Request for Information Regarding Remittance Rule Assessment, 15009-15014 [2017-05681]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
protection, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Spent
fuel, Whistleblowing.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, as amended; and 5 U.S.C.
552 and 553; the NRC is adopting the
following amendment to 10 CFR part 72:
PART 72—LICENSING
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT
NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL
RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND
REACTOR-RELATED GREATER THAN
CLASS C WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 72
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182,
183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42
U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095,
2099, 2111, 2201, 2210e, 2232, 2233, 2234,
2236, 2237, 2238, 2273, 2282, 2021); Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202,
206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851);
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4332); Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982, secs. 117(a), 132, 133, 134, 135, 137,
141, 145(g), 148, 218(a) (42 U.S.C. 10137(a),
10152, 10153, 10154, 10155, 10157, 10161,
10165(g), 10168, 10198(a)); 44 U.S.C. 3504
note.
2. In § 72.214, Certificate of
Compliance 1042 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel
storage casks.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
Certificate Number: 1042.
Initial Certificate Effective Date: June
7, 2017.
SAR Submitted by: TN Americas LLC.
SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis
Report for the NUHOMS® EOS Dry
Spent Fuel Storage System.
Docket Number: 72–1042.
Certificate Expiration Date: [DATE 20
YEARS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE
Federal Register].
Model Number: EOS–37PTH, EOS–
89BTH.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day
of March 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Victor M. McCree,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2017–05897 Filed 3–23–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION
12 CFR Part 1005
[Docket No. CFPB–2017–0004]
Request for Information Regarding
Remittance Rule Assessment
Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
ACTION: Notice of assessment of
remittance rule and request for public
comment.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection (Bureau) is
conducting an assessment of certain of
the Bureau’s regulations related to
consumer remittance transfers under the
Electronic Fund Transfer Act (subpart B
of Regulation E) in accordance with
section 1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act. The Bureau is requesting public
comment on its plans for assessing these
regulations as well as certain
recommendations and information that
may be useful in conducting the
planned assessment.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before: May 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. CFPB–2017–
0004, by any of the following methods:
• Electronic: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: FederalRegisterComments@
cfpb.gov. Include Docket No. CFPB–
2017–0004 in the subject line of the
email.
• Mail: Monica Jackson, Office of the
Executive Secretary, Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G
Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Monica
Jackson, Office of the Executive
Secretary, Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau, 1275 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20002.
Instructions: All submissions should
include the document title and docket
number. Because paper mail in the
Washington, DC area and at the Bureau
is subject to delay, commenters are
encouraged to submit comments
electronically. In general, all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov. In
addition, comments will be available for
public inspection and copying at 1275
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002
on official business days between the
hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
Time. You can make an appointment to
inspect the documents by telephoning
(202) 435–7275.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15009
All comments, including attachments
and other supporting materials, will
become part of the public record and
subject to public disclosure. Sensitive
personal information, such as account
numbers or Social Security numbers,
should not be included. Comments
generally will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Fulford, Economist; Paul
Rothstein, Section Chief; Jane Raso,
Counsel; Max Bentovim, Financial
Analyst; Division of Research, Markets,
and Regulations at (202) 435–9798.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Congress established the Bureau in
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank
Act).1 In the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress
generally consolidated in the Bureau the
rulemaking authority for Federal
consumer financial laws previously
vested in certain other Federal agencies.
Congress also provided the Bureau with
the authority to, among other things,
prescribe rules as may be necessary or
appropriate to enable the Bureau to
administer and carry out the purposes
and objectives of the Federal consumer
financial laws and to prevent evasions
thereof.2 Since 2011, the Bureau has
issued a number of rules adopted under
Federal consumer financial law.3
Section 1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank
Act requires the Bureau to conduct an
assessment of each significant rule or
order adopted by the Bureau under
Federal consumer financial law. The
Bureau must publish a report of the
assessment not later than five years after
the effective date of such rule or order.
The assessment must address, among
other relevant factors, the rule’s
effectiveness in meeting the purposes
and objectives of title X of the DoddFrank Act and the specific goals stated
by the Bureau. The assessment must
reflect available evidence and any data
that the Bureau reasonably may collect.
Before publishing a report of its
assessment, the Bureau must invite
public comment on recommendations
for modifying, expanding, or
eliminating the significant rule or order.
In February 2012, the Bureau
published a final rule concerning
consumer remittance transfers to
individuals and businesses in foreign
countries in the Federal Register titled
‘‘Electronic Fund Transfers (Regulation
E)’’ (February 2012 Final Rule) to
implement section 1073 of the Dodd
1 Public
Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
U.S.C. 5512(b)(1).
3 12 U.S.C. 5512(d).
2 12
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
15010
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Frank Act.4 The Bureau amended the
February 2012 Final Rule on several
occasions both before and after it took
effect on October 28, 2013.5 As
discussed further below, the Bureau has
determined that the February 2012 Final
Rule and all the amendments related to
it that the Bureau made and that took
effect on October 28, 2013 collectively
make up a significant rule for purposes
of section 1022(d) and will conduct an
assessment of the rule. This document
refers to the February 2012 Final Rule
as amended when it took effect on
October 28, 2013 as the ‘‘Remittance
Rule.’’ Further, the Bureau will consider
certain amendments to it that the
Bureau issued shortly after the
Remittance Rule’s October 28, 2013
effective date to the extent doing so will
facilitate a more meaningful assessment
of the Remittance Rule. Specifically, the
Bureau is incorporating into the
assessment certain amendments related
to the extension of an exception in the
Remittance Rule that permits insured
institutions to provide estimated
amounts instead of exact amounts under
certain circumstances. Those
amendments were published in a final
rule in the Federal Register in
September 2014 and became effective in
November 2014.6 In this document, the
Bureau is requesting public comment on
the issues identified below regarding the
Remittance Rule and these certain
subsequent amendments.
II. Assessment Process
Assessments pursuant to section
1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act are for
informational purposes only and are not
part of any formal or informal
rulemaking proceedings under the
Administrative Procedure Act.7 The
Bureau plans to consider relevant
comments and other information
received as it conducts the assessment
and prepares an assessment report. The
Bureau does not, however, expect that it
will respond in the assessment report to
each comment received pursuant to this
document. Furthermore, the Bureau
does not anticipate that the assessment
report will include specific proposals by
the Bureau to modify any rules,
although the findings made in the
assessment will help to inform the
Bureau’s thinking as to whether to
consider commencing a rulemaking
proceeding in the future.8 Upon
4 77
FR 6194 (February 7, 2012).
discussed below, one of the amendments is
a temporary delay of the original effective date,
February 7, 2013.
6 78 FR 55970 (Sept. 18, 2014).
7 Public Law 79–404, 60 Stat. 237 (1946).
8 The Bureau announces its rulemaking plans in
semiannual updates of its rulemaking agenda,
5 As
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
Section 1073 of the Dodd Frank Act
amended the Electronic Fund Transfer
Act (EFTA) to create a comprehensive
new system of consumer protection for
remittance transfers sent by consumers
in the United States to individuals and
businesses in foreign countries.
Consumers transfer tens of billions of
dollars from the United States each year.
However, these transactions were
generally excluded from existing
Federal consumer protection regulation
in the United States until the DoddFrank Act expanded the scope of the
EFTA to provide for their regulation.9
On February 7, 2012, the Bureau
published the February 2012 Final Rule
in the Federal Register to implement
section 919 of the EFTA, as set forth in
section 1073 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The
rule was published in a new subpart B
to the Bureau’s Regulation E.10 The
February 2012 Final Rule, among other
things, defined remittance transfers 11
and which persons must comply with
the rule because they are remittance
transfer providers; 12 established certain
consumer disclosures that must be given
to consumers who send remittance
transfers and certain exceptions to these
disclosures; provided consumers with
cancellation and refund rights, and
required providers to resolve errors.
Further, the February 2012 Final Rule
implemented a statutory exception that
permits remittance transfer providers
that are insured institutions to estimate,
under certain circumstances, the
amount of currency that a designated
recipient will receive (the ‘‘temporary
exception’’).13
As discussed above, the Bureau
subsequently amended the February
2012 Final Rule several times before the
effective date of October 28, 2013 to
revise the rule, temporarily delay the
effective date of the February 2012 Final
Rule,14 and to address important
questions raised by industry, consumer
advocacy groups, and other
stakeholders. The Bureau believed that
these amendments were warranted to
increase certain consumer protections,
avoid potentially significant disruption
to the provision of remittance transfers,
and clarify the regulations by making
technical corrections and conforming
changes.
First, in July 2012, the Bureau
published amendments to correct
certain technical aspects of the February
2012 Final Rule and to make certain
non-substantive, conforming changes.15
Then, in August 2012, the Bureau
published amendments to the February
2012 Final Rule that, among other
things, added a safe harbor that clarified
that persons that provide 100 or fewer
remittance transfers in both the prior
and the current calendar years are
deemed not to be providing remittance
transfers in the normal course of
business, and thus are not remittance
transfer providers and are not required
to comply with the February 2012 Final
Rule.16 The August 2012 final rule also
contained provisions that apply to
remittance transfers scheduled in
advance of the transfer date, including
a provision that permits a remittance
transfer provider to provide estimates
for certain disclosures for certain of
these transfers.17
Subsequently, as noted above, the
Bureau temporarily delayed the
which are posted as part of the federal government’s
Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory
Actions. See https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
eAgendaMain.
9 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. EFTA section 919 is
codified in 15 U.S.C. 1693o–1.
10 77 FR 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
11 12 CFR 1005.30(e) (defining a remittance
transfer generally to be a transfer of funds requested
by a sender to a designated recipient that is sent by
a remittance transfer provider). There are specific
exclusions for certain kinds of transfers,
specifically, small value transactions of $15 or less,
and transfers for the purchase or sale of securities
or commodities provided that certain conditions are
met. A designated recipient is any natural person
or organization such as a corporation specified by
the sender as the authorized recipient of a
remittance transfer to be received at a location in
a foreign country. 12 CFR 1003.30(c) and comment
30(c)–1.
12 77 FR 6194, 6285 (providing that a remittance
transfer provider is any person that provides
remittance transfers for a consumer in the normal
course of its business, regardless of whether the
consumer holds an account with such person).
13 EFTA section 919(a)(4) established that the
temporary exception would expire on July 21, 2015,
but permitted the Bureau to extend the exception
for up to ten years after the enactment of the DoddFrank Act (i.e., July 21, 2020), if it determined that
the expiration of the exception on July 21, 2015,
would negatively affect the ability of insured
institutions to send remittances to locations in
foreign countries. The Bureau extended the
exception to July 21, 2020, in September 2014 based
on its determination that the expiration of the
exception on July 21, 2015, would negatively affect
the ability of insured institutions to send
remittances to locations in foreign countries. See 79
FR 55970 (Sept. 18, 2014).
14 78 FR 6025 (Jan. 29, 2013). The February 2012
Final Rule had an effective date of February 7, 2013.
The Bureau temporarily delayed the effective date
because it had published additional proposed
amendments to the February 2012 Final Rule in
December 2012. In a final rule published in May
2013, the Bureau finalized these amendments and
set the effective date as October 28, 2013.
15 77 FR 40459 (July 10, 2012).
16 12 CFR 1005.30(f)(2)(i).
17 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(2); 1005.36.
completion of the assessment, the
Bureau plans to issue an assessment
report no later than October 28, 2018.
III. The Remittance Rule
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
effective date of the February 2012 Final
Rule pending the finalization of
proposed amendments it published in
the Federal Register in December 2012
to further amend the February 2012
Final Rule.18 Then, in May 2013, the
Bureau finalized the proposed
amendments it published in December
2012 in a final rule. Among other things,
the May 2013 final rule created a
permanent exception for transfers
through open networks that made
optional in certain circumstances the
disclosure of fees imposed by the
designated recipient’s institution and
the disclosure of taxes collected on the
remittance transfer by a person other
than the provider.19 It also provided that
for these charges, estimates may be
provided.20 These amendments also
created certain exceptions to the general
error resolution provisions in situations
in which a remittance transfer is not
delivered to a designated recipient
because the sender provided an
incorrect account number or recipient
institution identifier that results in the
transferred funds being deposited in the
wrong account.21 Lastly, in August
2013, the Bureau published a
clarificatory amendment and a technical
correction to the May 2013 final rule.22
As noted above and discussed further
below, the Bureau has determined that
the Remittance Rule is a significant rule
for purposes of Dodd-Frank section
1022(d) and will conduct an assessment
of the rule.23
18 77
FR 77188 (Dec. 31, 2012).
FR 30662 (May 22, 2013); 12 CFR
1005.31(b)(1)(vii).
20 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(3).
21 12 CFR 1005.33(h).
22 78 FR 49365 (Aug. 14, 2013).
23 As noted above, in September 2014, the Bureau
published a final rule that, among other things,
extended the temporary exception to July 21, 2020.
The effective date of this final rule was November
17, 2014. In September 2014, the Bureau also
published a final rule that extended its supervisory
authority to any nonbank international money
transfer provider that has at least one million
aggregate annual international money transfers to
determine compliance with, among other things,
the Remittance Rule. 79 FR 56631 (Sept. 23, 2014).
In October 2016, the Bureau amended Regulation E
by issuing two final rules. The first final rule
focused on prepaid accounts and made clarificatory
amendments to the Remittance Rule to clarify its
application to prepaid accounts. As stated in the
final rule, the effective date of these clarifications
is October 1, 2017. 81 FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016).
However, on March 15, 2017, the Bureau published
a proposal to extend the effective date by six
months to April 1, 2018. 82 FR 13782 (Mar. 15,
2017). The second final rule made certain clerical
and non-substantive corrections to errors it has
identified in Regulation E, including in certain
provisions of the Remittance Rule. 81 FR 70319
(Oct. 12, 2016). This rule became effective on
November 14, 2016. The Bureau has discretion to
choose the relevant time frame for the analysis and
thus the most appropriate way to address
amendments to any particular significant rule for
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
19 78
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
The Remittance Rule applies to
remittance transfers sent by traditional
financial institutions such as banks and
credit unions; non-banks, such as
money transmitters; and Internet and
mobile providers. Further, a remittance
transfer could be a consumer-toconsumer transfer, or it could be a
consumer-to-business transfer. The
Remittance Rule applies to remittance
transfers sent over open networks. The
most common form of open network
remittance transfer is a wire transfer.
The rule also applies to remittance
transfers sent over closed networks, in
which a remittance transfer provider
typically uses either its own operators
or a network of agents or other partners
to collect funds from senders in the
United States and distribute those funds
to the designated recipient abroad. The
rule additionally applies to remittance
transfers sent through the automated
clearinghouse system (ACH), although
use of ACH for consumer transfers is
limited compared to its use for nonconsumer (i.e., business-to-business)
transfers.
A. Major Provisions of the Remittance
Rule
The Remittance Rule addressed three
major topics, which are summarized
below.
1. Disclosures. Consistent with the
disclosure requirements established by
section 919(a) of EFTA, the Remittance
Rule generally requires a remittance
transfer provider to provide a written
pre-payment disclosure when the
sender requests a transfer and generally
requires the provider to provide a
written receipt when payment is
made.24 The pre-payment disclosure
must contain specific information about
a remittance transfer, such as the fee a
remittance transfer will impose on the
remittance transfer,25 the exchange rate,
if any,26 certain applicable fees and
taxes that will be imposed on the
transfer,27 and the amount to be
received by the designated recipient.28
The receipt must include the
information provided on the prepurposes of an assessment of such rule. In this
notice, except with respect to amendments related
to the extension of the temporary exception, the
Bureau is not seeking comment on the amendments
to the Remittance Rule that became or will become
effective after the October 28, 2013 effective date.
24 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1) and (2). As an alternative
to providing a written receipt, the rule permits a
remittance transfer provider to give a single written
disclosure prior to payment containing all of the
information required on the receipt, so long as the
provider also provides proof of payment. 12 CFR
1004.31(b)(3).
25 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(ii).
26 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(iv).
27 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(ii) and (vi).
28 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(vii).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15011
payment disclosure,29 as well as certain
additional information, such as the date
of availability of the funds 30 and
information regarding the sender’s error
resolution and cancellation rights.31
Disclosures must always be made in
English. In certain circumstances, a
remittance transfer provider must also
provide foreign language disclosures.32
The Remittance Rule requires that
disclosures regarding the exchange rate
and amount of currency that will be
received by the designated recipient
must be exact, unless an exception
applies. The rule contains four
exceptions to this general requirement,
which permit providers to disclose
estimates of certain amounts instead of
actual amounts.33 Specifically, in
addition to the temporary exception
discussed above, the Remittance Rule
implements a statutory exemption that
permits estimates where a remittance
transfer provider is unable to determine
exact amounts due to either the laws of
the recipient country or the method by
which transactions are made in the
recipient country.34 The third
exception, as discussed above, makes it
optional for remittance transfer
providers to disclose fees imposed by
the designated recipient’s institution in
certain circumstances and taxes
collected on the remittance transfer by
third parties, and that to the extent such
charges are disclosed, a remittance
transfer provider may disclose estimates
instead of actual amounts.35 Lastly, also
as discussed above, the Bureau permits
a remittance transfer provider to provide
certain estimates for certain transfers
scheduled before the date of transfer.36
The temporary exception is generally
limited to insured institutions (i.e.,
29 12
CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(i).
CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(ii).
31 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(iv).
32 EFTA section 919(b); 12 CFR 1005.31(g). The
remittance transfer provider must either provide a
sender disclosures in each of the foreign languages
principally used by the remittance transfer provider
to advertise, solicit, or market remittance transfer
services at the office in which a sender conducts a
transaction or asserts an error, or provide
disclosures in the language primarily used by the
sender to conduct the remittance transfer or to
assert an error.
33 The Remittance Rule also sets forth certain
estimate methodologies.
34 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(1). The Bureau has
published a safe harbor list of countries. See 78 FR
66251 (Nov. 5, 2013). A remittance transfer provider
may provide estimates instead of exact amounts
when sending to one of the countries on the list
unless the provider has information that it is
possible to disclose exact amounts. The rule
permits a remittance transfer provider to make its
own determination that the laws of countries, not
on the list, do not permit a determination of exact
amounts.
35 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(3).
36 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(2).
30 12
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
15012
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
insured depository institutions or
insured credit unions),37 but the other
exceptions are available to any
remittance transfer provider that meets
their criteria.
2. Cancellation and refund. The rule
also provides consumers with
cancellation and refund rights.38 As a
general matter, if a remittance transfer
provider receives an oral or written
request from a sender to cancel a
remittance transfer within 30 minutes
after the sender pays for the remittance
transfer, then the remittance transfer
provider must comply with the request,
provided that the request contains
certain identifying information and the
transferred funds have not been picked
up by the designated recipient or
deposited into the designated recipient’s
account.39 Within three business days of
receiving a sender’s cancellation
request, a remittance transfer provider
must provide a refund of the total
amount of funds the sender provided in
connection with the remittance transfer,
including, to the extent not prohibited
by law, taxes, at no additional cost to
the sender.40
3. Error resolution. Consistent with
EFTA section 919(d), the Remittance
Rule requires remittance transfer
providers to remedy certain errors
related to remittance transfers.41 A
remittance transfer provider is generally
required to investigate errors upon
receiving oral or written error notice
from a sender within 180 days after the
disclosed date of availability of the
remittance transfer. The remittance
transfer provider must investigate and
determine whether an error has
occurred within 90 days of receiving an
error notice and must report its
investigation results to the consumer in
writing within three business days after
completing the investigation. If an error
occurred, the remittance transfer
provider must correct the error within
one business day of, or as soon as
reasonably practicable, after receiving
37 Staff of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) wrote a no-action letter on
December 14, 2012, that concludes it will not
recommend enforcement actions to the SEC under
Regulation E if a broker-dealer provides disclosures
as though the broker-dealer were an insured
institution for purposes of the temporary exception.
The letter is available at https://www.sec.gov/
divisions/marketreg/mr-noaction/2012/financialinformation-forum-121412-rege.pdf.
38 EFTA section 919(d)(3) (establishing that the
Board must issue rules regarding remittance transfer
cancellation and refund policies for consumers).
39 12 CFR 1005.34(a).
40 12 CFR 1005.34(b).
41 12 CFR 1005.33. The Remittance Rule defines
what ‘‘error’’ under the rule includes and also what
it does not include. 12 CFR 1005.33(a)(1) and (2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
the sender’s instructions regarding the
appropriate remedy.
The type of remedy that is available
depends on the type of error that the
remittance transfer provider has
determined to have occurred.42
Additionally, the Remittance Rule
requires remittance transfer providers to
develop and maintain written policies
and procedures to ensure compliance
with the rule’s error resolution
requirements and to keep certain
records related to error investigations.
The rule also provides that remittance
transfer providers are liable for the acts
of their agents when those agents act on
their behalf.
B. Significant Rule Determination
The Bureau has determined that the
Remittance Rule is a significant rule for
purposes of Dodd-Frank section
1022(d). The Bureau makes this
determination partly on the basis of the
estimated aggregate annual cost to
industry of complying with the rule.43
In addition, as the Bureau stated at the
time of issuance, the Bureau expected
the February 2012 Final Rule to have
important effects on remittance transfer
service features, provider operations,
and the overall market. For example, the
Remittance Rule required providers to
give consumers new pre-payment
disclosures that contained information
that providers did not uniformly
42 The May 2013 final rule adopted provisions
that provide that mistakes due to senders providing
incorrect account numbers or recipient institution
identifiers are not errors under certain
circumstances. This amendment and the
amendment to make optional the disclosure of
recipient institution fees and certain taxes in
connection with open network transfers are
examples of how the Bureau made significant
changes to the February 2012 Final Rule to ease
compliance and prevent market disruptions,
especially for remittance transfers sent through
open networks to bank accounts.
43 In the Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis (PRA
Analysis) published with the February 2012 Final
Rule, the Bureau estimated an additional 4,253,000
in ongoing burden hours (as well as an additional
3,431,000 in one-time burden hours) from the
February 2012 Final Rule. 77 FR 6194, 6285 (Feb.
7, 2012). In the Supporting Statement submitted to
OMB, the Bureau valued the ongoing burden hours
at $29.64 per hour. Thus, there was approximately
$126 million in additional ongoing burden from the
February 2012 Final Rule. In the PRA Analysis
published with the August 2012 Final Rule, the
Bureau estimated that the amendments reduced
annual burden by 532,784 hours; and that the
amendments in the May 2013 Final Rule reduced
annual burden by an additional 276,000 hours.
Taking into account these reductions, there was
approximately $102 million in additional ongoing
burden from the rule that took effect. The Bureau
noted, however, that the decrease in burden was
likely larger than the estimated amounts since the
estimated reductions did not take full account of
the downward revision in the number of state
licensed money transmitters that offer remittance
transfer services. See 77 FR 50244, 50282 (Aug. 20,
2012) and 78 FR 30662, 30701 (May 22, 2013).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
provide consumers prior to the rule. The
rule also established new procedures for
resolving and remedying errors. The
Bureau stated that these requirements
would likely necessitate changes in
business operations so firms could
collect and provide consumers the
information required in the disclosures
and track and resolve errors consumers
asserted. The improved disclosures
might put downward pressure on
pricing, but the Bureau also recognized
in its consideration of benefits, costs
and impacts (conducted pursuant to
Dodd-Frank section 1022(b)(2)(A)) that
the additional costs of the new regime
might have the opposite effect. The
Bureau was uncertain about the
combined effect on price and quantity
levels and observed that certain
providers, though not necessarily
providers with significant market
shares, might attempt to increase prices
or stop providing remittance transfers
altogether at least in certain corridors.
The Bureau also considered that the
Remittance Rule would create important
new compliance risks for providers
although, as noted, there are several
important exceptions that reduce these
risks. The rule also states that providers
are liable for violations by an agent
when the agent acts for the provider.
Information received by the Bureau
related to these effects has generally
been consistent with Bureau
expectations. Taking all of these factors
into consideration, including the annual
costs of the Remittance Rule, the Bureau
concludes that the Remittance Rule is
‘‘significant’’ for purposes of section
1022(d).
IV. The Assessment Plan
Because the Bureau has determined
that the Remittance Rule is a significant
rule for purposes of 1022(d), section
1022(d) requires the Bureau to assess
the rule’s effectiveness in meeting the
purposes and objectives of title X of the
Dodd-Frank Act and the specific goals
stated by the Bureau. Section 1021 of
the Dodd-Frank Act states that the
Bureau’s purpose is to implement and,
where applicable, enforce Federal
consumer financial law consistently for
the purpose of ensuring that all
consumers have access to markets for
consumer financial products and
services and that markets for consumer
financial products and services are fair,
transparent, and competitive. Section
1021 also sets forth the Bureau’s
objectives, which are to ensure that,
with respect to consumer financial
products and services:
• Consumers are provided with
timely and understandable information
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
to make responsible decisions about
financial transactions;
• Consumers are protected from
unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and
practices and from discrimination;
• Outdated, unnecessary, or unduly
burdensome regulations are regularly
identified and addressed in order to
reduce unwarranted regulatory burdens;
• Federal consumer financial law is
enforced consistently, without regard to
the status of a person as a depository
institution, in order to promote fair
competition; and
• Markets for consumer financial
products and services operate
transparently and efficiently to facilitate
access and innovation.
Section 1022(d) also requires the
Bureau to assess the Remittance Rule’s
effectiveness in meeting the specific
goals stated by the Bureau. As discussed
above, the Remittance Rule provides
three significant consumer protections:
(1) Reliable disclosures including the
price of a remittance transfer, the
amount of currency to be delivered to
the recipient, and the date of
availability; (2) cancellation rights
following a transfer; (3) error resolution
provisions requiring providers to
investigate disputes and remedy
errors.44 The objectives of the
Remittance Rule include improving the
predictability of remittance transfers,45
providing consumers with better
information for comparison shopping,46
and, with regard to amendments made
in 2012 and 2013, limiting potential
market disruption that might have
resulted from implementing the
February 2012 Remittance Rule as
originally adopted.47
To assess the effectiveness of the
Remittance Rule in meeting these
purposes, goals, and objectives, the
Bureau intends to focus its assessment
of the Remittance Rule in two areas: (1)
Whether the market for remittances has
evolved after the Remittance Rule in
ways that promote access, efficiency,
and limited market disruption by
considering how remittance volumes,
prices, and competition in the
remittance market may have changed;
and, (2) whether the new system of
consumer protections has brought more
information, transparency, and greater
predictability of prices to the market.
To assess the Remittance Rule, the
Bureau plans to analyze a variety of
metrics and data to the extent feasible.
Feasibility will depend on the
availability of data and the cost to
44 77
45 77
FR 6193, 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
FR 6193, 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
46 Id.
47 See
e.g., 78 FR at 30683 (May 22, 2013).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
obtain any new data. The Bureau will
seek to gather information about
activities and outcomes including the
ones listed below and seek to
understand how these activities and
outcomes relate to each other:
(1) Provider activities undertaken to
comply with the Remittance Rule such
as provision of disclosures; responses to
errors; and provision of cancellation
rights;
(2) Consumer activities including
utilization of their error resolution
rights;
(3) Consumer outcomes that the
Remittance Rule sought to affect
including whether the new system has
brought greater transparency and
predictability of the costs of sending
remittances and allowed for comparison
shopping; and
(4) Other market outcomes that the
Remittance Rule may have affected
including the number and types of
providers, the number of remittances
sent, and the price of transfers.
In conducting the assessment, the
Bureau will seek to compare consumer
outcomes to a baseline that would exist
if the Remittance Rule’s requirements
were not in effect. Doing so is
challenging because the Bureau cannot
directly observe what the remittance
market would look like had the
Remittance Rule not come into effect.
The Bureau may have access to data
from before the effective date of the
Remittance Rule that is informative
about the outcomes absent the
Remittance Rule. In addition, some of
the provisions of the rule that allow
exemptions, applicable State laws in
effect before the rule, or other
institutional factors may allow the
Bureau to observe outcomes similar to
outcomes one might observe without the
rule. The Bureau will draw conclusions
as supported by the data, taking into
account that factors other than the rule
itself may affect observable outcomes.
The Bureau may also seek to compare
outcomes observed with the Remittance
Rule to counterfactual outcomes if
specific elements of the Remittance Rule
had not been in effect. For example, the
Bureau may seek to understand the
effects of specific amendments,
provisions, or exceptions, which only
makes sense when compared to a
baseline in which the balance of the
Remittance Rule is in effect. In addition,
the Bureau may consider how other
possible provisions might have changed
the effects of the rule.
The Bureau has existing data sources,
currently available or in development,
with which to undertake these analyses,
and the Bureau is also planning to
secure additional data. Existing data
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15013
sources include the World Bank
Migration and Remittance Database,48
consumer complaints submitted to the
Bureau, and information obtained from
Bureau supervision and enforcement
activities. The Bureau plans to use
information provided by banks and
credit unions in their Call Reports on
their remittance activities. The Bureau
is also exploring the availability and
utility of other sources of data including
State level assessments and reports on
money transmitters operating within
individual States.
The Bureau intends to interview
various market participants, including
remittance transfer providers and
potential remittance transfer providers,
as it analyzes the data described above
and interprets the findings. The Bureau
may also request information from
remittance transfer providers about, for
example, error assertions and
resolutions and sample disclosures,
including, if applicable, foreign
language disclosures.
As it conducts its assessment of the
Remittance Rule, the Bureau expects to
consider effects of specific provisions of
the rule to the extent feasible. For
example, the Bureau may collect and
analyze information about the use of the
temporary exception allowing insured
institutions to estimate certain thirdparty fees and exchange rates that
expires in July 2020. In addition, where
practical and reasonable the Bureau may
also collect and analyze information
about: (1) The 100-transfer safe harbor;
(2) exceptions to the rule’s error
resolution regime for certain sender
mistakes involving incorrect account
numbers and recipient institution
identifiers; (3) optional disclosure of
recipient institution fees for remittance
transfers conducted over open networks;
(4) optional disclosure of taxes imposed
on a remittance transfer by a person
other than the remittance transfer
provider; and (5) the requirement to
provide foreign language disclosures
under certain circumstances.
V. Request for Comment
To inform the assessment, the Bureau
hereby invites members of the public to
submit information and other comments
relevant to the issues identified below,
as well as any information relevant to
assessing the effectiveness of the
Remittance Rule in meeting the
purposes and objectives of title X of the
Dodd-Frank Act (section 1021) and the
specific goals of the Bureau (enumerated
48 The database is available at https://
www.worldbank.org/en/topic/
migrationremittancesdiasporaissues/brief/
migration-remittances-data, accessed February 14,
2017.
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
15014
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 56 / Friday, March 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules
above). In particular, the Bureau invites
the public, including consumers and
their advocates, remittance transfer
providers and other industry
representatives, industry analysts, and
other interested persons to submit the
following:
(1) Comments on the feasibility and
effectiveness of the assessment plan, the
objectives of the Remittance Rule that
the Bureau intends to emphasize in the
assessment, and the outcomes, metrics,
baselines and analytical methods for
assessing the effectiveness of the rule as
described in part IV above;
(2) Data and other factual information
that may be useful for executing the
Bureau’s assessment plan, as described
in part IV above;
(3) Recommendations to improve the
assessment plan, as well as data, other
factual information, and sources of data
that would be useful and available to
execute any recommended
improvements to the assessment plan
including data on the exceptions and
provisions discussed at the end of part
IV;
(4) Data and other factual information
about the benefits and costs of the
Remittance Rule for consumers,
remittance transfer providers, and
others; and about the impacts of the rule
on transparency, efficiency, access, and
innovation in the remittance market;
(5) Data and other factual information
about the rule’s effectiveness in meeting
the purposes and objectives of Title X of
the Dodd-Frank Act (section 1021),
which are listed in part IV above;
(6) Recommendations for modifying,
expanding, or eliminating the
Remittance Rule.
Dated: March 15, 2017.
Richard Cordray,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
[FR Doc. 2017–05681 Filed 3–23–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 100, 110 and 165
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[Docket Number USCG–2016–0949]
RIN 1625–AA08, AA01, AA87
Special Local Regulation, Temporary
Anchorages and Safety Zones: Sail
Boston 2017; Port of Boston, MA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:13 Mar 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
The Coast Guard proposes to
adopt a temporary special local
regulation, multiple safety zones, and
temporary spectator anchorages before,
during, and after Sail Boston 2017 in the
Port of Boston, Massachusetts, to be
held between June 16, 2017 and June 22,
2017. These regulations are necessary to
promote the safe navigation of vessels
and the safety of life and property
during this event. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before April 24, 2017. The Coast
Guard anticipates that this proposed
rule will be effective from 12:00 a.m. on
June 16, 2017 until 7:00 p.m. on June
22, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2016–0949 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Mark Cutter,
Sector Boston Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
617–223–4000, email Mark.E.Cutter@
uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
Sail Boston, Inc. is sponsoring Sail
Boston 2017, which has been designated
a Marine Event of National Significance
by the U.S. Coast Guard. Scheduled
events will occur between June 16, 2017
and June 22, 2017 in the Port of Boston.
Scheduled events will consist of Tall
Ships in a parade of sail into Boston
Harbor on June 17, 2017, public tours of
U.S. Navy vessels and Tall Ships, and
a U.S. Navy Blue Angels aerial
demonstration. Tall ships will depart
Boston on June 22, 2017 for the restart
of the Rendez-Vous 2017 Tall Ships
Regatta.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
ensure the safety of vessels and
spectators in the vicinity of the Port of
Boston, before, during, and after the
scheduled events. The Coast Guard
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
estimates 1,000 spectator craft will
attend Sail Boston 2017 events. The
proposed regulations would create
temporary spectator anchorage
regulations, vessel movement control
measures, a safety zone around each
Tall Ship while anchored, transiting,
and moored, and a safety zone for the
restart of the Rendez-Vous 2017 Tall
Ships Regatta. The proposed regulations
would be in effect at various times in
the Port of Boston between June 16,
2017 and June 22, 2017. Vessel
congestion, due to the anticipated large
number of participating and spectator
vessels, poses a significant threat to the
safety of life.
This rule provides for the safety of life
on navigable waters and to protect the
participating Tall Ships, private vessels,
spectators, and the Port of Boston
during these events.
The Coast Guard proposes this
rulemaking under authorities in 33
U.S.C. 1233 through 1236; 49 CFR 1.46;
33 CFR 100.35, 33 U.S.C. 471; 33 U.S.C.
1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 49
CFR 1.46 and 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 33
U.S.C. 1225 and 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 49
CFR 1.46 and 33 CFR 1.05–1(G), 6.04–
1, 6.04–6, and 160.5.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Sail Boston, Inc is planning to host
the Tall Ships involved in the RendezVous 2017 Tall Ships Regatta in the Port
of Boston. The Port of Boston will be the
only U.S. Port that the Rendez-Vous
2017 Tall Ships Regatta will visit. The
event will commence with a parade of
sail into Boston Harbor on June 17,
2017, with the participating Tall Ships
mooring in various berths throughout
the Port of Boston until their departure
on June 22, 2017. Upon their departure
on June 22, 2017, the Tall Ships will
transit to a position approximately 5
nautical miles east of Rockport, MA for
the restart of the Rendez-Vous 2017 Tall
Ships Regatta.
At the time of this notice, Sail Boston
2017 events are expected to include the
following:
1. June 16 and June 17: 100-yard
safety zone surrounding each
participating Tall Ship while anchored
in Broad Sound;
2. June 17: 1000-yard safety zone
ahead and astern and 100-yards on each
side of participating Tall Ships during
the Parade of Sail;
3. June 16 and June 17: Temporary
spectator anchorages in effect for
viewing the Parade of Tall Ships
occurring on June 17, 2017;
4. June 17 through June 22: U.S. Navy
Vessels and multiple Tall Ships moored
in various locations throughout the Port
of Boston;
E:\FR\FM\24MRP1.SGM
24MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 56 (Friday, March 24, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15009-15014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05681]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION
12 CFR Part 1005
[Docket No. CFPB-2017-0004]
Request for Information Regarding Remittance Rule Assessment
AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
ACTION: Notice of assessment of remittance rule and request for public
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is
conducting an assessment of certain of the Bureau's regulations related
to consumer remittance transfers under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act
(subpart B of Regulation E) in accordance with section 1022(d) of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The Bureau
is requesting public comment on its plans for assessing these
regulations as well as certain recommendations and information that may
be useful in conducting the planned assessment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before: May 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CFPB-2017-
0004, by any of the following methods:
Electronic: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: FederalRegisterComments@cfpb.gov. Include Docket
No. CFPB-2017-0004 in the subject line of the email.
Mail: Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC
20552.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Monica Jackson, Office of the
Executive Secretary, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1275 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20002.
Instructions: All submissions should include the document title and
docket number. Because paper mail in the Washington, DC area and at the
Bureau is subject to delay, commenters are encouraged to submit
comments electronically. In general, all comments received will be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov. In addition,
comments will be available for public inspection and copying at 1275
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002 on official business days
between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an
appointment to inspect the documents by telephoning (202) 435-7275.
All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials,
will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure.
Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social
Security numbers, should not be included. Comments generally will not
be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Fulford, Economist; Paul
Rothstein, Section Chief; Jane Raso, Counsel; Max Bentovim, Financial
Analyst; Division of Research, Markets, and Regulations at (202) 435-
9798.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Congress established the Bureau in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act).\1\ In the Dodd-
Frank Act, Congress generally consolidated in the Bureau the rulemaking
authority for Federal consumer financial laws previously vested in
certain other Federal agencies. Congress also provided the Bureau with
the authority to, among other things, prescribe rules as may be
necessary or appropriate to enable the Bureau to administer and carry
out the purposes and objectives of the Federal consumer financial laws
and to prevent evasions thereof.\2\ Since 2011, the Bureau has issued a
number of rules adopted under Federal consumer financial law.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
\2\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(1).
\3\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the Bureau to
conduct an assessment of each significant rule or order adopted by the
Bureau under Federal consumer financial law. The Bureau must publish a
report of the assessment not later than five years after the effective
date of such rule or order. The assessment must address, among other
relevant factors, the rule's effectiveness in meeting the purposes and
objectives of title X of the Dodd-Frank Act and the specific goals
stated by the Bureau. The assessment must reflect available evidence
and any data that the Bureau reasonably may collect. Before publishing
a report of its assessment, the Bureau must invite public comment on
recommendations for modifying, expanding, or eliminating the
significant rule or order.
In February 2012, the Bureau published a final rule concerning
consumer remittance transfers to individuals and businesses in foreign
countries in the Federal Register titled ``Electronic Fund Transfers
(Regulation E)'' (February 2012 Final Rule) to implement section 1073
of the Dodd
[[Page 15010]]
Frank Act.\4\ The Bureau amended the February 2012 Final Rule on
several occasions both before and after it took effect on October 28,
2013.\5\ As discussed further below, the Bureau has determined that the
February 2012 Final Rule and all the amendments related to it that the
Bureau made and that took effect on October 28, 2013 collectively make
up a significant rule for purposes of section 1022(d) and will conduct
an assessment of the rule. This document refers to the February 2012
Final Rule as amended when it took effect on October 28, 2013 as the
``Remittance Rule.'' Further, the Bureau will consider certain
amendments to it that the Bureau issued shortly after the Remittance
Rule's October 28, 2013 effective date to the extent doing so will
facilitate a more meaningful assessment of the Remittance Rule.
Specifically, the Bureau is incorporating into the assessment certain
amendments related to the extension of an exception in the Remittance
Rule that permits insured institutions to provide estimated amounts
instead of exact amounts under certain circumstances. Those amendments
were published in a final rule in the Federal Register in September
2014 and became effective in November 2014.\6\ In this document, the
Bureau is requesting public comment on the issues identified below
regarding the Remittance Rule and these certain subsequent amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 77 FR 6194 (February 7, 2012).
\5\ As discussed below, one of the amendments is a temporary
delay of the original effective date, February 7, 2013.
\6\ 78 FR 55970 (Sept. 18, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Assessment Process
Assessments pursuant to section 1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act are
for informational purposes only and are not part of any formal or
informal rulemaking proceedings under the Administrative Procedure
Act.\7\ The Bureau plans to consider relevant comments and other
information received as it conducts the assessment and prepares an
assessment report. The Bureau does not, however, expect that it will
respond in the assessment report to each comment received pursuant to
this document. Furthermore, the Bureau does not anticipate that the
assessment report will include specific proposals by the Bureau to
modify any rules, although the findings made in the assessment will
help to inform the Bureau's thinking as to whether to consider
commencing a rulemaking proceeding in the future.\8\ Upon completion of
the assessment, the Bureau plans to issue an assessment report no later
than October 28, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Public Law 79-404, 60 Stat. 237 (1946).
\8\ The Bureau announces its rulemaking plans in semiannual
updates of its rulemaking agenda, which are posted as part of the
federal government's Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory
Actions. See https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. The Remittance Rule
Section 1073 of the Dodd Frank Act amended the Electronic Fund
Transfer Act (EFTA) to create a comprehensive new system of consumer
protection for remittance transfers sent by consumers in the United
States to individuals and businesses in foreign countries. Consumers
transfer tens of billions of dollars from the United States each year.
However, these transactions were generally excluded from existing
Federal consumer protection regulation in the United States until the
Dodd-Frank Act expanded the scope of the EFTA to provide for their
regulation.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. EFTA section 919 is codified in 15
U.S.C. 1693o-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 7, 2012, the Bureau published the February 2012 Final
Rule in the Federal Register to implement section 919 of the EFTA, as
set forth in section 1073 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The rule was published
in a new subpart B to the Bureau's Regulation E.\10\ The February 2012
Final Rule, among other things, defined remittance transfers \11\ and
which persons must comply with the rule because they are remittance
transfer providers; \12\ established certain consumer disclosures that
must be given to consumers who send remittance transfers and certain
exceptions to these disclosures; provided consumers with cancellation
and refund rights, and required providers to resolve errors. Further,
the February 2012 Final Rule implemented a statutory exception that
permits remittance transfer providers that are insured institutions to
estimate, under certain circumstances, the amount of currency that a
designated recipient will receive (the ``temporary exception'').\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 77 FR 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
\11\ 12 CFR 1005.30(e) (defining a remittance transfer generally
to be a transfer of funds requested by a sender to a designated
recipient that is sent by a remittance transfer provider). There are
specific exclusions for certain kinds of transfers, specifically,
small value transactions of $15 or less, and transfers for the
purchase or sale of securities or commodities provided that certain
conditions are met. A designated recipient is any natural person or
organization such as a corporation specified by the sender as the
authorized recipient of a remittance transfer to be received at a
location in a foreign country. 12 CFR 1003.30(c) and comment 30(c)-
1.
\12\ 77 FR 6194, 6285 (providing that a remittance transfer
provider is any person that provides remittance transfers for a
consumer in the normal course of its business, regardless of whether
the consumer holds an account with such person).
\13\ EFTA section 919(a)(4) established that the temporary
exception would expire on July 21, 2015, but permitted the Bureau to
extend the exception for up to ten years after the enactment of the
Dodd-Frank Act (i.e., July 21, 2020), if it determined that the
expiration of the exception on July 21, 2015, would negatively
affect the ability of insured institutions to send remittances to
locations in foreign countries. The Bureau extended the exception to
July 21, 2020, in September 2014 based on its determination that the
expiration of the exception on July 21, 2015, would negatively
affect the ability of insured institutions to send remittances to
locations in foreign countries. See 79 FR 55970 (Sept. 18, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the Bureau subsequently amended the February
2012 Final Rule several times before the effective date of October 28,
2013 to revise the rule, temporarily delay the effective date of the
February 2012 Final Rule,\14\ and to address important questions raised
by industry, consumer advocacy groups, and other stakeholders. The
Bureau believed that these amendments were warranted to increase
certain consumer protections, avoid potentially significant disruption
to the provision of remittance transfers, and clarify the regulations
by making technical corrections and conforming changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 78 FR 6025 (Jan. 29, 2013). The February 2012 Final Rule
had an effective date of February 7, 2013. The Bureau temporarily
delayed the effective date because it had published additional
proposed amendments to the February 2012 Final Rule in December
2012. In a final rule published in May 2013, the Bureau finalized
these amendments and set the effective date as October 28, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, in July 2012, the Bureau published amendments to correct
certain technical aspects of the February 2012 Final Rule and to make
certain non-substantive, conforming changes.\15\ Then, in August 2012,
the Bureau published amendments to the February 2012 Final Rule that,
among other things, added a safe harbor that clarified that persons
that provide 100 or fewer remittance transfers in both the prior and
the current calendar years are deemed not to be providing remittance
transfers in the normal course of business, and thus are not remittance
transfer providers and are not required to comply with the February
2012 Final Rule.\16\ The August 2012 final rule also contained
provisions that apply to remittance transfers scheduled in advance of
the transfer date, including a provision that permits a remittance
transfer provider to provide estimates for certain disclosures for
certain of these transfers.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 77 FR 40459 (July 10, 2012).
\16\ 12 CFR 1005.30(f)(2)(i).
\17\ 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(2); 1005.36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequently, as noted above, the Bureau temporarily delayed the
[[Page 15011]]
effective date of the February 2012 Final Rule pending the finalization
of proposed amendments it published in the Federal Register in December
2012 to further amend the February 2012 Final Rule.\18\ Then, in May
2013, the Bureau finalized the proposed amendments it published in
December 2012 in a final rule. Among other things, the May 2013 final
rule created a permanent exception for transfers through open networks
that made optional in certain circumstances the disclosure of fees
imposed by the designated recipient's institution and the disclosure of
taxes collected on the remittance transfer by a person other than the
provider.\19\ It also provided that for these charges, estimates may be
provided.\20\ These amendments also created certain exceptions to the
general error resolution provisions in situations in which a remittance
transfer is not delivered to a designated recipient because the sender
provided an incorrect account number or recipient institution
identifier that results in the transferred funds being deposited in the
wrong account.\21\ Lastly, in August 2013, the Bureau published a
clarificatory amendment and a technical correction to the May 2013
final rule.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 77 FR 77188 (Dec. 31, 2012).
\19\ 78 FR 30662 (May 22, 2013); 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(vii).
\20\ 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(3).
\21\ 12 CFR 1005.33(h).
\22\ 78 FR 49365 (Aug. 14, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above and discussed further below, the Bureau has
determined that the Remittance Rule is a significant rule for purposes
of Dodd-Frank section 1022(d) and will conduct an assessment of the
rule.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ As noted above, in September 2014, the Bureau published a
final rule that, among other things, extended the temporary
exception to July 21, 2020. The effective date of this final rule
was November 17, 2014. In September 2014, the Bureau also published
a final rule that extended its supervisory authority to any nonbank
international money transfer provider that has at least one million
aggregate annual international money transfers to determine
compliance with, among other things, the Remittance Rule. 79 FR
56631 (Sept. 23, 2014). In October 2016, the Bureau amended
Regulation E by issuing two final rules. The first final rule
focused on prepaid accounts and made clarificatory amendments to the
Remittance Rule to clarify its application to prepaid accounts. As
stated in the final rule, the effective date of these clarifications
is October 1, 2017. 81 FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016). However, on March
15, 2017, the Bureau published a proposal to extend the effective
date by six months to April 1, 2018. 82 FR 13782 (Mar. 15, 2017).
The second final rule made certain clerical and non-substantive
corrections to errors it has identified in Regulation E, including
in certain provisions of the Remittance Rule. 81 FR 70319 (Oct. 12,
2016). This rule became effective on November 14, 2016. The Bureau
has discretion to choose the relevant time frame for the analysis
and thus the most appropriate way to address amendments to any
particular significant rule for purposes of an assessment of such
rule. In this notice, except with respect to amendments related to
the extension of the temporary exception, the Bureau is not seeking
comment on the amendments to the Remittance Rule that became or will
become effective after the October 28, 2013 effective date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Remittance Rule applies to remittance transfers sent by
traditional financial institutions such as banks and credit unions;
non-banks, such as money transmitters; and Internet and mobile
providers. Further, a remittance transfer could be a consumer-to-
consumer transfer, or it could be a consumer-to-business transfer. The
Remittance Rule applies to remittance transfers sent over open
networks. The most common form of open network remittance transfer is a
wire transfer. The rule also applies to remittance transfers sent over
closed networks, in which a remittance transfer provider typically uses
either its own operators or a network of agents or other partners to
collect funds from senders in the United States and distribute those
funds to the designated recipient abroad. The rule additionally applies
to remittance transfers sent through the automated clearinghouse system
(ACH), although use of ACH for consumer transfers is limited compared
to its use for non-consumer (i.e., business-to-business) transfers.
A. Major Provisions of the Remittance Rule
The Remittance Rule addressed three major topics, which are
summarized below.
1. Disclosures. Consistent with the disclosure requirements
established by section 919(a) of EFTA, the Remittance Rule generally
requires a remittance transfer provider to provide a written pre-
payment disclosure when the sender requests a transfer and generally
requires the provider to provide a written receipt when payment is
made.\24\ The pre-payment disclosure must contain specific information
about a remittance transfer, such as the fee a remittance transfer will
impose on the remittance transfer,\25\ the exchange rate, if any,\26\
certain applicable fees and taxes that will be imposed on the
transfer,\27\ and the amount to be received by the designated
recipient.\28\ The receipt must include the information provided on the
pre-payment disclosure,\29\ as well as certain additional information,
such as the date of availability of the funds \30\ and information
regarding the sender's error resolution and cancellation rights.\31\
Disclosures must always be made in English. In certain circumstances, a
remittance transfer provider must also provide foreign language
disclosures.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1) and (2). As an alternative to
providing a written receipt, the rule permits a remittance transfer
provider to give a single written disclosure prior to payment
containing all of the information required on the receipt, so long
as the provider also provides proof of payment. 12 CFR
1004.31(b)(3).
\25\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(ii).
\26\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(iv).
\27\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(ii) and (vi).
\28\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(1)(vii).
\29\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(i).
\30\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(ii).
\31\ 12 CFR 1005.31(b)(2)(iv).
\32\ EFTA section 919(b); 12 CFR 1005.31(g). The remittance
transfer provider must either provide a sender disclosures in each
of the foreign languages principally used by the remittance transfer
provider to advertise, solicit, or market remittance transfer
services at the office in which a sender conducts a transaction or
asserts an error, or provide disclosures in the language primarily
used by the sender to conduct the remittance transfer or to assert
an error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Remittance Rule requires that disclosures regarding the
exchange rate and amount of currency that will be received by the
designated recipient must be exact, unless an exception applies. The
rule contains four exceptions to this general requirement, which permit
providers to disclose estimates of certain amounts instead of actual
amounts.\33\ Specifically, in addition to the temporary exception
discussed above, the Remittance Rule implements a statutory exemption
that permits estimates where a remittance transfer provider is unable
to determine exact amounts due to either the laws of the recipient
country or the method by which transactions are made in the recipient
country.\34\ The third exception, as discussed above, makes it optional
for remittance transfer providers to disclose fees imposed by the
designated recipient's institution in certain circumstances and taxes
collected on the remittance transfer by third parties, and that to the
extent such charges are disclosed, a remittance transfer provider may
disclose estimates instead of actual amounts.\35\ Lastly, also as
discussed above, the Bureau permits a remittance transfer provider to
provide certain estimates for certain transfers scheduled before the
date of transfer.\36\ The temporary exception is generally limited to
insured institutions (i.e.,
[[Page 15012]]
insured depository institutions or insured credit unions),\37\ but the
other exceptions are available to any remittance transfer provider that
meets their criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ The Remittance Rule also sets forth certain estimate
methodologies.
\34\ 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(1). The Bureau has published a safe
harbor list of countries. See 78 FR 66251 (Nov. 5, 2013). A
remittance transfer provider may provide estimates instead of exact
amounts when sending to one of the countries on the list unless the
provider has information that it is possible to disclose exact
amounts. The rule permits a remittance transfer provider to make its
own determination that the laws of countries, not on the list, do
not permit a determination of exact amounts.
\35\ 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(3).
\36\ 12 CFR 1005.32(b)(2).
\37\ Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) wrote
a no-action letter on December 14, 2012, that concludes it will not
recommend enforcement actions to the SEC under Regulation E if a
broker-dealer provides disclosures as though the broker-dealer were
an insured institution for purposes of the temporary exception. The
letter is available at https://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/mr-noaction/2012/financial-information-forum-121412-rege.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Cancellation and refund. The rule also provides consumers with
cancellation and refund rights.\38\ As a general matter, if a
remittance transfer provider receives an oral or written request from a
sender to cancel a remittance transfer within 30 minutes after the
sender pays for the remittance transfer, then the remittance transfer
provider must comply with the request, provided that the request
contains certain identifying information and the transferred funds have
not been picked up by the designated recipient or deposited into the
designated recipient's account.\39\ Within three business days of
receiving a sender's cancellation request, a remittance transfer
provider must provide a refund of the total amount of funds the sender
provided in connection with the remittance transfer, including, to the
extent not prohibited by law, taxes, at no additional cost to the
sender.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ EFTA section 919(d)(3) (establishing that the Board must
issue rules regarding remittance transfer cancellation and refund
policies for consumers).
\39\ 12 CFR 1005.34(a).
\40\ 12 CFR 1005.34(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Error resolution. Consistent with EFTA section 919(d), the
Remittance Rule requires remittance transfer providers to remedy
certain errors related to remittance transfers.\41\ A remittance
transfer provider is generally required to investigate errors upon
receiving oral or written error notice from a sender within 180 days
after the disclosed date of availability of the remittance transfer.
The remittance transfer provider must investigate and determine whether
an error has occurred within 90 days of receiving an error notice and
must report its investigation results to the consumer in writing within
three business days after completing the investigation. If an error
occurred, the remittance transfer provider must correct the error
within one business day of, or as soon as reasonably practicable, after
receiving the sender's instructions regarding the appropriate remedy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ 12 CFR 1005.33. The Remittance Rule defines what ``error''
under the rule includes and also what it does not include. 12 CFR
1005.33(a)(1) and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The type of remedy that is available depends on the type of error
that the remittance transfer provider has determined to have
occurred.\42\ Additionally, the Remittance Rule requires remittance
transfer providers to develop and maintain written policies and
procedures to ensure compliance with the rule's error resolution
requirements and to keep certain records related to error
investigations. The rule also provides that remittance transfer
providers are liable for the acts of their agents when those agents act
on their behalf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ The May 2013 final rule adopted provisions that provide
that mistakes due to senders providing incorrect account numbers or
recipient institution identifiers are not errors under certain
circumstances. This amendment and the amendment to make optional the
disclosure of recipient institution fees and certain taxes in
connection with open network transfers are examples of how the
Bureau made significant changes to the February 2012 Final Rule to
ease compliance and prevent market disruptions, especially for
remittance transfers sent through open networks to bank accounts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Significant Rule Determination
The Bureau has determined that the Remittance Rule is a significant
rule for purposes of Dodd-Frank section 1022(d). The Bureau makes this
determination partly on the basis of the estimated aggregate annual
cost to industry of complying with the rule.\43\ In addition, as the
Bureau stated at the time of issuance, the Bureau expected the February
2012 Final Rule to have important effects on remittance transfer
service features, provider operations, and the overall market. For
example, the Remittance Rule required providers to give consumers new
pre-payment disclosures that contained information that providers did
not uniformly provide consumers prior to the rule. The rule also
established new procedures for resolving and remedying errors. The
Bureau stated that these requirements would likely necessitate changes
in business operations so firms could collect and provide consumers the
information required in the disclosures and track and resolve errors
consumers asserted. The improved disclosures might put downward
pressure on pricing, but the Bureau also recognized in its
consideration of benefits, costs and impacts (conducted pursuant to
Dodd-Frank section 1022(b)(2)(A)) that the additional costs of the new
regime might have the opposite effect. The Bureau was uncertain about
the combined effect on price and quantity levels and observed that
certain providers, though not necessarily providers with significant
market shares, might attempt to increase prices or stop providing
remittance transfers altogether at least in certain corridors. The
Bureau also considered that the Remittance Rule would create important
new compliance risks for providers although, as noted, there are
several important exceptions that reduce these risks. The rule also
states that providers are liable for violations by an agent when the
agent acts for the provider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ In the Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis (PRA Analysis)
published with the February 2012 Final Rule, the Bureau estimated an
additional 4,253,000 in ongoing burden hours (as well as an
additional 3,431,000 in one-time burden hours) from the February
2012 Final Rule. 77 FR 6194, 6285 (Feb. 7, 2012). In the Supporting
Statement submitted to OMB, the Bureau valued the ongoing burden
hours at $29.64 per hour. Thus, there was approximately $126 million
in additional ongoing burden from the February 2012 Final Rule. In
the PRA Analysis published with the August 2012 Final Rule, the
Bureau estimated that the amendments reduced annual burden by
532,784 hours; and that the amendments in the May 2013 Final Rule
reduced annual burden by an additional 276,000 hours. Taking into
account these reductions, there was approximately $102 million in
additional ongoing burden from the rule that took effect. The Bureau
noted, however, that the decrease in burden was likely larger than
the estimated amounts since the estimated reductions did not take
full account of the downward revision in the number of state
licensed money transmitters that offer remittance transfer services.
See 77 FR 50244, 50282 (Aug. 20, 2012) and 78 FR 30662, 30701 (May
22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information received by the Bureau related to these effects has
generally been consistent with Bureau expectations. Taking all of these
factors into consideration, including the annual costs of the
Remittance Rule, the Bureau concludes that the Remittance Rule is
``significant'' for purposes of section 1022(d).
IV. The Assessment Plan
Because the Bureau has determined that the Remittance Rule is a
significant rule for purposes of 1022(d), section 1022(d) requires the
Bureau to assess the rule's effectiveness in meeting the purposes and
objectives of title X of the Dodd-Frank Act and the specific goals
stated by the Bureau. Section 1021 of the Dodd-Frank Act states that
the Bureau's purpose is to implement and, where applicable, enforce
Federal consumer financial law consistently for the purpose of ensuring
that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial
products and services and that markets for consumer financial products
and services are fair, transparent, and competitive. Section 1021 also
sets forth the Bureau's objectives, which are to ensure that, with
respect to consumer financial products and services:
Consumers are provided with timely and understandable
information
[[Page 15013]]
to make responsible decisions about financial transactions;
Consumers are protected from unfair, deceptive, or abusive
acts and practices and from discrimination;
Outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations
are regularly identified and addressed in order to reduce unwarranted
regulatory burdens;
Federal consumer financial law is enforced consistently,
without regard to the status of a person as a depository institution,
in order to promote fair competition; and
Markets for consumer financial products and services
operate transparently and efficiently to facilitate access and
innovation.
Section 1022(d) also requires the Bureau to assess the Remittance
Rule's effectiveness in meeting the specific goals stated by the
Bureau. As discussed above, the Remittance Rule provides three
significant consumer protections: (1) Reliable disclosures including
the price of a remittance transfer, the amount of currency to be
delivered to the recipient, and the date of availability; (2)
cancellation rights following a transfer; (3) error resolution
provisions requiring providers to investigate disputes and remedy
errors.\44\ The objectives of the Remittance Rule include improving the
predictability of remittance transfers,\45\ providing consumers with
better information for comparison shopping,\46\ and, with regard to
amendments made in 2012 and 2013, limiting potential market disruption
that might have resulted from implementing the February 2012 Remittance
Rule as originally adopted.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 77 FR 6193, 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
\45\ 77 FR 6193, 6194 (Feb. 7, 2012).
\46\ Id.
\47\ See e.g., 78 FR at 30683 (May 22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To assess the effectiveness of the Remittance Rule in meeting these
purposes, goals, and objectives, the Bureau intends to focus its
assessment of the Remittance Rule in two areas: (1) Whether the market
for remittances has evolved after the Remittance Rule in ways that
promote access, efficiency, and limited market disruption by
considering how remittance volumes, prices, and competition in the
remittance market may have changed; and, (2) whether the new system of
consumer protections has brought more information, transparency, and
greater predictability of prices to the market.
To assess the Remittance Rule, the Bureau plans to analyze a
variety of metrics and data to the extent feasible. Feasibility will
depend on the availability of data and the cost to obtain any new data.
The Bureau will seek to gather information about activities and
outcomes including the ones listed below and seek to understand how
these activities and outcomes relate to each other:
(1) Provider activities undertaken to comply with the Remittance
Rule such as provision of disclosures; responses to errors; and
provision of cancellation rights;
(2) Consumer activities including utilization of their error
resolution rights;
(3) Consumer outcomes that the Remittance Rule sought to affect
including whether the new system has brought greater transparency and
predictability of the costs of sending remittances and allowed for
comparison shopping; and
(4) Other market outcomes that the Remittance Rule may have
affected including the number and types of providers, the number of
remittances sent, and the price of transfers.
In conducting the assessment, the Bureau will seek to compare
consumer outcomes to a baseline that would exist if the Remittance
Rule's requirements were not in effect. Doing so is challenging because
the Bureau cannot directly observe what the remittance market would
look like had the Remittance Rule not come into effect. The Bureau may
have access to data from before the effective date of the Remittance
Rule that is informative about the outcomes absent the Remittance Rule.
In addition, some of the provisions of the rule that allow exemptions,
applicable State laws in effect before the rule, or other institutional
factors may allow the Bureau to observe outcomes similar to outcomes
one might observe without the rule. The Bureau will draw conclusions as
supported by the data, taking into account that factors other than the
rule itself may affect observable outcomes.
The Bureau may also seek to compare outcomes observed with the
Remittance Rule to counterfactual outcomes if specific elements of the
Remittance Rule had not been in effect. For example, the Bureau may
seek to understand the effects of specific amendments, provisions, or
exceptions, which only makes sense when compared to a baseline in which
the balance of the Remittance Rule is in effect. In addition, the
Bureau may consider how other possible provisions might have changed
the effects of the rule.
The Bureau has existing data sources, currently available or in
development, with which to undertake these analyses, and the Bureau is
also planning to secure additional data. Existing data sources include
the World Bank Migration and Remittance Database,\48\ consumer
complaints submitted to the Bureau, and information obtained from
Bureau supervision and enforcement activities. The Bureau plans to use
information provided by banks and credit unions in their Call Reports
on their remittance activities. The Bureau is also exploring the
availability and utility of other sources of data including State level
assessments and reports on money transmitters operating within
individual States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ The database is available at https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/migrationremittancesdiasporaissues/brief/migration-remittances-data, accessed February 14, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bureau intends to interview various market participants,
including remittance transfer providers and potential remittance
transfer providers, as it analyzes the data described above and
interprets the findings. The Bureau may also request information from
remittance transfer providers about, for example, error assertions and
resolutions and sample disclosures, including, if applicable, foreign
language disclosures.
As it conducts its assessment of the Remittance Rule, the Bureau
expects to consider effects of specific provisions of the rule to the
extent feasible. For example, the Bureau may collect and analyze
information about the use of the temporary exception allowing insured
institutions to estimate certain third-party fees and exchange rates
that expires in July 2020. In addition, where practical and reasonable
the Bureau may also collect and analyze information about: (1) The 100-
transfer safe harbor; (2) exceptions to the rule's error resolution
regime for certain sender mistakes involving incorrect account numbers
and recipient institution identifiers; (3) optional disclosure of
recipient institution fees for remittance transfers conducted over open
networks; (4) optional disclosure of taxes imposed on a remittance
transfer by a person other than the remittance transfer provider; and
(5) the requirement to provide foreign language disclosures under
certain circumstances.
V. Request for Comment
To inform the assessment, the Bureau hereby invites members of the
public to submit information and other comments relevant to the issues
identified below, as well as any information relevant to assessing the
effectiveness of the Remittance Rule in meeting the purposes and
objectives of title X of the Dodd-Frank Act (section 1021) and the
specific goals of the Bureau (enumerated
[[Page 15014]]
above). In particular, the Bureau invites the public, including
consumers and their advocates, remittance transfer providers and other
industry representatives, industry analysts, and other interested
persons to submit the following:
(1) Comments on the feasibility and effectiveness of the assessment
plan, the objectives of the Remittance Rule that the Bureau intends to
emphasize in the assessment, and the outcomes, metrics, baselines and
analytical methods for assessing the effectiveness of the rule as
described in part IV above;
(2) Data and other factual information that may be useful for
executing the Bureau's assessment plan, as described in part IV above;
(3) Recommendations to improve the assessment plan, as well as
data, other factual information, and sources of data that would be
useful and available to execute any recommended improvements to the
assessment plan including data on the exceptions and provisions
discussed at the end of part IV;
(4) Data and other factual information about the benefits and costs
of the Remittance Rule for consumers, remittance transfer providers,
and others; and about the impacts of the rule on transparency,
efficiency, access, and innovation in the remittance market;
(5) Data and other factual information about the rule's
effectiveness in meeting the purposes and objectives of Title X of the
Dodd-Frank Act (section 1021), which are listed in part IV above;
(6) Recommendations for modifying, expanding, or eliminating the
Remittance Rule.
Dated: March 15, 2017.
Richard Cordray,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
[FR Doc. 2017-05681 Filed 3-23-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P