This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
A legal case involving how Citi responded to customers who had money stolen via wire transfers has caused a spat between the CFPB and industry associations over the scope of the ElectronicFundTransferAct (EFTA).
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has made it easier for people to access stimulus CARES Actfunds by removing some of the legal barriers barring banks from issuing the payments through prepaid accounts, according to a press release.
Failure to comply with these regulations can lead to significant consequences, including fines and other legal actions. EFT payments have been around for many decades and have federal laws to protect the electronictransfer of funds. One such federal law is the ElectronicFundTransferAct (EFTA) , which passed in 1978.
Well, from a legal standpoint, there’s actually quite a lot. Certain regulations known as “chargeback rules” are, in fact, based on legal statutes. The ElectronicFundTransferAct (EFTA) Enacted in 1978, EFTA regulates bank responses to consumer complaints and sets liability limits for lost or stolen debit cards.
It’s meant to incentivize customers to pay using cash and reduce the costs associated with accepting electronic payment methods. Cash discount programs are legal in all states in the U.S. You can even implement both as long as you understand the legal implications. On the other hand, cash discounts are legal everywhere.
The safety and soundness of the overall financial system, coupled with the mitigation of adverse customer outcomes, remain the OCC’s top priorities generally, and in the BNPL lending market specifically.
Compliance Considerations for ACH Payments When implementing ACH payments, businesses must navigate several regulatory requirements and security standards to ensure legal and operational compliance – similar to how credit card processing requires PCI compliance. The ACH network is governed by a variety of regulatory bodies.
Its primary objectives encompass safeguarding consumers, maintaining financial stability, promoting market integrity, preventing fraud and security breaches, and ensuring legal compliance. Why Payment Regulation Exists Payment regulation exists for ensuring the integrity, stability, and equity within the payment ecosystem.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content