Prepaid Accounts Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (Regulation E) and the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z); Delay of Effective Date, 18975-18981 [2017-08341]
Download as PDF
18975
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 78
Tuesday, April 25, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION
12 CFR Parts 1005 and 1026
[Docket No. CFPB–2017–0008]
RIN 3170–AA69
Prepaid Accounts Under the Electronic
Fund Transfer Act (Regulation E) and
the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation
Z); Delay of Effective Date
Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
ACTION: Final rule; official
interpretation; delay of effective date.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection (Bureau or CFPB) is
issuing this final rule to delay the
October 1, 2017 effective date of the rule
governing Prepaid Accounts Under the
Electronic Fund Transfer Act
(Regulation E) and the Truth in Lending
Act (Regulation Z) by six months, to
April 1, 2018.
DATES: The amendments in this final
rule are effective on April 1, 2018. The
effective date of the final rule published
on November 22, 2016 (81 FR 83934) is
delayed from October 1, 2017, to April
1, 2018. The effective date for the
addition of § 1005.19(b) remains
October 1, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas L. Devlin and Yaritza Velez,
Counsels, and Kristine M. Andreassen,
Senior Counsel, Office of Regulations, at
202–435–7700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Jkt 241001
A. The Prepaid Accounts Rulemaking
In the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule,
the Bureau extended Regulation E
coverage to prepaid accounts and
adopted provisions specific to such
accounts, and generally expanded
Regulation Z’s coverage to overdraft
credit features that may be offered in
conjunction with prepaid accounts.3
FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016).
FR 13782 (Mar. 15, 2017).
3 81 FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016). The Bureau
released a proposal regarding prepaid accounts
under Regulations E and Z, including model and
sample disclosure forms, for public comment on
November 13, 2014. 79 FR 77102 (Dec. 23, 2014)
(Prepaid Accounts NPRM). The Bureau had
previously issued an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking that posed a series of questions for
public comment about how the Bureau might
consider regulating general purpose reloadable
2 82
On October 5, 2016, the Bureau
released a final rule to create
comprehensive consumer protections
for prepaid accounts under Regulation
E, which implements the Electronic
Fund Transfer Act (EFTA), and
Regulation Z, which implements the
Truth in Lending Act (TILA) (Prepaid
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
II. Background
1 81
I. Summary of the Final Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Accounts Final Rule).1 When it was
issued, the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule
had a general effective date of October
1, 2017. Through its efforts to support
industry implementation of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule, the Bureau learned
that some industry participants believed
that they would have difficulty
complying with certain provisions of
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule that
would have gone into effect on October
1, 2017. In order to facilitate compliance
with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule,
and to allow an opportunity for the
Bureau to assess whether any additional
adjustments to the Rule are appropriate,
the Bureau proposed to extend the
general effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule by six months, to
April 1, 2018 (Effective Date NPRM).2
Based on comments received, the
Bureau is issuing this final rule to delay
the October 1, 2017 effective date for the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule by six
months, to April 1, 2018. The Bureau is
also making conforming amendments to
certain regulatory text and commentary
adopted in the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule to reflect the effective date delay.
The Bureau plans to release a notice
of proposed rulemaking address at least
two issues that have been identified as
areas where the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule may be posing particular
complexities for implementation. When
the Bureau does so it will also seek
comment on whether any further
extension of the effective date is needed
in light of the specific changes
proposed.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Upon issuing the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule, the Bureau initiated robust
efforts to support industry
implementation.4 Information regarding
the Bureau’s Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule implementation initiatives and
available resources can be found on the
Bureau’s regulatory implementation
Web site at https://
www.consumerfinance.gov/policycompliance/guidance/implementationguidance/prepaid-rule/.
B. Effective Date Delay
As published, the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule had a general effective date
of October 1, 2017. As discussed in the
Effective Date NPRM, as part of its
efforts to support industry
implementation, the Bureau has
discussed implementation efforts with a
number of industry participants. As a
result of those discussions, the Bureau
learned that some industry participants
were concerned for a variety of reasons
that they would have difficulty in
complying with certain aspects of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule by October
1, 2017 while also ensuring continued
availability of their prepaid products
and with minimal disruption to
consumers. For example, although the
Bureau put in place an exception in
Regulation E § 1005.18(h)(2) pursuant to
which financial institutions are not
required to pull and replace prepaid
account access devices and packaging
materials with non-compliant
disclosures that were produced in the
normal course of business prior to
October 1, 2017, some industry
participants indicated that they believed
that they should in fact pull and replace
non-compliant packaging due to
concerns about legal and regulatory
cards and other prepaid products. 77 FR 30923
(May 24, 2012).
4 These on-going efforts include: (1) The
publication of a plain-language small entity
compliance guide to help industry understand the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule; (2) the publication of
various other implementation tools regarding the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, including an
executive summary of the rule, summaries of key
changes for payroll card accounts and government
benefit accounts, a prepaid account coverage chart,
a summary of the rule’s effective date provisions,
and a guide to preparing the short form disclosure;
(3) the release of native design files for print and
source code for web-based disclosures for all of the
model and sample disclosure forms included in the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule; (4) meetings with
industry, including trade associations and
individual industry participants, to discuss and
support their implementation efforts; and (5)
participation in conferences and forums.
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
18976
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
exposure at both the Federal and State
level, and in particular due to
developments following release of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. Industry
had also raised related concerns
regarding the constrained production
capacity of packaging manufacturers
and other supply chain limitations
resulting from increased industry
demand leading up to the October 1,
2017 effective date.
In addition, in the course of working
to implement the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule, some industry participants
raised concerns about what they
describe as unanticipated complexities
arising from the interaction of certain
aspects of the rule with certain business
models and practices, including those
newly adopted, that they did not fully
address in their comment letters on the
Prepaid Accounts NPRM, which may
complicate implementation and affect
consumers.
Based on its initial outreach to
industry before issuing the Effective
Date NPRM, the Bureau believed that a
six-month delay would be sufficient for
industry participants to ensure that they
can comply with the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule with minimal disruption to
consumers. The Bureau explained that,
in particular, a six-month extension
would both allow more time for package
printing and allow pull-and-replace
processes at retail locations to occur
after the winter holiday season, which
is a particularly busy time for retailers.
Indeed, the Bureau understands that
industry often effectuates pull-andreplace processes in the spring for
precisely this reason. The Bureau also
believed that a six-month delay would
allow the Bureau adequate opportunity
to consider possible additional
amendments to the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule, and for industry to
implement any such changes, without
unnecessary disruption to consumers’
access to, and use of, prepaid accounts.
The Bureau did not propose to delay
the effective date of the requirement to
submit prepaid account agreements to
the Bureau in Regulation E
§ 1005.19(f)(2), which is October 1,
2018. The Bureau expected to have its
agreement submission process in place
by October 1, 2018, and, as discussed in
the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau’s
pre-proposal outreach had not indicated
that industry participants were
concerned that they would not be able
to meet the agreement submission
effective date.
In the Effective Date NPRM, the
Bureau did not propose to amend any
other substantive requirements of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. The
purpose of that notice was not to seek
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
comment generally on policy decisions
made in the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule that industry or other stakeholders
might wish the Bureau to reconsider.
Rather, the Bureau stated that it would
continue its outreach to industry and
other stakeholders to understand their
experiences in implementing the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule.
III. Summary of the Rulemaking
Process, Comments Received, and the
Final Rule
A. Summary of the Rulemaking Process
On March 9, 2017, the Bureau
released the Effective Date NPRM with
a request for public comment. It was
published in the Federal Register on
March 15, 2017.5 The Bureau solicited
comment on all aspects of the Effective
Date NPRM. In particular, the Bureau
asked commenters to provide specific
detail and any available data regarding
current and planned practices, as well
as relevant knowledge and specific facts
about any benefits, costs, or other
impacts on industry, consumers, and
other stakeholders of the Effective Date
NPRM. The Bureau also solicited
comment about the impact of the
Effective Date NPRM on consumers who
use prepaid accounts. The Bureau
solicited comment regarding the
proposed extension of the general
effective date to April 1, 2018, as well
as alternative dates for extension.
B. Comments Received
The comment period for the Effective
Date NPRM closed on April 5, 2017. The
Bureau received 28 comment letters
from consumer advocacy groups;
national and regional trade associations;
members of the prepaid industry,
including issuing banks and credit
unions, program managers, and a digital
wallet provider; several think tanks; an
association of State financial regulators;
a group of State attorneys general; and
several commenters who did not
identify their affiliations.6
Industry and trade association
commenters all supported the Bureau’s
proposal to delay the effective date of
most provisions of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule; many expressly supported
the Bureau’s proposed six-month delay.
A number of commenters cited the
Bureau’s concerns that some industry
participants may need additional time
to comply with the rule, in particular
stating that providers might need to pull
and replace non-compliant packaging
notwithstanding the exception in the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule for prepaid
5 82
FR 13782 (Mar. 15, 2017).
comment letters are publicly available at
https://www.regulations.gov/.
6 These
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
account access devices and packaging
materials with non-compliant
disclosures that were produced in the
normal course of business prior to the
effective date of the rule.
A prepaid issuer, a digital wallet
provider, and a trade association each
expressed support for a six-month delay
of the effective date, contingent on the
Bureau also revisiting the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule to address certain
substantive provisions of the rule that
they argued required changes to
disclosures and business models that
could not be implemented by April 1,
2018. The provisions that they cited
relate to the linking of credit cards with
digital wallets that are capable of storing
funds and to error resolution and
limitations on liability for prepaid
accounts where the financial institution
has not completed its consumer
identification and verification process
with respect to the account. These
commenters requested a 12-month delay
to the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule’s
general effective date if the Bureau were
unwilling to revisit those issues.
Some industry and trade association
commenters argued that the Bureau
should delay the effective date further
by 12 months; two trade associations
advocated for an 18-month delay. The
commenters who requested a delay
longer than six months cited a variety of
reasons, including, for example, the
time needed to develop and review new
and updated disclosures and related
materials; time required to retool J-hook
card packaging to accommodate
disclosures required by the rule;
limitations in production capacity to
print new prepaid card collateral; and
the time needed to coordinate system
updates with processors, vendors, and
other service providers. A few
commenters cited other reasons as well,
such as the need to develop new
systems and operational processes
related to providing longer account
transaction histories and calculating
summary totals of fees. One trade
association stated that providers need to
develop an automated process to track
cardholder agreements for purposes of
submitting those agreements to the
Bureau, which it stated would need to
be in place as of the October 1, 2017
effective date in order to adequately
track agreements. Another trade
association commenter urged the
Bureau to delay the effective date for
longer than six months so that the
Bureau could conduct a comprehensive
study on the effects that the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule will have on
consumers, specifically related to
availability of prepaid accounts and
their costs to consumers.
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
One credit union trade association
commenter, requesting an 18-month
extension, cited concerns that the
proposed delayed effective date would
coincide with the effective date of other
regulations promulgated by the Bureau,
in particular the provisions of the
Bureau’s mortgage servicing rule
pertaining to successors-in-interest and
the provision of periodic statements to
consumers who have filed for
bankruptcy. An association of State
financial regulators also stated the
compliance investments necessitated by
other regulations such as the increased
data collection/reporting requirements
under the Home Mortgage Disclosure
Act and additional identification
requirements under the Bank Secrecy
Act/Customer Due Diligence rule
promulgated by another federal agency
as a reason for its support of a six-month
delay.
A coalition of 27 consumer advocacy
groups urged the Bureau to implement
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule as soon
as possible, citing the benefits of the
rule for consumers who use prepaid
accounts, and expressing concern that
further delays in the effective date
would cause harm to consumers. They
stated that, if an extension is warranted,
the Bureau should give the minimum
extension necessary—which in their
view would be no longer than the
proposed six months—and not provide
any further extensions. Another
consumer advocacy group supported the
Bureau’s proposal to delay the rule’s
effective date by six months while
reiterating that expeditious
implementation of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule remains essential to
providing comprehensive consumer
protections to users of prepaid accounts.
Two think tanks urged the Bureau to
consider the possible negative effects on
consumers of any delay in the effective
date of the rule. Another think tank
supported the six-month delay, stating
that otherwise there is a risk that
providers might pull cards without
replacing them, thus hampering
consumers’ access to those products.
The commenters who did not identify
their affiliation varied in their
comments, either expressing support for
the proposed delay in effective date or
arguing that the effective date should
not be extended to ensure that
consumers receive the protections of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. A group of
State attorneys general expressed
support for the rule generally but did
not comment specifically on the
effective date of the rule.
Safe harbor for early compliance. Two
trade association commenters urged the
Bureau to establish a safe harbor for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
prepaid providers that comply with the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule (or
portions of it) prior to the rule’s
effective date. These commenters
expressed concerns that prepaid
providers may be exposed to potential
liability if they comply with the rule
prior to the effective date, as they
suggested the possibility that there may
be some conflict between the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule and current
requirements for payroll card accounts
and government benefit accounts,
though they did not provide any
specific examples. One commenter
stated that early compliance would
benefit consumers and should not be
discouraged.
Section 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau did
not propose to delay the October 1, 2018
effective date of the requirement that
prepaid account issuers submit prepaid
account agreements to the Bureau,
which is set forth in Regulation E
§ 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau did,
however, solicit comment on whether it
should also delay that effective date.
Commenters generally did not express
concerns that the October 1, 2018
agreement submission effective date
would create compliance issues. One of
the trade association commenters
advocating for an 18-month delay of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule’s general
effective date suggested that the Bureau
contemplate a proportional delay for
§ 1005.19(f)(2), stating that it would
help relieve pressure on credit unions
that may need to submit credit card
agreements pursuant to Regulation Z
§ 1026.58 for covered separate credit
features accessible by hybrid prepaidcredit cards. Another trade association
expressed concerns pertaining to
general compliance with the
requirement to submit prepaid account
agreements to the Bureau, but did not
suggest a delay to the effective date in
§ 1005.19(f)(2).
A program manager expressed
concerns about the challenges it is
facing in complying with the agreement
posting requirement in § 1005.19, which
appears to be due, at least in part, to the
number of prepaid account agreements
it manages. This commenter suggested
making the effective dates set forth in
§ 1005.19(f)(1) and (2) consistent, but
did not request that the Bureau delay
the effective date for the agreement
submission requirement. A commenter
who did not identify his or her
affiliation supported the Bureau’s
proposal not to delay the effective date
of the agreement submission
requirement, but suggested that the
Bureau revisit that decision six months
in advance of the effective date.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18977
Substantive changes to the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule. As noted above,
the Bureau did not propose in the
Effective Date NPRM to amend any
other substantive provisions of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, nor was
the purpose of the Effective Date NPRM
to seek comment generally on policy
decisions made in the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule that industry or other
stakeholders might wish the Bureau to
reconsider. Nonetheless, many
commenters used their comment letters
to advocate for retaining, modifying, or
eliminating various provisions of the
rule. Commenters also suggested that
the Bureau could use the additional
time provided by delaying the effective
date of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule
to revisit these issues.
C. The Final Rule
For the reasons set forth herein, the
Bureau is finalizing as proposed a sixmonth delay of the October 1, 2017
effective date of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule. In order to effect this
change, the Bureau is also amending
Regulation E §§ 1005.18(b)(2)(ix) and
(h), and 1005.19(f)(1), and related
commentary, to reflect the delayed
effective date.
The Bureau continues to believe that
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule will
provide significant benefits to
consumers and that, therefore,
expeditious implementation remains
essential to provide comprehensive
consumer protections to users of
prepaid accounts. Having reviewed the
comments received, the Bureau
continues to believe that a six-month
delay of the effective date, when added
to the nearly 12 months previously
provided for in the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule, allows sufficient time for
industry to implement the rule and
provides for an appropriate balance
between the interests of the consumers
who will receive the benefits of the rule
and the needs of industry for an
adequate implementation period. The
Bureau appreciates the issues raised by
commenters advocating for a longer
delay to the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule’s effective date, but does not
believe that a longer delay is in fact
warranted at this time.
Based on industry outreach efforts
and the comments received in response
to the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau
has determined that it should revisit at
least two substantive issues through a
separate notice and comment
rulemaking process. Those issues relate
to the linking of credit cards into digital
wallets that are capable of storing funds
and to error resolution and limitations
on liability for prepaid accounts that
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
18978
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
cannot be registered, have not yet been
registered, or for which consumers have
attempted but have not successfully
completed the registration process. The
Bureau is continuing to evaluate other
concerns raised by industry and other
stakeholders, including those discussed
in comments on the Effective Date
NPRM, and may address a limited
number of other topics as well in its
forthcoming proposal. The Bureau also
will seek comment on whether any
further extension of the effective date is
needed in light of the specific changes
proposed.
Safe harbor for early compliance. The
Bureau agrees with commenters that
early compliance with the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule could benefit both
industry and consumers. The Bureau is
not aware of any conflicts between the
requirements of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule and the current regulations
applying to accounts that will be
covered by the rule, nor were any
specified by commenters. To the extent
that financial institutions are engaged in
consumer-friendly practices that are not
specifically required under current
regulations, the Bureau encourages
those institutions to continue those
practices, whether or not those practices
are required by the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule. For example, financial
institutions that already provide access
to more than 60 days of account history
to all current accountholders, or that
provide full Regulation E error
resolution and limited liability
protections to their accountholders, are
encouraged to continue to do so in
advance of the effective date. However,
financial institutions should ensure that
their disclosures do not suggest to
consumers that they are engaged in a
consumer-friendly practice that they
have not yet implemented.
The Bureau notes that the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule already
contemplates that some aspects of the
rule will be phased in, particularly with
respect to the exception that does not
require financial institutions to pull and
replace non-compliant packaging that
was manufactured, printed, or otherwise
produced in the normal course of
business prior to the effective date of the
rule. Thus, the Bureau is not adding an
explicit safe harbor for early
compliance, although the Bureau does
not believe that the absence of one will
prevent financial institutions from
implementing practices that are
required by the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule prior to the effective date. The
Bureau will seek comment in its
forthcoming proposal on whether there
are in fact any conflicts between
requirements of the Prepaid Accounts
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
Final Rule and the current regulations
applying to accounts that will be
covered by the rule that would merit a
more formal safe harbor.
Section 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau is
maintaining the October 1, 2018
effective date set forth in Regulation E
§ 1005.19(f)(2) for the agreement
submission requirement, as proposed. In
the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau
indicated that its industry outreach had
not indicated that the effective date of
this provision was causing significant
compliance concerns in and of itself,
and the comments to the Effective Date
NPRM support that conclusion. The
Bureau does not believe that the few
concerns raised by commenters warrant
a delay to the October 1, 2018 effective
date.
IV. Legal Authority
The Bureau is exercising its
rulemaking authority pursuant to EFTA
section 904(a) and (c), Dodd-Frank Act
sections 1022(b)(1) and 1032(a), and
TILA section 105(a) to delay the
effective date of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule.
The legal authority for the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule is described in
detail in the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.7 As
amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, EFTA
section 904(a) and (c) 8 authorizes the
Bureau to prescribe regulations to carry
out the purposes of EFTA and provide
that such regulations may contain such
classifications, differentiations, or other
provisions, and may provide for such
adjustments and exceptions, for any
class of electronic fund transfers or
remittance transfers as in the judgment
of the Bureau are necessary or proper to
effectuate the purposes of EFTA, to
prevent circumvention or evasion
thereof, or to facilitate compliance
therewith. As amended by the DoddFrank Act, TILA section 105(a) 9 directs
the Bureau to prescribe regulations to
carry out the purposes of TILA and
provides that such regulations may
contain such additional requirements,
classifications, differentiations, or other
provisions, and may provide for such
adjustments and exceptions for all or
any class of transactions as in the
judgment of the Bureau are necessary or
proper to effectuate the purposes of
TILA, to prevent circumvention or
evasion thereof, or to facilitate
compliance therewith.10 Section 1032(a)
7 See, e.g., 81 FR 83934, 83958–60 (Nov. 22,
2016).
8 15 U.S.C. 1593b(a).
9 15 U.S.C. 1604(a).
10 TILA section 105(d) generally provides that a
regulation requiring any disclosure that differs from
the disclosures previously required by parts A, D,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of the Dodd-Frank Act11 provides that
the Bureau may prescribe rules to
ensure that the features of any consumer
financial product or service, both
initially and over the term of the
product or service, are fully, accurately,
and effectively disclosed to consumers
in a manner that permits consumers to
understand the costs, benefits, and risks
associated with the product or service,
in light of the facts and circumstances.
Additionally, under Dodd-Frank Act
section 1022(b)(1),12 the Bureau has
general authority to 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.
EFTA, TILA, and Title X of the DoddFrank Act are Federal consumer
financial laws. Accordingly, in
finalizing this rule, the Bureau is
exercising its authority under DoddFrank Act section 1022(b) 13 to prescribe
rules under EFTA, TILA, and Title X of
the Dodd-Frank Act that carry out the
purposes and objectives and prevent
evasion of those laws. Section
1022(b)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act 14
prescribes certain standards for
rulemaking that the Bureau must follow
in exercising its authority under section
1022(b)(1).
V. Provisions Affected by the Final Rule
1005.18 Requirements for Financial
Institutions Offering Prepaid Accounts
18(b) Pre-Acquisition Disclosure
Requirements
18(b)(2) Short Form Disclosure Content
18(b)(2)(ix) Disclosure of Additional Fee
Types
Regulation E § 1005.18(b)(2) describes
the short form disclosure content
requirements for prepaid accounts.
Section 1005.18(b)(2)(ix) contains
requirements specifically regarding
additional fee types. Section
or E of TILA shall have an effective date ‘‘of that
October 1 which follows by at least six months the
date of promulgation.’’ Section 105(d) further
provides that the Bureau ‘‘may at its discretion take
interim action by regulation, amendment, or
interpretation to lengthen the period of time
permitted for creditors or lessors to adjust their
forms to accommodate new requirements.’’
Although the Bureau desires to have the rule take
effect as soon as feasible given its value for
consumers, the Bureau is using its discretion under
TILA section 105(d) to lengthen the period in this
instance. The Bureau believes that the changes the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule will require to
disclosures pursuant to Regulation Z warrant a
delayed effective date that conforms to the rest of
the rule.
11 12 U.S.C. 5532(a).
12 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(1).
13 12 U.S.C. 5512(b).
14 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(2).
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D) describes the timing
requirements for the initial assessment
of an additional fee types disclosure,
and § 1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(E) describes the
timing for the periodic reassessment and
update of additional fee types
disclosures. The Bureau is revising the
dates in the regulatory text and headings
in § 1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) through (3)
and in comments 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1)–1,
18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(2)–1, 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(2)–
1.i through iii, and 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(3)–1
to reflect the new April 1, 2018 effective
date. The Bureau is not, however,
changing the October 1, 2014 date in
§ 1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) and related
commentary, which is the beginning of
the time frame for which financial
institutions may calculate additional fee
types to disclose, so as not to
inconvenience financial institutions that
have already prepared their additional
fee types calculations in reliance on that
date.
18(h) Effective Date and Special
Transition Rules for Disclosure
Provisions
Regulation E § 1005.18(h) sets forth
several provisions to make clearer the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule’s general
October 1, 2017 effective date. The
Bureau is revising the dates in the
regulatory text and headings throughout
§ 1005.18(h) and in comments 18(h)–1,
2, 6.i and 6.ii to reflect the new April
1, 2018 effective date.
1005.19 Internet Posting of Prepaid
Account Agreements
19(f) Effective Date
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
19(f)(1) Effective Date
Regulation E § 1005.19(f)(1) sets forth
the general effective date for the prepaid
account agreement posting requirements
in § 1005.19, other than the delayed
requirement to submit prepaid account
agreements to the Bureau pursuant to
§ 1005.19(b), as addressed in
§ 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau is revising
the date in the regulatory text of
§ 1005.19(f)(1) to reflect the new April 1,
2018 effective date. As discussed above,
the Bureau is not delaying the October
1, 2018 date for submission of
agreements to the Bureau.
VI. Effective Date
The Bureau is delaying the October 1,
2017 effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule by six months, to
April 1, 2018. Additionally, the Bureau
is making conforming amendments to
Regulation E §§ 1005.18(b)(2)(ix) and (h)
and 1005.19(f)(1), and related
commentary, as described above, which
will also become effective April 1, 2018.
This final rule with respect to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
effective date of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule will become effective 30 days
after publication in the Federal
Register, as required under section
553(d) of the Administrative Procedure
Act.15
VII. Dodd-Frank Act Section 1022(b)
Analysis
In developing the final rule, the
Bureau has considered the potential
benefits, costs, and impacts required by
section 1022(b)(2) of the Dodd-Frank
Act. Specifically, section 1022(b)(2)
calls for the Bureau to consider the
potential benefits and costs of a
regulation to consumers and covered
persons, including the potential
reduction of consumer access to
consumer financial products or services,
the impact on depository institutions
and credit unions with $10 billion or
less in total assets as described in
section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank Act, and
the impact on consumers in rural areas.
In addition, 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(2)(B)
directs the Bureau to consult, before and
during the rulemaking, with appropriate
prudential regulators or other Federal
agencies, regarding consistency with the
objectives those agencies administer.
The Bureau consulted, or offered to
consult with, the prudential regulators,
the Department of the Treasury, the
Securities and Exchange Commission,
and the Federal Trade Commission
regarding consistency with any
prudential, market, or systemic
objectives administered by these
agencies.
The Bureau previously considered the
benefits, costs, and impacts of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule’s major
provisions.16 The Bureau also
previously considered the benefits,
costs, and impacts of delaying the
effective date in the Effective Date
NPRM and solicited comment regarding
that discussion.17 Where comments
discuss the benefits or costs of delaying
the effective date in the context of
commenting on the merits of the
provision, the Bureau has addressed
those comments above. In this respect,
the Bureau’s section 1022(b)(2)
discussion is not limited to the
discussion in this part of the final rule.
In considering the relevant potential
benefits, costs, and impacts, the Bureau
has applied its knowledge and expertise
concerning consumer financial markets
and information received in response to
its request for comment. Compared to
the baseline established by the Prepaid
15 5
U.S.C. 553(d).
FR 83934, 84269 (Nov. 22, 2016).
17 82 FR 13782, 13785 (Mar. 15, 2017).
16 81
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18979
Accounts Final Rule,18 the delay of the
effective date of the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule will generally benefit
covered persons by facilitating initial
compliance with the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule’s requirements and delaying
the start of ongoing compliance costs.
Because covered persons retain the
option of complying with the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule’s original effective
date, any delay in the effective date will
not increase costs to providers.
Consumers may experience both
benefits and costs from a delay in the
effective date. If a delay in the effective
date helps to preserve consumer access
to covered products by minimizing
industry disruption, both consumers
and covered persons will benefit.
However, the Bureau believes that
delaying the effective date may also
delay consumers’ realization of benefits
arising from the protections provided by
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule,
thereby potentially imposing a cost on
consumers. One think tank commenter
stated that, although prepaid providers
often offer some protections voluntarily,
providers may alter or remove
protections so long as the rule is not in
effect. Another think tank commenter
stated that the primary cost of the delay
would be that consumers would not
have the information needed to make
appropriate choices among card
products. However, the commenter also
stated that providers have made
improvements with respect to
disclosure recently and that it believed
that the risk of consumers not having
adequate information for decisionmaking during the intervening period
was low.
The Bureau does not expect the final
rule to have a differential impact on
depository institutions and credit
unions with $10 billion or less in total
assets, as described in section 1026 of
the Dodd-Frank Act, or on consumers in
rural areas. The Bureau does not believe
that the delay in the effective date will
reduce consumer access to consumer
financial products and services, and it
may increase consumer access by
decreasing the possibility of industry
disruption arising from the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule’s implementation.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act 19 as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
18 The Bureau has discretion in any rulemaking
to choose an appropriate scope of analysis with
respect to potential benefits, costs, and impacts and
an appropriate baseline.
19 Public Law 96–354, 94 Stat. 1164 (1980).
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
18980
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
1996 20 (RFA) requires each agency to
consider the potential impact of its
regulations on small entities, including
small businesses, small governmental
units, and small not-for-profit
organizations.21 The RFA defines a
‘‘small business’’ as a business that
meets the size standard developed by
the Small Business Administration
(SBA) pursuant to the Small Business
Act.22
The RFA generally requires an agency
to conduct an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a final
regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) of
any rule subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking requirements, unless the
agency certifies that the rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.23
The Bureau also is subject to certain
additional procedures under the RFA
involving the convening of a panel to
consult with small entity
representatives prior to proposing a rule
for which an IRFA is required.24
The undersigned certified that the
Effective Date NPRM would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities and
that an IRFA was therefore not required.
The Bureau arrived at this conclusion
because the Effective Date NPRM would
delay the effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule, which itself would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.25 Upon considering relevant
comments, the Bureau’s conclusion that
the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities is unchanged.
Therefore, a FRFA is not required.26
As discussed above, this final rule
delays the effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule to April 1, 2018.
The six-month delay in the effective
date will benefit small entities by
providing additional flexibility with
20 Public Law 104–21, section 241, 110 Stat. 847,
864–65 (1996).
21 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612. The term ‘‘ ‘small
organization’ means any not-for-profit enterprise
which is independently owned and operated and is
not dominant in its field, unless an agency
establishes [an alternative definition under notice
and comment].’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(4). The term ‘‘ ‘small
governmental jurisdiction’ means governments of
cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school
districts, or special districts, with a population of
less than fifty thousand, unless an agency
establishes [an alternative definition after notice
and comment].’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
22 5 U.S.C. 601(3). The Bureau may establish an
alternative definition after consulting with the SBA
and providing an opportunity for public comment.
Id.
23 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612.
24 5 U.S.C. 609.
25 81 FR 83934, 84308 (Nov. 22, 2016).
265 U.S.C. 605(b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
respect to the timing of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule’s implementation.
In addition to generally providing
increased flexibility, the delay in the
effective date will permit small entities
to delay the commencement of any
ongoing costs that result from
complying with the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule. Because small entities retain
the option of complying with the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule’s original
effective date, the final rule’s delay of
the effective date will not increase costs
incurred by small entities relative to the
baseline established by the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule.
Accordingly, the undersigned hereby
certifies that this final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA),27 Federal agencies are
generally required to seek Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval for information collection
requirements prior to implementation.
The collections of information related to
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule have
been previously reviewed and approved
by OMB in accordance with the PRA
and assigned OMB Control Number
3170–0014 (Regulation E) and 3170–
0015 (Regulation Z). Under the PRA, the
Bureau may not conduct or sponsor and,
notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person is not required to respond
to an information collection unless the
information collection displays a valid
control number assigned by OMB.
The Bureau has determined that this
final rule will not have any new or
revised information collection
requirements (recordkeeping, reporting,
or disclosure requirements) on covered
entities or members of the public that
would constitute collections of
information requiring OMB approval
under the PRA.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1005
Banking, Banks, Consumer protection,
Credit unions, Electronic fund transfers,
National banks, Remittance transfers,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Savings Associations.
Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth above,
Regulation E, 12 CFR part 1005, as
amended November 22, 2016, at 81 FR
83934, is further amended as follows:
27 44
PO 00000
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
PART 1005—ELECTRONIC FUND
TRANSFERS (REGULATION E)
1. The authority citation for part 1005
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5512, 5581; 15 U.S.C.
1693b. Subpart B is also issued under 12
U.S.C. 5601 and 15 U.S.C. 1693o–1.
Subpart A—General
§ 1005.18 Requirements for financial
institutions offering prepaid accounts.
2. Section 1005.18 is amended by
revising all references to ‘‘October 1,
2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2018’’ in
paragraphs (b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) through (3)
and (h).
■
§ 1005.19 Internet posting of prepaid
account agreements.
3. Section 1005.19 is amended by
revising the reference to ‘‘October 1,
2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2018’’ in
paragraph (f)(1).
■ 4. In Supplement I to part 1005:
■ a. Under Section 1005.18—
Requirements for Financial Institutions
Offering Prepaid Accounts:
■ i. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1)
Existing Prepaid Account Programs as
of October 1, 2017, the subsection
heading and paragraph 1 are amended
by revising all references to ‘‘October 1,
2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2018’’.
■ ii. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(2)
Existing Prepaid Account Programs as
of October 1, 2017 with Unavailable
Data, the subsection heading and
paragraph 1 are amended by revising all
references to ‘‘October 1, 2017’’ to read
‘‘April 1, 2018’’.
■ iii. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(2)
Periodic Reassessment, paragraphs 1.i
through iii are amended by:
■ A. Revising all references to ‘‘October
1, 2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2018’’.
■ B. Revising all references to ‘‘October
1, 2019’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2020’’.
■ C. Revising the reference to ‘‘January
1, 2020’’ to read ‘‘July 1, 2020’’.
■ iv. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(3) Fee
Schedule Change, paragraph 1 is
amended by revising the reference to
‘‘October 1, 2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1,
2018’’.
■ v. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date
and Special Transition Rules for
Disclosure Provisions, paragraphs 1 and
2 are amended by revising all references
to ‘‘October 1, 2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1,
2018’’.
■ vi. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date
and Special Transition Rules for
Disclosure Provisions, paragraph 6
introductory text and paragraph 6.i are
amended by:
■ A. Revising all references to ‘‘October
1, 2017’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2018’’.
■
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
B. Revising the reference to
‘‘November 1, 2017’’ to read ‘‘May 1,
2018’’.
■ C. Revising the reference to ‘‘October
1, 2018’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2019’’.
■ D. Revising the reference to ‘‘October
1, 2019’’ to read ‘‘April 1, 2020’’.
■ vii. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date
and Special Transition Rules for
Disclosure Provisions, paragraph 6.ii is
revised to read as follows:
■
Supplement I to Part 1005—Official
Interpretations
*
*
*
*
*
Section 1005.18—Requirements for
Financial Institutions Offering Prepaid
Accounts
*
*
*
*
*
18(h) Effective Date and Special
Transition Rules for Disclosure
Provisions
*
*
*
*
*
6. Account information not available
on April 1, 2018. * * *
ii. Summary totals of fees. A financial
institution must display a summary
total of the amount of all fees assessed
by the financial institution on the
consumer’s prepaid account for the
prior calendar month and for the
calendar year to date pursuant to
§ 1005.18(c)(5) beginning April 1, 2018.
If, on April 1, 2018, the financial
institution does not have readily
accessible the data necessary to
calculate the summary totals of fees for
the prior calendar month or the calendar
year to date, the financial institution
may provide the summary totals using
the data it has until the financial
institution has accumulated the data
necessary to display the summary totals
as required by § 1005.18(c)(5). That is,
the financial institution would first
display the monthly fee total beginning
on May 1, 2018 for the month of April,
and the year-to-date fee total beginning
on April 1, 2018, provided the financial
institution discloses that it is displaying
the year-to-date total beginning on April
1, 2018 rather than for the entire
calendar year 2018. On January 1, 2019,
financial institutions must begin
displaying year-to-date fee totals for
calendar year 2019.
*
*
*
*
*
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
Dated: April 19, 2017.
Richard Cordray,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
[FR Doc. 2017–08341 Filed 4–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Apr 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
18981
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Authority for This Rulemaking
Federal Aviation Administration
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it removes
NOTAM information in Class D
extension airspace and amends the
airport’s geographic coordinates in
associated Class D and Class E airspace
for the above noted airports in Aspen,
CO, and Pueblo, CO.
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2017–0054; Airspace
Docket No. 17–ANM–2]
Amendment of Class D and Class E
Airspace; Aspen, CO; and Pueblo, CO
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule, technical
amendment.
AGENCY:
This action amends the legal
description of the Class E airspace
designated as an extension, at Aspen
Pitkin County/Sardy Field, Aspen, CO,
and Pueblo Memorial Airport, Pueblo,
CO, eliminating the Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) part-time status. This action
also updates the geographic coordinates
of these airports in the associated Class
D and E airspace areas to match the
FAA’s current aeronautical database.
This action does not affect the charted
boundaries or operating requirements of
the airspace.
DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 22,
2017. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by
reference action under title 1, Code of
Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to
the annual revision of FAA Order
7400.11 and publication of conforming
amendments.
ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11A,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can
be viewed on line at https://
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/.
For further information, you can contact
the Airspace Policy Group, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC, 20591; telephone: 202–
267–8783. The Order is also available
for inspection at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federalregulations/ibr_locations.html.
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on
September 15.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
Clark, Federal Aviation Administration,
Operations Support Group, Western
Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425)
203–4511.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
History
The FAA Aeronautical Information
Services branch found the Class E
airspace designated as an extension for
Aspen Pitkin County/Sardy Field,
Aspen, CO, and Pueblo Memorial
Airport, Pueblo, CO, as published in
FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, does
not require part-time status. Also, after
a review, the FAA found the geographic
coordinates referenced in the airspace
legal descriptions under Class D and
Class E airspace areas for Aspen Pitkin
County/Sardy Field, Aspen, CO, and
Pueblo Memorial Airport, Pueblo, CO
do not match the FAA’s current
aeronautical database. This rulemaking
makes these updates.
Class D and Class E airspace
designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005,
respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A
dated August 3, 2016, and effective
September 15, 2016, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
part 71.1. The Class D and Class E
airspace designations listed in this
document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
Availability and Summary of
Documents for Incorporation by
Reference
This document amends FAA Order
7400.11A, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016,
and effective September 15, 2016. FAA
Order 7400.11A is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
E:\FR\FM\25APR1.SGM
25APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 25, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18975-18981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08341]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 25, 2017 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 18975]]
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION
12 CFR Parts 1005 and 1026
[Docket No. CFPB-2017-0008]
RIN 3170-AA69
Prepaid Accounts Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act
(Regulation E) and the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z); Delay of
Effective Date
AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
ACTION: Final rule; official interpretation; delay of effective date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau or CFPB)
is issuing this final rule to delay the October 1, 2017 effective date
of the rule governing Prepaid Accounts Under the Electronic Fund
Transfer Act (Regulation E) and the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z)
by six months, to April 1, 2018.
DATES: The amendments in this final rule are effective on April 1,
2018. The effective date of the final rule published on November 22,
2016 (81 FR 83934) is delayed from October 1, 2017, to April 1, 2018.
The effective date for the addition of Sec. 1005.19(b) remains October
1, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas L. Devlin and Yaritza Velez,
Counsels, and Kristine M. Andreassen, Senior Counsel, Office of
Regulations, at 202-435-7700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of the Final Rule
On October 5, 2016, the Bureau released a final rule to create
comprehensive consumer protections for prepaid accounts under
Regulation E, which implements the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA),
and Regulation Z, which implements the Truth in Lending Act (TILA)
(Prepaid Accounts Final Rule).\1\ When it was issued, the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule had a general effective date of October 1, 2017.
Through its efforts to support industry implementation of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule, the Bureau learned that some industry participants
believed that they would have difficulty complying with certain
provisions of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule that would have gone into
effect on October 1, 2017. In order to facilitate compliance with the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, and to allow an opportunity for the Bureau
to assess whether any additional adjustments to the Rule are
appropriate, the Bureau proposed to extend the general effective date
of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule by six months, to April 1, 2018
(Effective Date NPRM).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 81 FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016).
\2\ 82 FR 13782 (Mar. 15, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on comments received, the Bureau is issuing this final rule
to delay the October 1, 2017 effective date for the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule by six months, to April 1, 2018. The Bureau is also making
conforming amendments to certain regulatory text and commentary adopted
in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule to reflect the effective date delay.
The Bureau plans to release a notice of proposed rulemaking address
at least two issues that have been identified as areas where the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule may be posing particular complexities for
implementation. When the Bureau does so it will also seek comment on
whether any further extension of the effective date is needed in light
of the specific changes proposed.
II. Background
A. The Prepaid Accounts Rulemaking
In the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, the Bureau extended Regulation
E coverage to prepaid accounts and adopted provisions specific to such
accounts, and generally expanded Regulation Z's coverage to overdraft
credit features that may be offered in conjunction with prepaid
accounts.\3\ Upon issuing the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, the Bureau
initiated robust efforts to support industry implementation.\4\
Information regarding the Bureau's Prepaid Accounts Final Rule
implementation initiatives and available resources can be found on the
Bureau's regulatory implementation Web site at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/guidance/implementation-guidance/prepaid-rule/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 81 FR 83934 (Nov. 22, 2016). The Bureau released a proposal
regarding prepaid accounts under Regulations E and Z, including
model and sample disclosure forms, for public comment on November
13, 2014. 79 FR 77102 (Dec. 23, 2014) (Prepaid Accounts NPRM). The
Bureau had previously issued an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking that posed a series of questions for public comment about
how the Bureau might consider regulating general purpose reloadable
cards and other prepaid products. 77 FR 30923 (May 24, 2012).
\4\ These on-going efforts include: (1) The publication of a
plain-language small entity compliance guide to help industry
understand the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule; (2) the publication of
various other implementation tools regarding the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule, including an executive summary of the rule, summaries of
key changes for payroll card accounts and government benefit
accounts, a prepaid account coverage chart, a summary of the rule's
effective date provisions, and a guide to preparing the short form
disclosure; (3) the release of native design files for print and
source code for web-based disclosures for all of the model and
sample disclosure forms included in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule;
(4) meetings with industry, including trade associations and
individual industry participants, to discuss and support their
implementation efforts; and (5) participation in conferences and
forums.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Effective Date Delay
As published, the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule had a general
effective date of October 1, 2017. As discussed in the Effective Date
NPRM, as part of its efforts to support industry implementation, the
Bureau has discussed implementation efforts with a number of industry
participants. As a result of those discussions, the Bureau learned that
some industry participants were concerned for a variety of reasons that
they would have difficulty in complying with certain aspects of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule by October 1, 2017 while also ensuring
continued availability of their prepaid products and with minimal
disruption to consumers. For example, although the Bureau put in place
an exception in Regulation E Sec. 1005.18(h)(2) pursuant to which
financial institutions are not required to pull and replace prepaid
account access devices and packaging materials with non-compliant
disclosures that were produced in the normal course of business prior
to October 1, 2017, some industry participants indicated that they
believed that they should in fact pull and replace non-compliant
packaging due to concerns about legal and regulatory
[[Page 18976]]
exposure at both the Federal and State level, and in particular due to
developments following release of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule.
Industry had also raised related concerns regarding the constrained
production capacity of packaging manufacturers and other supply chain
limitations resulting from increased industry demand leading up to the
October 1, 2017 effective date.
In addition, in the course of working to implement the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule, some industry participants raised concerns about
what they describe as unanticipated complexities arising from the
interaction of certain aspects of the rule with certain business models
and practices, including those newly adopted, that they did not fully
address in their comment letters on the Prepaid Accounts NPRM, which
may complicate implementation and affect consumers.
Based on its initial outreach to industry before issuing the
Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau believed that a six-month delay would
be sufficient for industry participants to ensure that they can comply
with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule with minimal disruption to
consumers. The Bureau explained that, in particular, a six-month
extension would both allow more time for package printing and allow
pull-and-replace processes at retail locations to occur after the
winter holiday season, which is a particularly busy time for retailers.
Indeed, the Bureau understands that industry often effectuates pull-
and-replace processes in the spring for precisely this reason. The
Bureau also believed that a six-month delay would allow the Bureau
adequate opportunity to consider possible additional amendments to the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, and for industry to implement any such
changes, without unnecessary disruption to consumers' access to, and
use of, prepaid accounts.
The Bureau did not propose to delay the effective date of the
requirement to submit prepaid account agreements to the Bureau in
Regulation E Sec. 1005.19(f)(2), which is October 1, 2018. The Bureau
expected to have its agreement submission process in place by October
1, 2018, and, as discussed in the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau's
pre-proposal outreach had not indicated that industry participants were
concerned that they would not be able to meet the agreement submission
effective date.
In the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau did not propose to amend any
other substantive requirements of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. The
purpose of that notice was not to seek comment generally on policy
decisions made in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule that industry or
other stakeholders might wish the Bureau to reconsider. Rather, the
Bureau stated that it would continue its outreach to industry and other
stakeholders to understand their experiences in implementing the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule.
III. Summary of the Rulemaking Process, Comments Received, and the
Final Rule
A. Summary of the Rulemaking Process
On March 9, 2017, the Bureau released the Effective Date NPRM with
a request for public comment. It was published in the Federal Register
on March 15, 2017.\5\ The Bureau solicited comment on all aspects of
the Effective Date NPRM. In particular, the Bureau asked commenters to
provide specific detail and any available data regarding current and
planned practices, as well as relevant knowledge and specific facts
about any benefits, costs, or other impacts on industry, consumers, and
other stakeholders of the Effective Date NPRM. The Bureau also
solicited comment about the impact of the Effective Date NPRM on
consumers who use prepaid accounts. The Bureau solicited comment
regarding the proposed extension of the general effective date to April
1, 2018, as well as alternative dates for extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 82 FR 13782 (Mar. 15, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Comments Received
The comment period for the Effective Date NPRM closed on April 5,
2017. The Bureau received 28 comment letters from consumer advocacy
groups; national and regional trade associations; members of the
prepaid industry, including issuing banks and credit unions, program
managers, and a digital wallet provider; several think tanks; an
association of State financial regulators; a group of State attorneys
general; and several commenters who did not identify their
affiliations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These comment letters are publicly available at https://www.regulations.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry and trade association commenters all supported the
Bureau's proposal to delay the effective date of most provisions of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule; many expressly supported the Bureau's
proposed six-month delay. A number of commenters cited the Bureau's
concerns that some industry participants may need additional time to
comply with the rule, in particular stating that providers might need
to pull and replace non-compliant packaging notwithstanding the
exception in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule for prepaid account access
devices and packaging materials with non-compliant disclosures that
were produced in the normal course of business prior to the effective
date of the rule.
A prepaid issuer, a digital wallet provider, and a trade
association each expressed support for a six-month delay of the
effective date, contingent on the Bureau also revisiting the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule to address certain substantive provisions of the
rule that they argued required changes to disclosures and business
models that could not be implemented by April 1, 2018. The provisions
that they cited relate to the linking of credit cards with digital
wallets that are capable of storing funds and to error resolution and
limitations on liability for prepaid accounts where the financial
institution has not completed its consumer identification and
verification process with respect to the account. These commenters
requested a 12-month delay to the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's general
effective date if the Bureau were unwilling to revisit those issues.
Some industry and trade association commenters argued that the
Bureau should delay the effective date further by 12 months; two trade
associations advocated for an 18-month delay. The commenters who
requested a delay longer than six months cited a variety of reasons,
including, for example, the time needed to develop and review new and
updated disclosures and related materials; time required to retool J-
hook card packaging to accommodate disclosures required by the rule;
limitations in production capacity to print new prepaid card
collateral; and the time needed to coordinate system updates with
processors, vendors, and other service providers. A few commenters
cited other reasons as well, such as the need to develop new systems
and operational processes related to providing longer account
transaction histories and calculating summary totals of fees. One trade
association stated that providers need to develop an automated process
to track cardholder agreements for purposes of submitting those
agreements to the Bureau, which it stated would need to be in place as
of the October 1, 2017 effective date in order to adequately track
agreements. Another trade association commenter urged the Bureau to
delay the effective date for longer than six months so that the Bureau
could conduct a comprehensive study on the effects that the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule will have on consumers, specifically related to
availability of prepaid accounts and their costs to consumers.
[[Page 18977]]
One credit union trade association commenter, requesting an 18-
month extension, cited concerns that the proposed delayed effective
date would coincide with the effective date of other regulations
promulgated by the Bureau, in particular the provisions of the Bureau's
mortgage servicing rule pertaining to successors-in-interest and the
provision of periodic statements to consumers who have filed for
bankruptcy. An association of State financial regulators also stated
the compliance investments necessitated by other regulations such as
the increased data collection/reporting requirements under the Home
Mortgage Disclosure Act and additional identification requirements
under the Bank Secrecy Act/Customer Due Diligence rule promulgated by
another federal agency as a reason for its support of a six-month
delay.
A coalition of 27 consumer advocacy groups urged the Bureau to
implement the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule as soon as possible, citing
the benefits of the rule for consumers who use prepaid accounts, and
expressing concern that further delays in the effective date would
cause harm to consumers. They stated that, if an extension is
warranted, the Bureau should give the minimum extension necessary--
which in their view would be no longer than the proposed six months--
and not provide any further extensions. Another consumer advocacy group
supported the Bureau's proposal to delay the rule's effective date by
six months while reiterating that expeditious implementation of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule remains essential to providing
comprehensive consumer protections to users of prepaid accounts.
Two think tanks urged the Bureau to consider the possible negative
effects on consumers of any delay in the effective date of the rule.
Another think tank supported the six-month delay, stating that
otherwise there is a risk that providers might pull cards without
replacing them, thus hampering consumers' access to those products.
The commenters who did not identify their affiliation varied in
their comments, either expressing support for the proposed delay in
effective date or arguing that the effective date should not be
extended to ensure that consumers receive the protections of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. A group of State attorneys general
expressed support for the rule generally but did not comment
specifically on the effective date of the rule.
Safe harbor for early compliance. Two trade association commenters
urged the Bureau to establish a safe harbor for prepaid providers that
comply with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule (or portions of it) prior
to the rule's effective date. These commenters expressed concerns that
prepaid providers may be exposed to potential liability if they comply
with the rule prior to the effective date, as they suggested the
possibility that there may be some conflict between the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule and current requirements for payroll card accounts
and government benefit accounts, though they did not provide any
specific examples. One commenter stated that early compliance would
benefit consumers and should not be discouraged.
Section 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau did not propose to delay the
October 1, 2018 effective date of the requirement that prepaid account
issuers submit prepaid account agreements to the Bureau, which is set
forth in Regulation E Sec. 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau did, however,
solicit comment on whether it should also delay that effective date.
Commenters generally did not express concerns that the October 1, 2018
agreement submission effective date would create compliance issues. One
of the trade association commenters advocating for an 18-month delay of
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's general effective date suggested that
the Bureau contemplate a proportional delay for Sec. 1005.19(f)(2),
stating that it would help relieve pressure on credit unions that may
need to submit credit card agreements pursuant to Regulation Z Sec.
1026.58 for covered separate credit features accessible by hybrid
prepaid-credit cards. Another trade association expressed concerns
pertaining to general compliance with the requirement to submit prepaid
account agreements to the Bureau, but did not suggest a delay to the
effective date in Sec. 1005.19(f)(2).
A program manager expressed concerns about the challenges it is
facing in complying with the agreement posting requirement in Sec.
1005.19, which appears to be due, at least in part, to the number of
prepaid account agreements it manages. This commenter suggested making
the effective dates set forth in Sec. 1005.19(f)(1) and (2)
consistent, but did not request that the Bureau delay the effective
date for the agreement submission requirement. A commenter who did not
identify his or her affiliation supported the Bureau's proposal not to
delay the effective date of the agreement submission requirement, but
suggested that the Bureau revisit that decision six months in advance
of the effective date.
Substantive changes to the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. As noted
above, the Bureau did not propose in the Effective Date NPRM to amend
any other substantive provisions of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule,
nor was the purpose of the Effective Date NPRM to seek comment
generally on policy decisions made in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule
that industry or other stakeholders might wish the Bureau to
reconsider. Nonetheless, many commenters used their comment letters to
advocate for retaining, modifying, or eliminating various provisions of
the rule. Commenters also suggested that the Bureau could use the
additional time provided by delaying the effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule to revisit these issues.
C. The Final Rule
For the reasons set forth herein, the Bureau is finalizing as
proposed a six-month delay of the October 1, 2017 effective date of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule. In order to effect this change, the Bureau
is also amending Regulation E Sec. Sec. 1005.18(b)(2)(ix) and (h), and
1005.19(f)(1), and related commentary, to reflect the delayed effective
date.
The Bureau continues to believe that the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule will provide significant benefits to consumers and that,
therefore, expeditious implementation remains essential to provide
comprehensive consumer protections to users of prepaid accounts. Having
reviewed the comments received, the Bureau continues to believe that a
six-month delay of the effective date, when added to the nearly 12
months previously provided for in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule,
allows sufficient time for industry to implement the rule and provides
for an appropriate balance between the interests of the consumers who
will receive the benefits of the rule and the needs of industry for an
adequate implementation period. The Bureau appreciates the issues
raised by commenters advocating for a longer delay to the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule's effective date, but does not believe that a
longer delay is in fact warranted at this time.
Based on industry outreach efforts and the comments received in
response to the Effective Date NPRM, the Bureau has determined that it
should revisit at least two substantive issues through a separate
notice and comment rulemaking process. Those issues relate to the
linking of credit cards into digital wallets that are capable of
storing funds and to error resolution and limitations on liability for
prepaid accounts that
[[Page 18978]]
cannot be registered, have not yet been registered, or for which
consumers have attempted but have not successfully completed the
registration process. The Bureau is continuing to evaluate other
concerns raised by industry and other stakeholders, including those
discussed in comments on the Effective Date NPRM, and may address a
limited number of other topics as well in its forthcoming proposal. The
Bureau also will seek comment on whether any further extension of the
effective date is needed in light of the specific changes proposed.
Safe harbor for early compliance. The Bureau agrees with commenters
that early compliance with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule could
benefit both industry and consumers. The Bureau is not aware of any
conflicts between the requirements of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule
and the current regulations applying to accounts that will be covered
by the rule, nor were any specified by commenters. To the extent that
financial institutions are engaged in consumer-friendly practices that
are not specifically required under current regulations, the Bureau
encourages those institutions to continue those practices, whether or
not those practices are required by the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule.
For example, financial institutions that already provide access to more
than 60 days of account history to all current accountholders, or that
provide full Regulation E error resolution and limited liability
protections to their accountholders, are encouraged to continue to do
so in advance of the effective date. However, financial institutions
should ensure that their disclosures do not suggest to consumers that
they are engaged in a consumer-friendly practice that they have not yet
implemented.
The Bureau notes that the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule already
contemplates that some aspects of the rule will be phased in,
particularly with respect to the exception that does not require
financial institutions to pull and replace non-compliant packaging that
was manufactured, printed, or otherwise produced in the normal course
of business prior to the effective date of the rule. Thus, the Bureau
is not adding an explicit safe harbor for early compliance, although
the Bureau does not believe that the absence of one will prevent
financial institutions from implementing practices that are required by
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule prior to the effective date. The Bureau
will seek comment in its forthcoming proposal on whether there are in
fact any conflicts between requirements of the Prepaid Accounts Final
Rule and the current regulations applying to accounts that will be
covered by the rule that would merit a more formal safe harbor.
Section 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau is maintaining the October 1,
2018 effective date set forth in Regulation E Sec. 1005.19(f)(2) for
the agreement submission requirement, as proposed. In the Effective
Date NPRM, the Bureau indicated that its industry outreach had not
indicated that the effective date of this provision was causing
significant compliance concerns in and of itself, and the comments to
the Effective Date NPRM support that conclusion. The Bureau does not
believe that the few concerns raised by commenters warrant a delay to
the October 1, 2018 effective date.
IV. Legal Authority
The Bureau is exercising its rulemaking authority pursuant to EFTA
section 904(a) and (c), Dodd-Frank Act sections 1022(b)(1) and 1032(a),
and TILA section 105(a) to delay the effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule.
The legal authority for the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule is
described in detail in the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's Supplementary
Information.\7\ As amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, EFTA section 904(a)
and (c) \8\ authorizes the Bureau to prescribe regulations to carry out
the purposes of EFTA and provide that such regulations may contain such
classifications, differentiations, or other provisions, and may provide
for such adjustments and exceptions, for any class of electronic fund
transfers or remittance transfers as in the judgment of the Bureau are
necessary or proper to effectuate the purposes of EFTA, to prevent
circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance
therewith. As amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, TILA section 105(a) \9\
directs the Bureau to prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes
of TILA and provides that such regulations may contain such additional
requirements, classifications, differentiations, or other provisions,
and may provide for such adjustments and exceptions for all or any
class of transactions as in the judgment of the Bureau are necessary or
proper to effectuate the purposes of TILA, to prevent circumvention or
evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith.\10\ Section
1032(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act\11\ provides that the Bureau may
prescribe rules to ensure that the features of any consumer financial
product or service, both initially and over the term of the product or
service, are fully, accurately, and effectively disclosed to consumers
in a manner that permits consumers to understand the costs, benefits,
and risks associated with the product or service, in light of the facts
and circumstances. Additionally, under Dodd-Frank Act section
1022(b)(1),\12\ the Bureau has general authority to 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See, e.g., 81 FR 83934, 83958-60 (Nov. 22, 2016).
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 1593b(a).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 1604(a).
\10\ TILA section 105(d) generally provides that a regulation
requiring any disclosure that differs from the disclosures
previously required by parts A, D, or E of TILA shall have an
effective date ``of that October 1 which follows by at least six
months the date of promulgation.'' Section 105(d) further provides
that the Bureau ``may at its discretion take interim action by
regulation, amendment, or interpretation to lengthen the period of
time permitted for creditors or lessors to adjust their forms to
accommodate new requirements.'' Although the Bureau desires to have
the rule take effect as soon as feasible given its value for
consumers, the Bureau is using its discretion under TILA section
105(d) to lengthen the period in this instance. The Bureau believes
that the changes the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule will require to
disclosures pursuant to Regulation Z warrant a delayed effective
date that conforms to the rest of the rule.
\11\ 12 U.S.C. 5532(a).
\12\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFTA, TILA, and Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act are Federal consumer
financial laws. Accordingly, in finalizing this rule, the Bureau is
exercising its authority under Dodd-Frank Act section 1022(b) \13\ to
prescribe rules under EFTA, TILA, and Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act
that carry out the purposes and objectives and prevent evasion of those
laws. Section 1022(b)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act \14\ prescribes certain
standards for rulemaking that the Bureau must follow in exercising its
authority under section 1022(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(b).
\14\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Provisions Affected by the Final Rule
1005.18 Requirements for Financial Institutions Offering Prepaid
Accounts
18(b) Pre-Acquisition Disclosure Requirements
18(b)(2) Short Form Disclosure Content
18(b)(2)(ix) Disclosure of Additional Fee Types
Regulation E Sec. 1005.18(b)(2) describes the short form
disclosure content requirements for prepaid accounts. Section
1005.18(b)(2)(ix) contains requirements specifically regarding
additional fee types. Section
[[Page 18979]]
1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D) describes the timing requirements for the initial
assessment of an additional fee types disclosure, and Sec.
1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(E) describes the timing for the periodic reassessment
and update of additional fee types disclosures. The Bureau is revising
the dates in the regulatory text and headings in Sec.
1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) through (3) and in comments 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1)-
1, 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(2)-1, 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(2)-1.i through iii, and
18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(3)-1 to reflect the new April 1, 2018 effective date.
The Bureau is not, however, changing the October 1, 2014 date in Sec.
1005.18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) and related commentary, which is the beginning
of the time frame for which financial institutions may calculate
additional fee types to disclose, so as not to inconvenience financial
institutions that have already prepared their additional fee types
calculations in reliance on that date.
18(h) Effective Date and Special Transition Rules for Disclosure
Provisions
Regulation E Sec. 1005.18(h) sets forth several provisions to make
clearer the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's general October 1, 2017
effective date. The Bureau is revising the dates in the regulatory text
and headings throughout Sec. 1005.18(h) and in comments 18(h)-1, 2,
6.i and 6.ii to reflect the new April 1, 2018 effective date.
1005.19 Internet Posting of Prepaid Account Agreements
19(f) Effective Date
19(f)(1) Effective Date
Regulation E Sec. 1005.19(f)(1) sets forth the general effective
date for the prepaid account agreement posting requirements in Sec.
1005.19, other than the delayed requirement to submit prepaid account
agreements to the Bureau pursuant to Sec. 1005.19(b), as addressed in
Sec. 1005.19(f)(2). The Bureau is revising the date in the regulatory
text of Sec. 1005.19(f)(1) to reflect the new April 1, 2018 effective
date. As discussed above, the Bureau is not delaying the October 1,
2018 date for submission of agreements to the Bureau.
VI. Effective Date
The Bureau is delaying the October 1, 2017 effective date of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule by six months, to April 1, 2018.
Additionally, the Bureau is making conforming amendments to Regulation
E Sec. Sec. 1005.18(b)(2)(ix) and (h) and 1005.19(f)(1), and related
commentary, as described above, which will also become effective April
1, 2018. This final rule with respect to the effective date of the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule will become effective 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register, as required under section 553(d)
of the Administrative Procedure Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Dodd-Frank Act Section 1022(b) Analysis
In developing the final rule, the Bureau has considered the
potential benefits, costs, and impacts required by section 1022(b)(2)
of the Dodd-Frank Act. Specifically, section 1022(b)(2) calls for the
Bureau to consider the potential benefits and costs of a regulation to
consumers and covered persons, including the potential reduction of
consumer access to consumer financial products or services, the impact
on depository institutions and credit unions with $10 billion or less
in total assets as described in section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank Act, and
the impact on consumers in rural areas. In addition, 12 U.S.C.
5512(b)(2)(B) directs the Bureau to consult, before and during the
rulemaking, with appropriate prudential regulators or other Federal
agencies, regarding consistency with the objectives those agencies
administer. The Bureau consulted, or offered to consult with, the
prudential regulators, the Department of the Treasury, the Securities
and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission regarding
consistency with any prudential, market, or systemic objectives
administered by these agencies.
The Bureau previously considered the benefits, costs, and impacts
of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's major provisions.\16\ The Bureau
also previously considered the benefits, costs, and impacts of delaying
the effective date in the Effective Date NPRM and solicited comment
regarding that discussion.\17\ Where comments discuss the benefits or
costs of delaying the effective date in the context of commenting on
the merits of the provision, the Bureau has addressed those comments
above. In this respect, the Bureau's section 1022(b)(2) discussion is
not limited to the discussion in this part of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 81 FR 83934, 84269 (Nov. 22, 2016).
\17\ 82 FR 13782, 13785 (Mar. 15, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In considering the relevant potential benefits, costs, and impacts,
the Bureau has applied its knowledge and expertise concerning consumer
financial markets and information received in response to its request
for comment. Compared to the baseline established by the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule,\18\ the delay of the effective date of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule will generally benefit covered persons by
facilitating initial compliance with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's
requirements and delaying the start of ongoing compliance costs.
Because covered persons retain the option of complying with the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule's original effective date, any delay in the
effective date will not increase costs to providers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The Bureau has discretion in any rulemaking to choose an
appropriate scope of analysis with respect to potential benefits,
costs, and impacts and an appropriate baseline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumers may experience both benefits and costs from a delay in
the effective date. If a delay in the effective date helps to preserve
consumer access to covered products by minimizing industry disruption,
both consumers and covered persons will benefit. However, the Bureau
believes that delaying the effective date may also delay consumers'
realization of benefits arising from the protections provided by the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, thereby potentially imposing a cost on
consumers. One think tank commenter stated that, although prepaid
providers often offer some protections voluntarily, providers may alter
or remove protections so long as the rule is not in effect. Another
think tank commenter stated that the primary cost of the delay would be
that consumers would not have the information needed to make
appropriate choices among card products. However, the commenter also
stated that providers have made improvements with respect to disclosure
recently and that it believed that the risk of consumers not having
adequate information for decision-making during the intervening period
was low.
The Bureau does not expect the final rule to have a differential
impact on depository institutions and credit unions with $10 billion or
less in total assets, as described in section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank
Act, or on consumers in rural areas. The Bureau does not believe that
the delay in the effective date will reduce consumer access to consumer
financial products and services, and it may increase consumer access by
decreasing the possibility of industry disruption arising from the
Prepaid Accounts Final Rule's implementation.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act \19\ as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
[[Page 18980]]
1996 \20\ (RFA) requires each agency to consider the potential impact
of its regulations on small entities, including small businesses, small
governmental units, and small not-for-profit organizations.\21\ The RFA
defines a ``small business'' as a business that meets the size standard
developed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) pursuant to the
Small Business Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164 (1980).
\20\ Public Law 104-21, section 241, 110 Stat. 847, 864-65
(1996).
\21\ 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612. The term `` `small organization'
means any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field, unless an agency
establishes [an alternative definition under notice and comment].''
5 U.S.C. 601(4). The term `` `small governmental jurisdiction' means
governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school
districts, or special districts, with a population of less than
fifty thousand, unless an agency establishes [an alternative
definition after notice and comment].'' 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
\22\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3). The Bureau may establish an alternative
definition after consulting with the SBA and providing an
opportunity for public comment. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RFA generally requires an agency to conduct an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) of any rule subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.\23\ The Bureau also is subject to certain additional
procedures under the RFA involving the convening of a panel to consult
with small entity representatives prior to proposing a rule for which
an IRFA is required.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612.
\24\ 5 U.S.C. 609.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The undersigned certified that the Effective Date NPRM would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities and that an IRFA was therefore not required. The Bureau
arrived at this conclusion because the Effective Date NPRM would delay
the effective date of the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule, which itself
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.\25\ Upon considering relevant comments, the Bureau's
conclusion that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities is unchanged. Therefore, a FRFA
is not required.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 81 FR 83934, 84308 (Nov. 22, 2016).
\26\5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, this final rule delays the effective date of
the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule to April 1, 2018. The six-month delay
in the effective date will benefit small entities by providing
additional flexibility with respect to the timing of the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule's implementation. In addition to generally
providing increased flexibility, the delay in the effective date will
permit small entities to delay the commencement of any ongoing costs
that result from complying with the Prepaid Accounts Final Rule.
Because small entities retain the option of complying with the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule's original effective date, the final rule's delay
of the effective date will not increase costs incurred by small
entities relative to the baseline established by the Prepaid Accounts
Final Rule.
Accordingly, the undersigned hereby certifies that this final rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),\27\ Federal
agencies are generally required to seek Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) approval for information collection requirements prior to
implementation. The collections of information related to the Prepaid
Accounts Final Rule have been previously reviewed and approved by OMB
in accordance with the PRA and assigned OMB Control Number 3170-0014
(Regulation E) and 3170-0015 (Regulation Z). Under the PRA, the Bureau
may not conduct or sponsor and, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person is not required to respond to an information collection
unless the information collection displays a valid control number
assigned by OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bureau has determined that this final rule will not have any
new or revised information collection requirements (recordkeeping,
reporting, or disclosure requirements) on covered entities or members
of the public that would constitute collections of information
requiring OMB approval under the PRA.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1005
Banking, Banks, Consumer protection, Credit unions, Electronic fund
transfers, National banks, Remittance transfers, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Savings Associations.
Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth above, Regulation E, 12 CFR part 1005, as
amended November 22, 2016, at 81 FR 83934, is further amended as
follows:
PART 1005--ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS (REGULATION E)
0
1. The authority citation for part 1005 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5512, 5581; 15 U.S.C. 1693b. Subpart B is
also issued under 12 U.S.C. 5601 and 15 U.S.C. 1693o-1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1005.18 Requirements for financial institutions offering prepaid
accounts.
0
2. Section 1005.18 is amended by revising all references to ``October
1, 2017'' to read ``April 1, 2018'' in paragraphs (b)(2)(ix)(D)(1)
through (3) and (h).
Sec. 1005.19 Internet posting of prepaid account agreements.
0
3. Section 1005.19 is amended by revising the reference to ``October 1,
2017'' to read ``April 1, 2018'' in paragraph (f)(1).
0
4. In Supplement I to part 1005:
0
a. Under Section 1005.18--Requirements for Financial Institutions
Offering Prepaid Accounts:
0
i. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(1) Existing Prepaid Account Programs
as of October 1, 2017, the subsection heading and paragraph 1 are
amended by revising all references to ``October 1, 2017'' to read
``April 1, 2018''.
0
ii. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(D)(2) Existing Prepaid Account Programs
as of October 1, 2017 with Unavailable Data, the subsection heading and
paragraph 1 are amended by revising all references to ``October 1,
2017'' to read ``April 1, 2018''.
0
iii. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(2) Periodic Reassessment, paragraphs
1.i through iii are amended by:
0
A. Revising all references to ``October 1, 2017'' to read ``April 1,
2018''.
0
B. Revising all references to ``October 1, 2019'' to read ``April 1,
2020''.
0
C. Revising the reference to ``January 1, 2020'' to read ``July 1,
2020''.
0
iv. In subsection 18(b)(2)(ix)(E)(3) Fee Schedule Change, paragraph 1
is amended by revising the reference to ``October 1, 2017'' to read
``April 1, 2018''.
0
v. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date and Special Transition Rules for
Disclosure Provisions, paragraphs 1 and 2 are amended by revising all
references to ``October 1, 2017'' to read ``April 1, 2018''.
0
vi. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date and Special Transition Rules for
Disclosure Provisions, paragraph 6 introductory text and paragraph 6.i
are amended by:
0
A. Revising all references to ``October 1, 2017'' to read ``April 1,
2018''.
[[Page 18981]]
0
B. Revising the reference to ``November 1, 2017'' to read ``May 1,
2018''.
0
C. Revising the reference to ``October 1, 2018'' to read ``April 1,
2019''.
0
D. Revising the reference to ``October 1, 2019'' to read ``April 1,
2020''.
0
vii. In subsection 18(h) Effective Date and Special Transition Rules
for Disclosure Provisions, paragraph 6.ii is revised to read as
follows:
Supplement I to Part 1005--Official Interpretations
* * * * *
Section 1005.18--Requirements for Financial Institutions Offering
Prepaid Accounts
* * * * *
18(h) Effective Date and Special Transition Rules for Disclosure
Provisions
* * * * *
0
6. Account information not available on April 1, 2018. * * *
ii. Summary totals of fees. A financial institution must display a
summary total of the amount of all fees assessed by the financial
institution on the consumer's prepaid account for the prior calendar
month and for the calendar year to date pursuant to Sec. 1005.18(c)(5)
beginning April 1, 2018. If, on April 1, 2018, the financial
institution does not have readily accessible the data necessary to
calculate the summary totals of fees for the prior calendar month or
the calendar year to date, the financial institution may provide the
summary totals using the data it has until the financial institution
has accumulated the data necessary to display the summary totals as
required by Sec. 1005.18(c)(5). That is, the financial institution
would first display the monthly fee total beginning on May 1, 2018 for
the month of April, and the year-to-date fee total beginning on April
1, 2018, provided the financial institution discloses that it is
displaying the year-to-date total beginning on April 1, 2018 rather
than for the entire calendar year 2018. On January 1, 2019, financial
institutions must begin displaying year-to-date fee totals for calendar
year 2019.
* * * * *
Dated: April 19, 2017.
Richard Cordray,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
[FR Doc. 2017-08341 Filed 4-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P