The Defense Department is issuing a proposed rule, "Limitations on Terms of Consumer Credit Extended to Serve Members and Dependents." It will be published in the April 11, 2007, Federal Register.

BankersOnline sent out a Special Briefing on the proposal on Tuesday, April 10.

Check it out!

Thanks, John. I just read the article. This is a classic example of our recent society trying to protect every special interest group from itself. This is so unnecessary and bad law, that words just do no justice to this case. There is absolutely no reason to burden the banking industry with this proposal. The TILA is more than adequate to protect the consumer and inform him of what he is entering into with any credit transaction. Where is the need? Where is the benefit? Why does the DoD believe it needs this additional protection, beyond Reg. Z. I just don't believe its good law. This additional burden, the "MAPR" is laughable and ridiculous to say the least and can only lead to more confusion. What about being responsible for one's own actions for a change. Or, how about having every special interest group having it own set of rules the bank must follow, i.e. the police department, fire fighters, teachers, even the lawyers. I'm absoultely against this proposal, totally.

Whether we like it or not, service members and their dependents do become victimized by unscrupulous lenders. Some of these folks get pulled into debt spirals that they can't break out of because they are easy prey. Tax refund anticipation loans, payday lending, usurious fees, useless add-ons, inadequate underwriting and continuous refinancing all have adverse effects on military families. Some of these service members have gotten into such financial trouble as to compromise their security clearances, rendering them less fit for duty.

These are the good men and women we depend upon to defend our country.

How about simply a law making it illegal for service members and their dependents to obtain credit other than from the Military Credit Unions.

How does making a law that dictates where service members get their loans helpful? If that was the case, these financial insitutions (there are military banks also) could charge whatever they wanted to the service members, since they can't get a loan anywhere else. That totally defeats the purpose.

While I agree it shouldn't be applied to regulated financial institutions, I think it's a great idea for those other lenders that take advantage of situations.

I think some people need a little more sympathy for our enlisted military.

I do not think that this law should apply only to enlisted's and their families...protections like this should be applied across the board to all people who may become victimized by unscrupulous lenders.

To just protect one class of people based on their profession and not protect everyone who may fall prey to these schemes appears to be discrimitory in my eyes. Why not apply these rules to anyone living up to 150% of the poverty level too?

This discussion belies the main problem with our society, we try ti make too many excuses for everyone's problems, instead of addressing the "real truths". Sure, there are abuses, but just like HOEPA, the banking industry was not the problem, it the NBFI's. The bankers should get a break on this one. The DoD should consider an exemption to FI's, period. We have too many laws and regs. many of which already address servicemembers and gives them a break on the interest rate, i.e. SCRA. What else could they want or need?