Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

CFPB Updates Exam Procedures for Remittance Transfers

Higher Education_1200x600_0002_iStock-854446566
By Keith J. Barnett, Ethan G. Ostroff & Carlin McCrory on February 24, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On February 14, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) updated its Supervision and Examinations Manual to reflect changes it made to the Remittance Transfer Rule (Rule) in a final rule published on June 5, 2020. The changes made to Subpart B of Regulation E, effective July 21, 2020, (1) increased the Rule’s safe harbor for compliance from 100 remittance transfers to 500 remittance transfers annually and (2) created two new permanent exceptions that permit insured institutions to disclose estimates of particular fees and exchange rates if certain conditions are met.

The Dodd-Frank Act amended the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and created a new system of consumer protections for remittance transfers sent by consumers in the United States to individuals and businesses in foreign countries. On February 7, 2012, the CFPB published Subpart B (Requirements for Remittance Transfers) to Regulation E to implement the new remittance protections set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act (77 Fed. Reg. 6194). Under Regulation E, a financial institution subject to the remittance transfer requirements must provide the sender with both a pre-payment disclosure (when the consumer first requests a transfer and before the sender is required to pay for the remittance transfer) and a receipt (after the sender makes payment for the remittance transfer). These disclosures include the exchange rate, fees charged by a third party in connection with the transfer, etc.

The safe harbor states that only entities that have provided 500 or fewer remittance transfers in both the current calendar year and the prior calendar year will not be subject to remittance transfer requirements.

The first permanent exception allows insured institutions to estimate the exchange rate and other disclosures that depend on the exchange rate, provided several conditions are met: (1) The sender is requesting to send the remittance transfer from her account at the insured institution; (2) the exact exchange rate for the remittance transfer cannot be determined by the insured institution at the time the disclosures must be made; and (3) in the prior calendar year, the insured institution sent 1,000 or fewer remittance transfers to the particular country to which the remittance transfer in question is being sent.

The second permanent exception permits insured institutions to estimate covered third-party fees and other disclosures that depend on covered third-party fees in connection with a remittance transfer only if (1) the sender is requesting to send the remittance transfer from her account at the insured institution; (2) the insured institution cannot determine the exact third-party fees required to be disclosed at the time of the remittance transfer; and (3) in the prior calendar year, the insured institution sent 500 or fewer remittance transfers to the particular country to which the remittance transfer in question is being sent.

Photo of Keith J. Barnett Keith J. Barnett

Keith Barnett is a litigation, investigations (internal and regulatory), and enforcement attorney with more than 15 years of experience representing clients in the financial services and professional liability industries.

Read more about Keith J. BarnettEmailKeith's Linkedin Profile
Photo of Ethan G. Ostroff Ethan G. Ostroff

Ethan specializes in the defense of consumer actions, including class and mass actions, general business litigation, as well as regulatory compliance.

Read more about Ethan G. OstroffEmailEthan G.'s Linkedin Profile
Photo of Carlin McCrory Carlin McCrory

Carlin is a regulatory, compliance, and payments attorney with experience representing financial institutions, fintechs, lenders, debt collectors, payment processors, neobanks, virtual currency companies, and mortgage servicers.

Read more about Carlin McCroryEmail
  • Posted in:
    Civil Litigation, Corporate Compliance
  • Blog:
    Regulatory Oversight
  • Organization:
    Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Pro Policyholder
  • The Way on FDA
  • Crypto Digest
  • Inside Cybersecurity & Privacy Law
  • La Oficina Legal Ayala Hernández
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo