J.P. Morgan’s Move to Charge Per Plaid Request: What It Means for Businesses and the Payments Industry

Introduction

The financial data-sharing ecosystem is going through a seismic shift. Recently, J.P. Morgan announced it will begin charging fees for each Plaid request, changing the economics of open banking and data aggregation.

For businesses that rely on Plaid to connect customer bank accounts — from fintech apps to subscription services and payments providers — this is a significant development. It highlights the growing tension between banks, aggregators, and fintechs over who controls access to financial data, and who bears the cost of that access.

In this article, we’ll explore what this change means, why J.P. Morgan is pushing for it, and how it will affect businesses, ISOs, fintechs, and the broader payments industry.

What’s Changing?

Plaid, the leading financial data aggregator, enables customers to securely connect their bank accounts to apps for payments, budgeting, lending, and more. Until now, banks like J.P. Morgan largely absorbed the infrastructure costs of serving these API requests.

J.P. Morgan’s new policy means that:

• Each Plaid request (data pull) will incur a fee.

• Businesses using Plaid (or similar aggregators) to access J.P. Morgan account data may face higher costs.

• The bank is effectively monetizing access to its customer data via third parties.

  
  

This marks a significant shift in the economics of open banking in the U.S.

Why Is J.P. Morgan Charging for Plaid Requests?

1. Infrastructure Costs: Handling millions of API calls from Plaid and other aggregators requires servers, security, and compliance systems. J.P. Morgan argues that it should be compensated for carrying this technical burden.

   
   

2. Control Over Data Access: Banks are increasingly concerned that fintechs profit from customer data without banks sharing in that value. Charging per request gives banks more leverage.

   
   

3. Revenue Opportunity: With tens of millions of Plaid users connecting to bank accounts, the volume of requests is massive. Even a small fee per request could generate substantial new revenue streams for banks.

   
   

4. Industry Precedent: By moving first, J.P. Morgan sets a precedent other major banks may follow. If Wells Fargo, Citi, or Bank of America adopt similar pricing models, it could fundamentally reshape open banking.

   
   

What This Means for Businesses Using Plaid

1. Higher Costs for Fintechs and Merchants

Businesses relying on Plaid for payments, account verification, or customer onboarding will see increased costs. Depending on volume, this could materially impact margins — especially for startups and thin-margin fintechs.

2. Possible Pass-Through to Consumers

To offset higher costs, some fintechs may pass fees on to end users, making “free” account connections less common. This could slow adoption of account-to-account payments.

3. Competitive Pressure on Aggregators

Plaid and competitors (like Yodlee, MX, or Finicity) may need to renegotiate terms with banks or absorb costs to remain attractive. This could squeeze aggregator margins or force pricing model changes.

4. Strategic Reassessment

Businesses may explore alternatives to Plaid, such as:

• Direct bank APIs where available.

• FedNow and RTP rails for real-time payments and verification.

• Payment orchestration platforms that reduce dependency on a single aggregator.

  
  

Implications for the Payments Industry

1. Increased Friction in Open Banking

One of Plaid’s biggest value props has been seamless, low-cost connectivity. Per-request charges introduce friction into a model designed for scale and accessibility.

2. Shift Toward Bank-Centric Models

As banks like J.P. Morgan monetize API access, fintechs may be pressured into partnership models where banks control more of the economics and customer experience.

3. Rising Cost of Account-to-Account Payments

Account-to-account (A2A) payments, touted as a cheaper alternative to card rails, may lose some of their cost advantage if data access fees become widespread.

4. Regulatory Attention

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other regulators are watching open banking closely. Charging per request could spark regulatory scrutiny if it’s seen as anti-competitive.

ISO and Merchant Perspective

For Independent Sales Organizations (ISOs) and merchants, the change brings several considerations:

• Impact on ACH Payments: Many ISOs rely on Plaid for ACH verification and fraud reduction. Increased costs may erode the pricing advantage ACH has over cards.

• Need for Payment Diversification: Merchants may need to diversify payment rails — balancing cards, ACH, wallets, and real-time payments — to protect margins.

• Customer Experience Risks: If fees lead fintechs to limit Plaid integrations, customers may face more friction connecting their accounts, hurting conversion rates.

• Partnership Opportunities: ISOs that offer orchestration and multi-rail support will be better positioned to help merchants adapt to the changing landscape.

  
  

Winners and Losers

Winners:

• Big Banks: New revenue streams and more leverage over fintechs.

• Alternative Aggregators: Opportunity to differentiate if they can keep costs lower than Plaid.

• Payment Orchestration Platforms: As businesses seek flexibility, orchestration providers that integrate multiple rails gain value.

  
  

Losers:

• Fintech Startups: Higher costs make scaling harder.

• Merchants Using ACH via Plaid: Some of the cost advantages of ACH may erode.

• Consumers: May face higher fees or reduced access to financial tools.

  
  

Long-Term Outlook

This move by J.P. Morgan is likely just the beginning. Other Tier 1 banks will watch closely, and if they adopt similar per-request pricing, the entire U.S. open banking ecosystem could shift toward a bank-controlled cost model.

In the long run, this could:

• Accelerate adoption of regulated open banking frameworks (like PSD2 in Europe) in the U.S.

• Push fintechs toward direct bank partnerships rather than relying solely on aggregators.

• Encourage innovation in fraud-proof account verification that reduces reliance on constant data pulls.

  
  

Conclusion

J.P. Morgan’s decision to charge per Plaid request marks a turning point in the relationship between banks, aggregators, fintechs, and merchants.

For businesses, it means higher costs and a need to reassess reliance on Plaid. For the payments industry, it signals a shift toward bank-controlled monetization of data access.

While this change adds short-term challenges, it also creates opportunities for ISOs, merchants, and orchestration providers who can adapt quickly. The future of open banking in the U.S. will depend on whether regulators, banks, and fintechs can strike a balance between accessibility, cost, and control.

At Tailored Commerce Group, we help merchants and ISOs navigate these changes with multi-rail payment strategies, orchestration tools, and ACH optimization — ensuring businesses stay resilient no matter how the open banking landscape evolves.