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.

  • NYDFS and French regulator sign fintech MOU

    Fintech

    On June 3, NYDFS and France’s Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to help ease fintech innovators’ entry into the New York and French markets. This is the first fintech cooperation agreement signed by the ACPR with a U.S. regulator. Under the terms of the MOU, the two regulators will (i) refer companies to one another for potential market entry; (ii) “exchange information about regulatory and policy issues”; (iii) ensure innovators in both jurisdictions receive equal levels of support; and (iv) “share regulatory and supervisory expertise and best practices.” According to NYDFS, the regulators aim to encourage and support financial innovation, enhance consumer protections, and encourage “healthy market competition in their respective markets.”

    Fintech NYDFS State Issues Of Interest to Non-US Persons France

  • Special Alert: OCC adopts final rule addressing Madden

    Federal Issues

    On Acting Comptroller of the Currency Brian Brooks’ first day in that role, the OCC issued a final rule designed to effectively reverse the Second Circuit’s 2015 Madden v. Midland Funding decision.[1] As published in yesterday’s Federal Register, the rule, titled “Permissible Interest on Loans that are Sold, Assigned, or Otherwise Transferred,” provides that “[i]nterest on a loan that is permissible under [12 U.S.C. 85 for national bank or 12 U.S.C 1463(g)(1) for federal thrifts] shall not be affected by the sale, assignment, or other transfer of the loan.” This rule contrasts with the Madden decision’s conclusion that a purchaser of a loan originated by a national bank could not charge interest at the rate permissible for the bank if that rate would be impermissible under the lower usury cap applicable to the purchaser. More specifically, the Madden court found that subjecting assignees to state usury law under these circumstances does not “significantly interfere” with the exercise of national bank powers -- the general preemption standard set forth in the Dodd Frank Act.[2]  

    Federal Issues Special Alerts OCC Madden Interest Rate Usury Fintech

  • South Carolina regulator issues interim guidance to businesses regarding payment or performance deferrals and modifications

    State Issues

    On June 1, the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs issued interim guidance regarding business activities during Covid-19, including payment or performance deferrals and modifications. The department strongly encourages persons and entities engaging in consumer credit transactions or other activities governed by the South Carolina Consumer Protection Code and subject to the department’s oversight to work with borrowers during the Covid-19 crisis and to “be practical, flexible, and empathetic.” The department also encourages businesses to adopt a number of measures related to modifications, workout strategies, waiving late fees, deferment charges, NSF fees, and certain ACH withdrawals, suspending charging off accounts, and suspending repossessions of collateral and foreclosure of real property. The interim guidance also addresses escrow accounts and electronic signatures, and sets forth additional resources for businesses and consumers.

    State Issues Covid-19 South Carolina Consumer Credit Repossession Foreclosure Mortgages Auto Finance ESIGN Fintech

  • Kansas permits temporary remote notarizations

    State Issues

    On May 26, the Kansas governor issued Executive Order 20-40, which temporarily permits notaries and witnesses to use audio-video technology for notarial acts during the state of disaster emergency. The order requires that (i) the notary public and the individual signing the document both be physically located in Kansas while performing the notarial act, (ii) the notary public identify the individual signing the document by personal knowledge or documentary evidence, and (iii) the transaction follow any guidance posted by the Kansas secretary of state on its website, among other conditions.

    State Issues Covid-19 Kansas Notary Fintech

  • Indiana updates notary public requirements

    State Issues

    Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson issued an announcement highlighting new laws and regulations regarding continuing education for notaries public, remote notary authorization, and criminal history record checks for notaries public. As of March 31, active notaries public can receive authorization to conduct remote notarizations if they submit an application, complete an educational course, pay a $100 fee, and contract with an approved technology vendor. The new laws relating to continuing education and criminal history record checks take effect on July 1.

    State Issues Covid-19 Indiana Notary Fintech

  • Texas regulator extends reporting deadlines for property tax lenders, urges working with borrowers

    State Issues

    On May 13, the Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner revised an advisory bulletin (previously discussed here) for property tax lenders, which sets forth guidance regarding annual report deadlines, electronic signatures, activity from unlicensed locations, and working with borrowers, including by increasing communications, working out modifications, waving late charges, and suspending foreclosures, among other things.

    State Issues Covid-19 Texas Property Tax Lending ESIGN Fintech Foreclosure Mortgages

  • Tennessee governor extends authorization of remote notarization

    State Issues

    On May 12, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee issued Executive Order No. 37 allowing for remote notarizations and witnessing of documents until June 30, thereby extending the relief previously granted in Executive Order No. 26, which was set to expire on May 18. 

    State Issues Covid-19 Tennessee Notary Fintech

  • Arkansas Insurance Department issues bulletin to insurers regarding compliance and licensing

    State Issues

    On May 11, the Arkansas Insurance Department issued a bulletin regarding compliance and licensing for admitted and surplus lines insurance carriers doing business in Arkansas. Insurers and other regulated entities are advised that they must continue to expeditiously adjust claims during Covid-19. The bulletin also provides guidance on regulatory filing deadlines, the permissibility of electronic filings and signatures, the status of on-site examinations by the department, license renewals, and continuing education deadlines. 

    State Issues Covid-19 Arkansas Insurance Compliance Licensing ESIGN Fintech Examination

  • Virginia regulator extends procedural orders requiring electronic service and filing

    State Issues

    On May 11, the Virginia State Corporation Commission issued an order extending its earlier procedural orders that modify its operating and service of order procedures to permit electronic service of commission orders and electronic filing of certain business documents (previously covered here).

    State Issues Covid-19 Virginia Fintech

  • California small business sues nonbank lender over PPP prioritization

    Federal Issues

    On May 6, a small California business filed a proposed class action against a nonbank lender, accusing the lender of a “scheme to enrich itself at the expense of small businesses in connection with the federal government’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP),” in violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law. In the complaint, the plaintiff alleges she submitted an application for less than $25,000 to the lender on March 28 and received an email response that same day acknowledging receipt of her application. On March 29, the plaintiff received another email from the lender, which asked her to gather documentation and stated that she would receive an invitation to a secure portal in the next “48 business hours.” According to the complaint, however, by April 13, the plaintiff had not yet received a link to the portal, but the lender had sent an email acknowledging the delay. The complaint states that the plaintiff “informed and believes, and on that basis alleges” that the lender “chose to prioritize higher loans that would yield higher fees,” and did not disclose to the public that “it was prioritizing loans not on a first come, first served basis, but on criteria relating to the value of the loan.” The plaintiff alleges she would have chosen a different lender had she known the lender was going to prioritize larger loans. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, restitution, as well as compensatory and punitive damages.

    Federal Issues Covid-19 Courts SBA Small Business Lending Fintech Nonbank State Issues California

Pages

Upcoming Events