§ 1005.12 Relation to other laws.
(a) Relation to Truth in Lending.
1. Determining applicable regulation. i. For transactions involving access devices that also function as credit cards, whether Regulation E or Regulation Z (12 CFR part 1026) applies depends on the nature of the transaction. For example, if the transaction solely involves an extension of credit, and does not include a debit to a checking account (or other consumer asset account), the liability limitations and error resolution requirements of Regulation Z apply. If the transaction debits a checking account only (with no credit extended), the provisions of Regulation E apply. If the transaction debits a checking account but also draws on an overdraft line of credit attached to the account, Regulation E's liability limitations apply, in addition to §§ 1026.13(d) and (g) of Regulation Z (which apply because of the extension of credit associated with the overdraft feature on the checking account). If a consumer's access device is also a credit card and the device is used to make unauthorized withdrawals from a checking account, but also is used to obtain unauthorized cash advances directly from a line of credit that is separate from the checking account, both Regulation E and Regulation Z apply.
ii. The following examples illustrate these principles:
A. A consumer has a card that can be used either as a credit card or a debit card. When used as a debit card, the card draws on the consumer's checking account. When used as a credit card, the card draws only on a separate line of credit. If the card is stolen and used as a credit card to make purchases or to get cash advances at an ATM from the line of credit, the liability limits and error resolution provisions of Regulation Z apply; Regulation E does not apply.
B. In the same situation, if the card is stolen and is used as a debit card to make purchases or to get cash withdrawals at an ATM from the checking account, the liability limits and error resolution provisions of Regulation E apply; Regulation Z does not apply.
C. In the same situation, assume the card is stolen and used both as a debit card and as a credit card; for example, the thief makes some purchases using the card as a debit card, and other purchases using the card as a credit card. Here, the liability limits and error resolution provisions of Regulation E apply to the unauthorized transactions in which the card was used as a debit card, and the corresponding provisions of Regulation Z apply to the unauthorized transactions in which the card was used as a credit card.
D. Assume a somewhat different type of card, one that draws on the consumer's checking account and can also draw on an overdraft line of credit attached to the checking account. There is no separate line of credit, only the overdraft line, associated with the card. In this situation, if the card is stolen and used, the liability limits and the error resolution provisions of Regulation E apply. In addition, if the use of the card has resulted in accessing the overdraft line of credit, the error resolution provisions of §§ 1026.13(d) and (g) of Regulation Z also apply, but not the other error resolution provisions of Regulation Z.
2. Issuance rules. For access devices that also constitute credit cards, the issuance rules of Regulation E apply if the only credit feature is a preexisting credit line attached to the asset account to cover overdrafts (or to maintain a specified minimum balance) or an overdraft service, as defined in § 1005.17(a). Regulation Z (12 CFR part 1026) rules apply if there is another type of credit feature; for example, one permitting direct extensions of credit that do not involve the asset account.
3. Overdraft service. The addition of an overdraft service, as that term is defined in § 1005.17(a), to an accepted access device does not constitute the addition of a credit feature subject to Regulation Z. Instead, the provisions of Regulation E apply, including the liability limitations (§ 1005.6) and the requirement to obtain consumer consent to the service before any fees or charges for paying an overdraft may be assessed on the account (§ 1005.17).
(1) The Electronic Fund Transfer Act and this part govern:
(i) The addition to an accepted credit card, as defined in Regulation Z (12 CFR 1026.12, comment 12-2), of the capability to initiate electronic fund transfers;
(ii) The issuance of an access device that permits credit extensions (under a preexisting agreement between a consumer and a financial institution) only when the consumer's account is overdrawn or to maintain a specified minimum balance in the consumer's account, or under an overdraft service, as defined in § 1005.17(a) of this part;
(iii) The addition of an overdraft service, as defined in § 1005.17(a), to an accepted access device; and
(iv) A consumer's liability for an unauthorized electronic fund transfer and the investigation of errors involving an extension of credit that occurs under an agreement between the consumer and a financial institution to extend credit when the consumer's account is overdrawn or to maintain a specified minimum balance in the consumer's account, or under an overdraft service, as defined in § 1005.17(a).
(2) The Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z (12 CFR part 1026), which prohibit the unsolicited issuance of credit cards, govern:
(i) The addition of a credit feature to an accepted access device; and
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, the issuance of a credit card that is also an access device.
(b) Preemption of inconsistent state laws —
1. Specific determinations. The regulation prescribes standards for determining whether state laws that govern EFTs, and state laws regarding gift certificates, store gift cards, or general-use prepaid cards that govern dormancy, inactivity, or service fees, or expiration dates, are preempted by the Act and the regulation. A state law that is inconsistent may be preempted even if the Bureau has not issued a determination. However, nothing in § 1005.12(b) provides a financial institution with immunity for violations of state law if the institution chooses not to make state disclosures and the Bureau later determines that the state law is not preempted.
2. Preemption determination. The Bureau recognizes state law preemption determinations made by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System prior to July 21, 2011, until and unless the Bureau makes and publishes any contrary determination. The Board of Governors determined that certain provisions in the state law of Michigan are preempted by the Federal law, effective March 30, 1981:
i. Definition of unauthorized use. Section 5(4) is preempted to the extent that it relates to the section of state law governing consumer liability for unauthorized use of an access device.
ii. Consumer liability for unauthorized use of an account. Section 14 is inconsistent with § 1005.6 and is less protective of the consumer than the Federal law. The state law places liability on the consumer for the unauthorized use of an account in cases involving the consumer's negligence. Under the Federal law, a consumer's liability for unauthorized use is not related to the consumer's negligence and depends instead on the consumer's promptness in reporting the loss or theft of the access device.
iii. Error resolution. Section 15 is preempted because it is inconsistent with § 1005.11 and is less protective of the consumer than the Federal law. The state law allows financial institutions up to 70 days to resolve errors, whereas the Federal law generally requires errors to be resolved within 45 days.
iv. Receipts and periodic statements. Sections 17 and 18 are preempted because they are inconsistent with § 1005.9. The state provisions require a different disclosure of information than does the Federal law. The receipt provision is also preempted because it allows the consumer to be charged for receiving a receipt if a machine cannot furnish one at the time of a transfer.
(1) Inconsistent requirements. The Bureau shall determine, upon its own motion or upon the request of a state, financial institution, or other interested party, whether the Act and this part preempt state law relating to electronic fund transfers, or dormancy, inactivity, or service fees, or expiration dates in the case of gift certificates, store gift cards, or general-use prepaid cards.
(2) Standards for determination. State law is inconsistent with the requirements of the Act and this part if state law:
(i) Requires or permits a practice or act prohibited by the Federal law;
(ii) Provides for consumer liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers that exceeds the limits imposed by the Federal law;
(iii) Allows longer time periods than the Federal law for investigating and correcting alleged errors, or does not require the financial institution to credit the consumer's account during an error investigation in accordance with § 1005.11(c)(2)(i) of this part; or
(iv) Requires initial disclosures, periodic statements, or receipts that are different in content from those required by the Federal law except to the extent that the disclosures relate to consumer rights granted by the state law and not by the Federal law.
(c) State exemptions —
(1) General rule. Any state may apply for an exemption from the requirements of the Act or this part for any class of electronic fund transfers within the state. The Bureau shall grant an exemption if it determines that:
(i) Under state law the class of electronic fund transfers is subject to requirements substantially similar to those imposed by the Federal law; and
(ii) There is adequate provision for state enforcement.
(2) Exception. To assure that the Federal and state courts continue to have concurrent jurisdiction, and to aid in implementing the Act:
(i) No exemption shall extend to the civil liability provisions of section 916 of the Act; and
(ii) When the Bureau grants an exemption, the state law requirements shall constitute the requirements of the Federal law for purposes of section 916 of the Act, except for state law requirements not imposed by the Federal law.