[rubberroad]

USAA just did this a few weeks ago. My knee-jerk response was to be upset, but then I read the arguments regarding creditors retaining the right to determine what is purchased with said credit, as well as the implications for whether cryptocurrency would be considered a cash advance.

[FLUX-YOU]

Cryptocurrency definitely needs to be a cash advance, otherwise you can abuse % cash back and other benefits with it (reddit.com/r/churning). I don't think it's been possible to do it for a while though.

But TBH they probably do it because cash advance has a higher APR.

[unethical_ban]

Off-topic, but I find churning at least as ethical as banks promoting the accumulation of debt with paltry benefits/kickback to consumers for earning Visa/MC money with transaction fees.

Abuse is the credit system and its marketing writ large.

[adrr]

Cash advance higher APR is to mitigate the extra risk of people using debt to pay for debt and the increased risk of default. The bank isn't losing money on the cashback feature of a credit card. They are splitting the interchange with the customer. The vendor/merchant is the one paying 2.4% of the transaction.

[wccrawford]

I'm pretty sure all the credit cards I've had had cash advance at a higher APR and it started accruing immediately, instead of in 30 days. It really only makes sense to use it in an emergency and if you don't have your bank card to use instead.

[mjcl]

> But TBH they probably do it because cash advance has a higher APR.

Which seems reasonable to me — if someone is at the point they need to borrow cash from a credit card, they’re probably a higher risk of default.