The rich, tantalizing aroma of coffee swept over me as I patiently waited in line last week at the Community Coffee inside of the University’s Middleton Library.

Once it was my turn, I placed my usual order: large regular coffee, no room for cream. The total came out to nearly $3.

Without thinking, I handed my debit card to the barista working the cash register.

Unbeknownst to me, this $3 purchase sent my checking account balance over the edge by a mere 17 cents, immediately triggering a $30 overdraft fee.

And with an uncanny predictability, I received a phone call the next day from my parents, demanding an explanation for the negative balance and resulting $30 fine.

Angered and annoyed, I simply argued that I had not been paying attention to my balance, and I reassured them it would not happen again. This story probably sounds familiar, as college students are among the largest demographic to be increasingly saddled with outrageous overdraft fees, according to estimates from the Center for Responsible Lending.

Why are overdraft fees becoming so common?

Is it a problem stemming from a lack of attention to detail? Perhaps. But it’s really the manifestation of something even larger — an exploitative practice aimed at duping unsophisticated consumers that has transformed into a huge profit-center for banks.

It is certainly undeniable that far too many people, especially college students, are being fit with hefty bills for relatively minor purchases, under an ironically labeled “overdraft protection program” that most major banks have implemented within the past ten years.

Before this program, most banks would simply not allow consumers to purchase goods and services if their accounts did not possess the sufficient funds.

Now, banks will automatically pay for debit transactions even if account holders do not have the money to cover the bill — and then charge them a steep fee for each purchase.

Moebs Services, an economic research firm that collects data on financial institutions, recently reported that banks will earn more than $38 billion this year from overdraft and bounced-check fees.

The most egregious aspect of this practice, though, is that it disproportionately affects the least-wealthiest account holders, such as students.

In fact, Moebs Services estimates that 90 percent of the $38 billion will be paid by the poorest 10 percent of the customer base. By turning overdraft penalty fees into a profitable revenue source, U.S. banks have demonstrated a fundamental truth that will always ring true for corporate America: a lightly regulated industry will see firms do everything in their power to increase profits, even if that means deliberately harming consumers.

And not surprisingly, most bankers vehemently defend the practice of overdraft protection, claiming the system benefits debit card users by allowing them to keep spending when they are out of money.

This is, of course, a concept devoid of logic. To banks, however, it means more money in their pockets and less money in yours.

So, what’s the solution to this debit card dilemma? How can federal regulators protect consumers?

First, it must be made illegal for banks to automatically subscribe customers in overdraft programs without explicitly notifying them — this type of practice has become increasingly accepted throughout the financial world.

Overdraft protection programs must be a service that bank customers opt into only after they have been made aware of all the fees and fines that are associated with their selected program.

The next half of the solution involves a change that is technological in nature.

When customers swipe their debit cards at the register, banks must be required to notify customers in real time when a purchase will overdraw their account — and what fees will be induced if a consumer decides to continue with the purchase.

This type of technology will be incremental to the sustainability of an era where consumers would no longer be kept in the dark and unfairly subject to bank’s predatory overdraft protection programs.

Unfortunately, however, there is a low probability that banks will invest in this technology unless they are legally mandated to do so. Ultimately, then, we will need congressional action.

Until action is taken, buy at your own risk. That late-night trip to Louie’s might be more expensive than you think.