Legislature(2007 - 2008)BELTZ 211
04/03/2007 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB116 | |
| SB124 | |
| SB115 | |
| HB34 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 124 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 115 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 116-UNIFORM MONEY SERVICES ACT
CHAIR ELLIS announced SB 116 to be up for its second committee
hearing and that it had a new CS.
1:36:55 PM
SENATOR STEVENS joined the committee.
SENATOR KIM ELTON, sponsor of SB 116, and his staff, Jesse Kiel,
took the committee through the CS.
SENATOR ELTON said the money transfer industry brought this to
his attention. It provides regulations of the industry to induce
good behavior. It has as its purpose, not only consumer
protection and guaranteeing good services to people who use
money transfers, but an element of homeland security. It allows
better tracking of money that is transferred from the U.S. to
foreign countries.
1:38:11 PM
SENATOR BETTYE DAVIS joined the committee.
SENATOR KIM ELTON said SB 116 is supported by consumer
protection agencies and industry as well as the Department of
Commerce, Community & Economic Development. It has a fiscal note
of $80,000, but the fees collected from industry support the
function and there is no general fund impact.
1:39:22 PM
SENATOR BUNDE joined the committee.
SENATOR STEVENS asked if the consumer would be paying more to
cover the costs and what other impacts would be on the consumer
if this bill passes.
SENATOR ELTON said this should not cost the consumer anything,
but if it does, it won't be much and in return the consumer gets
a guarantee that the money they are transferring is going to get
there and will have the value they expect it to have when it
does arrive.
CHAIR ELLIS asked Mr. Kiel to review the proposed CS to SB 116,
Bannister 4/3/07 version K.
1:41:09 PM
JESSE KIEL, staff to Senator Elton, reviewed version K, starting
with the significant changes. The first was a question of
interpretation that was brought to their attention by the
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development staff
who noted that the Uniform Money Services Act was subject to a
possible interpretation that a money transmitter who originally
gets his licensure in another jurisdiction that has adopted this
uniform act might not have to pay fees in Alaska. According to
the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws
as well as Mr. Levine, who testified last week on behalf of the
large money transmitters, both of them said that was never their
intent. So, this CS makes it clear that a money transmitter who
gets his license by virtue of prior licensure in another state
with this law is subject to the fees and all the requirements
for filing and renewals and is potentially subject to
investigation just as thought they were originally licensed in
Alaska. It will be a much less cumbersome initial licensure
process for them, because another state under comparable law has
done the due diligence and the homework; however it won't be
free ride. Changes were also made to the definition section to
address that and make it very clear.
1:43:11 PM
MR. KIEL said the significant changes to AS O6.55.810 begin on
page 25, line 7. This section of the bill would require a notice
to consumers anywhere money services are provided whether
through an authorized delegate or directed by a licensee. A sign
needs to go up showing the business is regulated and giving
contact information for the department in case there are
complaints or questions.
Section 06.55.820 simply requires timely transmission. He
explained that the industry has been trending more and more in
recent years towards instant transfers where money is
transmitted immediately to a bank account. This takes in to
account the possibility the consumer might order a faster
service through a money transmitter, but in the more traditional
money transmission services, it's got to be available to the
destination within 10 days.
MR. KIEL explained that the receipt and refund portions work
together and they say that a consumer needs to get on paper a
statement that says how much money was transmitted, what the
fees were and either what the exchange rate is if it's being
transmitted and will be picked up in a different currency or if
the exchange rate floats, it's got to say (on page 26, line 4)
how that works. He said the bill doesn't interfere with how
money service businesses choose to set their exchange rates -
whether they are fixed or whether they float. "It simply says
the consumer has got to know."
1:45:22 PM
SENATOR BUNDE said 10 days seems like an inordinately long time
for a transfer of funds. He asked how that time frame was
chosen.
MR. KIEL replied that both Hawaii and Washington states adopted
that language. Many small money transmitters specialize in a
particular region of the world and offer extremely competitive
rates. Ten days should be the absolute outside extreme for any
money transmission. Customers might be willing to accept a
slower service for a lesser fee.
SENATOR ELTON wanted to standardize this licensure as much as
possible, so that people don't have to review individual state
laws and deal with them differently. The 10 day time frame is a
ceiling and in these days of hyperinflation, you do want it to
happen as fast as possible. "It's not arbitrary; it's kind of
what the standard is out there that other states have
established."
1:47:57 PM
SENATOR STEVENS moved to adopt CSSB 116(L&C), version K. There
were no objections and it was so ordered.
1:48:39 PM
SENATOR STEVENS moved to pass CSSB 116(L&C) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. There was
no discussion or objection and CSSB 116(L&C) moved from
committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|