An official website of the United States Government
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Proposed changes to the remittance rule and an extension of rule’s effective date

Proposed changes to the remittance rule and an extension of rule’s effective date

By

Updated on August 8, 2013: The remittance rule goes into effect October 28, 2013. Visit the remittance rule page for additional information regarding the rule including the most recent updates.

Today we issued a bulletin explaining that we intend to propose certain limited adjustments to our rule on international money transfers, as well as a brief extension of the date the rule would become effective.

Some regulated entities identified issues that pose practical challenges in implementing the new law. To address these issues, next month we will propose a narrow set of changes to the remittance rule. We’ll work on a fast track to finalize changes to the rule. The proposed changes would improve implementation of the new law while keeping the important new protections for consumers intended by the Dodd-Frank Act.

The proposed changes will address what should happen if a consumer provides an incorrect account number for a transfer and how remittance providers must disclose certain third-party fees and foreign taxes. Read the bulletin for more detail about the proposed changes.

These proposed changes to the remittance rule are designed to help companies successfully implement the rule’s valuable new protections for consumers. We expect to propose extending the effective date of the rule until 90 days after we issue a final rule on these issues because we recognize that remittance providers may need time to make sure they’re in compliance with the rule. We’re expecting the new implementation date to be during spring 2013, and will keep you updated.

For more information, please see today’s bulletin.

  • Anon Banker

    Saw that FHLB NY is discontinuing international wires because of rules promulgated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This will happen at a lot of banks due to the amount of paperwork and time involved. It’s OK to try to protect the consumer, but when the requirements are very burdensome then all that happens is that consumers will have less access to services.

  • Anon II

    If the FHLB – NY doesn’t have the talent or resources to implement the proposed rule, then what does that say about the feasibility of any smaller institution being able to do so?

  • CU Staff

    The only thing this rule will accompish will be the “Big Boys” gaining a bigger share in these transfers because they are the only institutions that will be able to implement these changes with their existing open networks. That is why we are leaning heavily toward not offering international wires in the future. The costs would be too high (both financial and compliance) to continue to offer the service to our members. We charged a nominal $15 fee for an international wire. Solutions that are available to our members would cost at least three times that amount. I thought the CFPB was looking out for the consumer and “leveling the playing field”. When will government agencies see that more regulation results in higher costs to the consumer? Credit Unions and Community Banks did not cause the financial problems that exist today, stop penalizing them and their members and customers. I understand the problem with gauging people with unseen fees, but putting the exemption at 100 is a joke. It should have been about 1000.

The CFPB blog aims to facilitate conversations about our work. We want your comments to drive this conversation. Please be courteous, constructive, and on-topic. To help make the conversation productive, we encourage you to read our comment policy before posting. Comments on any post remain open for seven days from the date it was posted.