financial institutions and card brands have generallytreated the settlement as a done deal, but retailer opposition tothe proposal has been building. Retail groups have argued that the proposedsettlement only addresses previous damages (and thatinsufficiently), and does not address the ongoing question of howcredit card interchange is calculated.