CFPB Press Release:

http://www.consumerfinance.gov/pressrele...l-institutions/

The proposed de minimus has been set at 100 per year.

Al

Thanks, Al, for the heads up. Someone was asking about this this morning.

Thanks to your early notice, I've managed to updated the BOL Alphabet Soup version of the regulation with all the changes.

Thanks Al and John. You're so efficient and much appreciated.

so the de minimus means banks with fewer than 100 wires will be exempt from the rule?

The de minimis (note spelling) provision will mean that a bank with 100 or fewer remittance transfers of all types (wires, IATs, qualifying bill payments, etc.) in 2012 and 100 or fewer in 2013 will not be subject to subpart B requirements. If, in 2013 (or any subsequent year), it conducts the 101st remittance transfer for that year, it becomes subject to the rule, but has a 6-month compliance grace period. So, for example, if your bank does 100 or fewer remittance transfers in 2012, and conducts its 101st remittance transfer for 2013 on August 1, 2013, it will have until February 1, 2014, to begin complying (assuming it continues to be a remittance transfer provider).

Does the de minimis only count consumer wires, or do we include wires for business purpose in that count as well. I know all types of wires but Reg E is a consumer Reg. Most of our wire activity is business related, but if we count those we do more then 100 wire transfer per year. I appriciate anyone's opinion.

This is pretty mind-boggling to me. How can a bank be expected to disclose the fees that intermediary banks in the payment chain will deduct from the wire amount and also the exchange rate applied by the beneficiary's bank?

They can't be, and yet, the rule exists.

So how are we all going to comply, and how will that change our fees?

That's the million dollar question.

The ABA has asked Congress to delay the effective date for two more years for many of the reasons noted in this thread. We'll see if they have any success. Even with the temporary estimate provision, it's gonna be a bear.

Congress hasn't done anything useful in quite some time so we should not expect any relief, but it would be nice since I should be retired by then.

What public policy issue was being addressed/solved by this regulation?

As Jennawer was wondering - I too am trying to figure out if the 100 applies to consumer transactions as Reg E is a consumer reg or do we count our business activity?

The disclosures (and thus the threshold count) would only apply to consumer transactions.

Complaining here is understandable, but ineffective. Either write to the Pollyanna Agency (CFPB), discontinue the service, or contact Western Union about being an agent.

Is this meaning 100 or fewer foreign wires or 100 wires, etc. no matter where they went?

We only had 1 foreign wire last year.

100 or fewer foreign consumer purpose wires.

Note the quote...not just wires.

Epiphany: Every bank will need to count all the little puppies to prove it does not apply. Examiners with nothing else to write about will say they should have compliance procedures in place in case they do cross the threshold.

Big fun!

Note: you have six months to be in compliance once you cross that threshhold.

OK, still checking. We only did 1 foreign wire, our core processor says they don't do bill pay outside the US so I think I'm down to finding out about foreign ACH, right?

Yup, and it's only outbound IATs that you'll have to look for. If you don't allow your customers do make them....

OK the question came up concerning Paypal. Our customer buys something from someone in Japan and pays through paypal. Since the money is going from us to paypal and then they send it on does that actually count as us sending it out of the country?

In those instances, Paypal is the originator, and it's bank the ODFI. As the RDFI, these transactions would not count towards your 100.

Start by asking yourself whom did your customer ask/authorize to move the funds? In this case, it's PayPal, so your bank is not the remittance transfer provider.

Does Paypal have to comply with this mess? If not then why not direct all our consumers to use Paypal or Western Union for their foreign transfers.