Library · Chargebacks · How to run this
Liability shift is not ratio exclusion
Liability shift answers who pays a qualifying fraud chargeback after successful authentication. A watched ratio answers how many fraud reports and disputes sit in a numerator this month. Those are different doors. Turning on 3DS is not a ratio eraser.
Pair: 3DS shift vs watched ratio on Chargebacks. What 3DS is: 3-D Secure. How to measure primary: rate vs threshold.
Shift vs count
Successful EMV 3DS can move fraud liability to the issuer on qualifying codes. Failed or attempted 3DS is not a shift. Consumer codes (not received, not as described, cancelled recurring) are outside that door.
The processor primary ratio and network VAMP still need a written rule for whether a shifted fraud case sits in the numerator. Visa’s public VAMP language calls out exclusions such as Compelling Evidence 3.0–qualified TC40 and some pre-dispute resolutions — contingent on extract timing — not a blanket “3DS success = out.”
What to get in writing
Ask the acquirer or processor: does liability-shifted fraud leave this MID’s primary count? Which VAMP rows still count after auth success? Do not paste a vendor slide into the agreement.
What not to do
Do not assume every 3DS success is out of VAMP. Do not count abandoned challenges as a shift. Do not turn on 3DS to “fix” consumer disputes. Placement tax still lives on orchestration when the lift write-up ships.
Related: Chargebacks, 3-D Secure, enumeration.
Procedure
- Name the watched ratio (processor primary vs network VAMP).
- Ask in writing whether shifted fraud still sits in the numerator.
- Do not equate liability shift with CE 3.0 exclusion.
- Place 3DS for fraud liability and conversion tax — not as a ratio eraser.
Failure modes
- Assuming every 3DS success is out of VAMP / processor ratio.
- Counting attempted 3DS as a shift.
- Ignoring consumer disputes because 3DS was on.
Worked example
None on this page yet. When one lands it will be a real case: what broke, the number, and what changed. Not a composite.
Glossary
- Liability shift
- Who eats a qualifying fraud chargeback after successful 3DS. Not automatic removal from a monitoring ratio.
Work with us — We run this job on your accounts. Services
FAQ
- If 3DS succeeded, is the fraud CB out of my ratio?
- Not by default. Shift is who eats the loss. Ask this processor whether shifted fraud still counts in primary.
- Does successful 3DS erase the case from Visa VAMP?
- Visa’s public FAQ names Compelling Evidence 3.0 and pre-dispute exclusions — not “every liability shift.” Confirm the extract rule.
- Does 3DS keep not-received out of the ratio?
- No. Liability shift is fraud-family. Consumer disputes still count when they post.