Skip to main content
Menu Icon
Close

InfoBytes Blog

Financial Services Law Insights and Observations

Filter

Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.

  • House Subcommittee on Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Holds Hearing to Discuss Consumer Fintech Needs

    Federal Issues

    On June 8, the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection held a hearing to discuss financial products and services offered by the fintech industry to meet consumer needs. (See previous InfoBytes coverage here.) Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) opened the hearing asserting, “There are serious opportunities for companies to reach consumers with new products to help them create a rainy-day fund for the first time, pay their mortgage securely, rebuild their credit, budget and manage multiple income streams, and invest their earnings . . . Cybersecurity [specifically] is an ongoing challenge, and one the Energy and Commerce Committee is tackling head on.” The June 8 hearing included testimony and recommendations from the following witnesses:

    • Ms. Jeanne Hogarth, Vice President at Center for Financial Services Innovation (CFSI) (statement). Hogarth stated that nearly three out of five American face financial health struggles and spoke about challenges fintech entrepreneurs may face when trying to help consumers, such as (i) “facilitat[ing] interstate and regulatory comity that enables consumers to access and use fintech products and service that promote financial health”; (ii) “support[ing] consumers’ access to their own data”; and (iii) “creat[ing] opportunities for pilot testing of both financial products and services and financial services regulations.” Hogath also detailed CFSI’s Financial Solutions Lab, which identifies financial health challenges faced by consumers and encourages companies to develop ways to address these issues.
    • Mr. Javier Saade, Managing Director at Fenway Summer Ventures (statement). Saade—whose venture capital firm backs emerging fintech companies—stressed the importance of understanding and mitigating associated risks as financial innovation continues to expand. Growth is supported and encouraged, he noted, provided entrepreneurs understand that the “’fail fast and often’ approach, typical of tech-driven startups in other sectors, may not be well suited for the financial services industry.” Furthermore, Saade stated that because “nearly 30 million U.S. households either have no access to financial products or obtain products outside of the banking system . . . even modest strides in achieving economic inclusion present the single largest addressable opportunity in fintech.”
    • Ms. Christina Tetreault, Staff Attorney at Consumer Union (statement). Tetreault, speaking on behalf of Consumer Union (the policy division of Consumer Reports), stated that while financial technology such as virtual currencies, digital cash, and distributed ledgers have the “potential to increase consumer access to safe financial products and return a measure of control to consumers,” safeguards devised between lawmakers and providers must be implemented with appropriate federal and state financial regulator oversight.
    • Mr. Peter Van Valkenburgh, Research Director at Coin Center (statement). Coin Center is a non-profit organization, which focuses on “public policy ramifications of digital currencies and open blockchain networks.” Van Valkenburgh emphasized the need for Congress to (i) create a nationwide federal money transmission license as an alternative to “state by state licensing,” which, in his opinion, emphasizes the needs of individual states rather than addressing the health and risk profile as a whole; and (ii) create a federal safe harbor to “protect Americans developing open blockchain infrastructure.” Van Valkenburgh also encouraged the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to establish federal “fintech charters” to promote a unified approach to regulating blockchain companies.

    Federal Issues Digital Assets Fintech OCC House Energy and Commerce Committee Blockchain Digital Commerce Privacy/Cyber Risk & Data Security Virtual Currency Distributed Ledger

  • FINRA Announces Fintech Outreach Initiative, Hosts Blockchain Symposium in July

    Fintech

    On June 13, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced a new outreach initiative to improve its understanding of fintech innovations and how they impact the securities industry. The Innovation Outreach Initiative will consist of the following components:

    • the launch of FINRA’s new webpage dedicated to fintech topics such as RegTech (covering compliance monitoring, fraud prevention, data management, and the identification and interpretation of regulations affecting the securities industry), artificial intelligence, and social media sentiment investing; and
    • the creation of a cross-departmental team led by the Office of Emerging Regulatory Issues developed to, among other things, foster discussion on fintech developments, develop publications on fintech topics, and increase collaboration with domestic and international regulators.

    Additionally, FINRA announced it will host a Blockchain Symposium in New York City on July 13 to create an opportunity for regulators and industry leaders to join together and discuss opportunities and challenges related to the use of Distributed Ledger Technology, also known as blockchain.

    Fintech Digital Assets Securities FINRA SEC Blockchain Distributed Ledger Virtual Currency

  • Vermont Enacts Law Expanding Requirements for Certain Businesses Regulated by Department of Financial Regulation

    State Issues

    On May 4, Vermont Governor Phil Scott signed into law H. 182, which amends a number of laws relating to businesses regulated by the state’s Department of Financial Regulation. Among other things, the law: (i) amends registration requirements for consumer litigation funding companies; (ii) amends the licensing requirements for licensed lenders, money transmitters, check cashers and currency exchangers, debt adjusters, and loan servicers; (iii) amends the mortgage loan originator prelicensing and relicensing education requirements; (iv) defines the term “virtual currency” under the Money Services chapter and provides that “virtual currency” is a permissible investment for licensees; and (v) sets forth requirements for money transmitters related to receipts and refunds. The law also creates new types of licenses (and other related requirements (e.g., disclosures, record retention)) for “loan solicitation” activity, which includes, among other things, lead generation. The law took effect May 4, 2017, with the exception of provisions relating to money transmitter receipts and refunds, lead generator disclosure requirements, and loan solicitor disclosure requirements, which take effect July 1, 2017.

    State Issues Licensing Virtual Currency

  • West Virginia Enacts Law Defining "Cryptocurrency" in Context of Money Laundering

    Fintech

    On April 26, West Virginia Governor Jim Justice approved new legislation (H.B 2585) that defines cryptocurrency in the context of money laundering. Specifically, “cryptocurrency” is defined as “digital currency in which encryption techniques are used to regulate the generation of units of currency and verify the transfer of funds, and which operate independently of a central bank.” Furthermore, the term “monetary instruments”—traditionally defined, for example, as coin, currency, checks, gift and prepaid credit cards—would now include cryptocurrency. With respect to the anti-money laundering clause, the legislation makes it unlawful to “conduct or attempt to conduct a financial transaction,” which would include cryptocurrency transactions, “involving the proceeds of criminal activity knowing that the property involved in the financial transaction represents the proceeds of, or is derived directly or indirectly from the proceeds of, criminal activity.” H.B. 2585 also outlines penalty structures for violations of the legislation—misdemeanor or felony charges depending on the severity of the crime—and allows for forfeiture or disgorgement of cryptocurrency.

    Fintech Digital Assets Anti-Money Laundering Payments State Issues Cryptocurrency Virtual Currency

  • Washington State Enacts Law Defining Licensing Requirements for Transmitters of Money and Virtual Currency

    Fintech

    On April 17, Washington Governor Jay Inslee signed into law a new piece of legislation (SSB 5031), which formally adds virtual currency to its money transmitter law. The legislation—introduced at the request of the Washington Department of Financial Institutions (DFI)—amends the definition of money transmission to include virtual currency, which is defined as “a digital representation of value used as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, or a store of value, but does not have legal tender status as recognized by the United States government.” The definition of virtual currency does not, however, include “the software or protocols governing the transfer of the digital representation of value or other uses of virtual distributed ledger systems to verify ownership or authenticity in a digital capacity when the virtual currency is not used as a medium of exchange.” The new law requires that applicants for a money transmitter license with business models that store virtual currency on behalf of others must provide a third-party security audit of all electronic information and data systems acceptable to DFI. Furthermore, licensees transmitting virtual currencies must now hold “like-kind virtual currencies” of the same volume as that held by the licensee but which is obligated to consumers in lieu of permissible investments. Among other disclosures, virtual currency licensees must disclose to consumers a schedule of fees and charges, whether the product or service is insured, that the transfer is irrevocable, and the licensee's liability for mistakes. Among other provisions, the law:

    • outlines new bond requirements for online currency exchange licensees;
    • expands supervisory powers allowing DFI to participate in joint or concurrent examinations with other state or federal agencies;
    • mandates that licensees report all licensee branch locations and all authorized delegates to the nationwide licensing system within 30 days of the contractual agreement with the licensee to provide money services in the state;
    • makes civil penalties $100 per violation per day for each day a violation is outstanding; and
    • excludes from its definition of “money transmission” the “provision solely of connection services to the internet, telecommunications services, or network access; units of value that are issued in affinity or rewards programs that cannot be redeemed for either money or virtual currencies; and units of value that are used solely within online gaming platforms that have no market or application outside of the gaming platforms.”

    The law goes into effect July 23, 2017.

    Fintech Virtual Currency Distributed Ledger State Legislation

  • GAO Publishes Study Examining Fintech Industry Regulation

    Fintech

    On April 19, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a study examining four “subsectors” within the fintech industry—marketplace lenders, mobile payments, digital wealth management platforms, and distributed ledger technology (also known as blockchain)—and highlighting the types of products and services offered and how they are regulated. The report, Financial Technology – Information on Subsectors and Regulatory Oversight, is the first in a series of planned reports on fintech, following a request by Congress for a review of issues related to the industry. From July 2016 to April 2017, GAO reviewed agency publications, guidance, final rulemakings, initiatives, and enforcement actions, and also conducted interviews with representatives from the federal prudential regulators, state supervision agencies, and trade associations in order to compile the findings in the report. The report provides an overview of the technologies associated with each subsector, identifies primary users of the products and services, notes potential benefits and risks, and highlights industry trends and current regulations and oversight. Notably, GAO stated it made no recommendations in this report.

    Fintech Digital Assets GAO Examination Congress Marketplace Lending Distributed Ledger Blockchain Virtual Currency Mobile Payments

  • NYDFS Authorizes Coinbase to Offer Trading of Digital Currencies in New York

    Fintech

    On March 22, the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) announced the approval of Coinbase, Inc.’s application to offer Ether and Litecoin to New York customers.  “Ether” is a “digital cryptography-based asset” of the Ethereum network, “similar to how bitcoin is the digital cryptography-based asset of the Bitcoin network.” Litecoin, developed as a modification of the Bitcoin protocol, is the first alternative virtual currency to Bitcoin to gain public acceptance.  NYDFS also approved Coinbase’s linked debit card service “Shift Card”—a VISA debit card that allows Coinbase users in select U.S. states and territories to use Bitcoin anywhere VISA is accepted. As discussed in a previous InfoBytes post, NYDFS recently issued a virtual currency and money transmitter license to Coinbase, which permits the company to operate as a service for buying, selling, sending, receiving, and storing Bitcoin. Financial Services Superintendent Maria T. Vullo noted, “DFS has proven that the state regulatory system is the best way to supervise and cultivate a thriving fintech industry, like virtual currency. New York will remain steadfast in pushing back against federal encroachment efforts like the OCC’s proposal to impose a one-size-fits-all national bank charter that increases risk and seeks to usurp state sovereignty.”

    Fintech Digital Commerce Bitcoin NYDFS Virtual Currency

  • Virtual Currency Added to Utah’s Unclaimed Property Act

    Fintech

    In March, Utah passed SB 175 amending its Unclaimed Property Act. Among the changes incorporated through the new law was the expansion of the law’s coverage to include “virtual currency”—a term the law defines as “a digital representation of value used as a medium of exchange, unit of account, or store of value, which does not have legal tender status recognized by the United States.” Notably, this definition explicitly excludes “(i) the software or protocols governing the transfer of the digital representation of value; (ii) game-related digital content; (iii) a loyalty card; (iv) membership rewards” and “(v) a gift card.” Virtual currency subject to Utah law must be turned over to the state’s treasury after it has been “presumed abandoned” for a prescribed period of time. The law contains a detailed test for when property has been presumed abandoned, when the clock starts ticking, and under what circumstances that clock may be paused and/or reset. In a March 15 press release, Utah Treasurer David Damschen, “applauded the final passage of SB 175,” but also explained that “there are certain changes in the law related to properties held by the banking and insurance industries that we may still have to make,” including, for example “certain prepaid debit card account balances.”

    Fintech Virtual Currency State Issues Bitcoin

  • SEC Denies Application for Bitcoin ETF Due to Lack of Regulation, Potential for Manipulation

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance

    On March 10, 2017, the SEC issued an Order disapproving of a proposed rule change by the BATS BZX Exchange (“the Proposal”), which proposed to list and trade “commodity-based trust shares” issued by the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust. The Proposal, if approved, would have established a bitcoin exchange-traded fund (“ETF”) that market participants could invest in through the BATS BZX Exchange platform. Specifically, in rejecting the Proposal, the Commission emphasized the lack of regulation in the bitcoin market, noting both (i) that the BATS BZX Exchange platform “would currently be unable to enter into, the type of surveillance-sharing agreement that helps address concerns about the potential for fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices in the market for the Shares”; and (ii) that bitcoin regulation, at present, would leave a bitcoin ETF more susceptible to manipulation than an ETF comprised of other commodities, such as gold and silver. Ultimately, the Commission concluded that, “[a]bsent the ability to detect and deter manipulation of the Shares—through surveillance sharing with significant, regulated markets related to the underlying asset—the [Commission] does not believe that a national securities exchange can meet its” regulatory obligations.

    Comments submitted in response to the original BATS BZX Exchange proposed rule change can be accessed here.

    Securities Fintech Digital Commerce Bitcoin SEC Agency Rule-Making & Guidance Virtual Currency

  • OCC Chief Issues Remarks on Fintech Charter Plan; Federal Reserve Governor Highlights Virtual Currency Risks

    Fintech

    On March 6, Thomas Curry, Comptroller of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) spoke at the LendIt USA 2017 conference and addressed arguments against the regulator’s authority to provide charters to Fintech firms as presented in its December 2016 white paper, Exploring Special Purpose National Bank Charters for Fintech Companies (see InfoBytes Special Alert). Curry stated, “[T]he National Bank Act [] give[s] the OCC the legal authority to grant national bank charters to companies engaged in the business of banking,” and added that “[i]t is not circumscribed just because a company delivers banking services in new ways with innovative technology.” Curry says the OCC plans to publish a supplemental document to clarify ways it will evaluate Fintech companies that apply for charters.

    Regarding the risks posed by institutions creating their own virtual currencies, Federal Reserve’s lead governor, Jerome Powell, said in remarks made to Yale University on March 3 that the risks and technological challenges are far too high for central banks to undertake. “Any central bank actively considering issuing its own digital currency would need to carefully consider the full range of the payments system and other policy issues, which do seem substantial, as well as the potential societal benefits,” said Powell. “I would expect private-sector systems to be more forward-leaning than central banks in providing new features to the public through faster payments systems as they compete to attract retail customers,” Powell said. “A central bank-issued digital currency would compete with these and other innovative private-sector products and may stifle innovation over the long run.”

    Fintech OFAC OCC National Bank Act Virtual Currency Federal Reserve

Pages

Upcoming Events