Rulemaking

We held a live session on October 16th to talk about the new requirements for remittance transfer providers.

The rule to implement the consumer protections created by the Dodd-Frank Act for certain electronic transfers of funds to other countries – the remittance rule – will go into effect on February 7, 2013.

You can read CFPB Director Richard Cordray’s full remarks and see the remittance rule presentation slides from the event.

If you missed the event, you can watch below:

The rule to implement the consumer protections created by the Dodd-Frank Act for certain electronic transfers of funds to other countries – the remittance rule – will go into effect on February 7, 2013. We’re undertaking a number of efforts to help industry understand and comply with the new requirements. These include: releasing a list of countries and other areas to which a particular exception to the rule’s disclosure requirements applies, hosting a webinar, answering specific questions, and releasing a small business guide.

What is the countries list?

The remittance rule generally requires disclosure of, among other things, exact amounts to be received in a foreign currency, fees, and taxes, but estimates of these amounts are permitted in several situations. One situation where estimates are allowed is when the provider cannot determine exact amounts because of the laws of the recipient country. We are interpreting the exception regarding the laws of a recipient country to apply to these countries and other areas.

Webinar October 16th

Join us for a free, 90 minute webinar about the new requirements for remittance transfer providers on October 16th at 2:30 p.m. EST. We’ll give an overview of the rule and answer questions about compliance.

The webinar should be useful for money transmitters, banks, credit unions, and other companies that send money abroad for consumers, as well as other organizations that work with or represent consumers who send money abroad. Agents, software providers, foreign banks and others involved in international fund transfers from the United States may also be interested.

• RSVP by October 9 to CFPB_RemittanceRule@cfpb.gov to reserve your spot.
• Send your question about the rule by October 5 to CFPB_RemittanceRule@cfpb.gov. We will answer as many questions as we can during the webinar.

Small business guide

In the coming weeks, we will release a small business compliance guide to give more help to smaller entities that have to comply with the rule.

Questions?

While we expect to answer many questions at the webinar, our team can also answer additional questions about the rule. You can reach us at (202) 435-7700.

One part of our proposed rule to improve the disclosures consumers receive when applying for and closing on a mortgage was a change to the current definition of “finance charge.” The finance charge is intended to reflect the cost of credit for consumers as a dollar amount. It’s used to calculate the Annual Percentage Rate or “APR.”

The proposed rule would eliminate numerous exceptions that exclude common costs (such as title insurance) from the finance charge. We want APR to be a more accurate reflection of the overall cost of credit. However, higher APRs and finance charges could affect the number of loans subject to other legal requirements and protections, such as special disclosures and restrictions for high-cost mortgages. In another rulemaking, we also proposed an adjustment that would prevent that from happening, by changing the coverage test for the high-cost mortgage protections to account for the higher APRs.

Comments on the proposed changes to the definition of the finance charge and the proposed change to the high-cost mortgage coverage test were originally due on September 7, 2012. Based on the feedback received, the Bureau now believes that it is appropriate to provide the public with additional time to prepare their comments. These comments are now due November 6, 2012. All other deadlines under both proposed rules remain unchanged.

For more information about the extensions, please see:

• Notice of Comment Extension for proposed changes to the definition of the finance charge
• Notice of Comment Extension on whether and how to account for the implications of a more inclusive finance charge on the scope of HOEPA coverage

Your opinion is important – weigh in now.

As we talked about on Friday, the Bureau is trying to put the customer service back in mortgage servicing. We are proposing nine rules to address issues that consumers face when paying their mortgage loans, dealing with escrow accounts, or figuring out what to do when they have fallen behind on their loans. We want to get rid of surprises and runarounds by servicers, which are often hired by creditors and investors to manage home loans.

You may not know this, but getting comments from the public – you – is an essential part of the agency rulemaking process. Federal law generally requires that the public get an opportunity to read a proposed rule and submit comments before the rule is finalized. Agencies publish the proposed rules in the Federal Register.

All too often, this opportunity passes, and the public doesn’t weigh in. This, in part, is because not everybody skims the Federal Register every day.

We want to make it easier for consumers and small businesses to tell us what they think about the rules that we are working on. To do that, we’ve partnered with Cornell University, which has launched a project called Regulation Room as part of the Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative, to get your take on our new proposed mortgage servicing rules.

RegulationRoom.org is not a government website. It is operated by students and staff at Cornell, with the goal of making it easy for people to participate in the rulemaking process. They are researching how to remove barriers to public participation, and we are excited to be partnering with them.

• First, the Cornell folks realized that all too often, the public is unaware of the rule-writing process, so they are spreading the word through a social media campaign.
• Next, they realized that most members of the public are not interested in reading a Federal Register notice that may easily be 100 pages or more. They use “layering” of information so you can quickly get an overview, but have the ability to dive deeper if you are interested in a particular point or subtopic.
• Also, they realized rulemakings involve complicated issues that can benefit from dialogue rather than just one-time letter writing. Besides presenting the information, Regulation Room hosts a forum for discussion. Even better, the forum is moderated to help answer questions and get more detailed information and feedback. Feel free to say that you do or don’t like our rule, but be prepared for a moderator to ask you to be more specific: Why do you feel that way? How could it be improved?
• Finally, they realized that most members of the public are unfamiliar with the formal commenting process at Regulations.gov (the official government site). So Regulation Room presents information and conducts a conversation right when a proposed rule first comes out, and then closes its forum down about a week before the end of the comment period so that the Cornell team can assemble all the feedback they have received into an official comment. People who have participated get one last chance to react to the summary before it is submitted formally to the CFPB through regulations.gov. And, like all other formal comments, we will read and consider it.

We are excited about this project for two reasons.

First: We really do want to hear what you think of our proposals on mortgage servicing.

Second: We want to learn as much as possible from this experience about how to get more public feedback in future rulemakings.

So head on over to Regulation Room and let us know what you think!

Dear CFPB,

Recently, I saw your notice of proposed rulemaking to combine and simplify existing mortgage disclosures. It’s 1,099 pages long! Why does it take so many pages to create something that’s supposed to be easy to use and understand?

Sincerely,
Interested in your regulations

Dear Interested,

This is a great question, one you’re not alone in asking — 1,099 is a lot of pages, as those of us who were involved in writing them can attest.

Let’s start with some background. Currently, two federal laws – the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) – mandate that consumers receive disclosures of certain information about mortgage loans. The Dodd-Frank Act required the CFPB to propose a rule to combine the TILA and RESPA disclosures.

If you want to see the new combined disclosures, combine and simplify existing mortgage disclosures check them out here. If you want to see what the proposal means for you, we’ve provided summaries, one on what it would mean for consumers and one with more technical detail.

You said “propose a rule to combine the disclosures” instead of just “propose combined disclosures.” Why?
It’s an important distinction. The rule explains how we would expect industry to use the disclosures: when to issue them, how they apply to different loans, what various terms mean, etc.

And that proposed rule is 1,099 pages?
Actually, no. We are not proposing 1,099 pages of new regulations. That page count is for the notice of the proposed rule, not the rule. Like notices of proposed rulemaking issued by other agencies (particularly the Federal Reserve Board), our proposal consists of three basic parts: (1) the preamble explaining the proposal; (2) the text of the proposed regulations; and (3) guidance on how to comply with those regulations.

In terms of pages, the new regulations are only a small part. Most of the pages explain what we are doing and why we are doing it. As required by law, we analyze the costs and benefits of the proposal for consumers and industry. We also provide thorough guidance on how to comply including samples of completed forms, which the industry requested during our outreach and Small Business Review Panel process. Because of the variability of mortgage loan and real estate transactions, industry wanted specific guidance for many different potential scenarios. This added to the page count.

Here’s how the notice breaks down:

Content	Pages
Preamble Directions on how to submit comments Summary of the proposed rule Overview of the mortgage market and the mortgage shopping process Summary of 43 years of TILA and RESPA mortgage disclosure regulation Summary of the Dodd-Frank Act provisions requiring the Bureau to combine the TILA and RESPA mortgage disclosures and related Dodd-Frank Act mortgage rulemakings Summary of the Bureau’s outreach, disclosure testing, and Small Business Review Panel Statement of the Bureau’s legal authority Detailed explanations of the reasons for each aspect of the proposed rule and requests for comment Analyses of the costs and benefits of the proposed rule for consumers and industry, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act), and the Paperwork Reduction Act	684
Proposed amendments to regulations New rules Technical and conforming amendments to existing rules	209
Proposed guidance regarding compliance with the amended regulations	205
Signature page	1
TOTAL	1,099

The preamble is long.
It is. The preamble provides context for the proposed forms and regulatory changes. The mortgage market is big, and mortgage disclosure regulation has 43 years of history. Also, before writing the rule, we spent a lot of time talking to industry and consumers and analyzing costs and benefits. That’s a lot of context, and that means a long preamble.

Why bother with all this context?
First, some of it is required by law. Second, we believe that part of our commitment to open government is providing more rather than less information about our work. Finally, we want your comments to help us understand the market better, and providing context can lead to more informative comments. Explaining what we considered in writing the proposal makes it easier to craft specific responses or to draw our attention to something you think we’ve missed. Comments that provide new insight or information can be the ones that have the greatest impact on what we do next.

That leaves 415 pages. Only part of that is new rules, though. What else is left?
The technical and conforming amendments make sure the new rules don’t conflict with existing rules, that they make the right cross-references, etc. This actually accounts for more than half of the proposed regulatory language.

The proposed guidance explains what certain regulatory language means in context. For example, the phrase “within three business days” appears a lot in this notice, as in: a creditor must deliver the loan estimate disclosure “within three business days” of application. But what counts as a business day? If a bank is closed the Friday before an Independence Day that falls on Saturday, does that Friday count as a business day? (Answer for purposes of delivery of this disclosure: yes.) Providing guidance that clarifies issues like these can save time, energy, and costs for both industry and regulators.

And the signature gets its own page?
Yes. We don’t expect a lot of comments on that page.

So where can I comment on this notice of proposed rulemaking?
First, we hope you’ll take a look at the Know Before You Owe project that helped us develop the proposed disclosures. Then, review the rule and submit your comments at Regulations.gov.

Today, we are posting a semi-annual update of the CFPB’s rulemaking agenda. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not published the full federal Unified Agenda yet, but this is the version we submitted to OMB.

Federal agencies typically release regulatory agendas twice a year. Each spring and fall, OMB works with the agencies to compile a list that outlines the rulemaking activities of all federal agencies for the coming 12-month cycle. It also includes recently-completed rulemakings. Cumulatively, the list is called the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions.

As an independent agency, we voluntarily participate in the Unified Agenda process. When OMB finalizes the spring 2012 Unified Agenda for the federal government as a whole, it will be published at www.reginfo.gov. To give the public additional time to consider our work prior to that, today we’re posting our final submission.

The CFPB’s agenda primarily includes rulemakings mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. For example, we are working on several mortgage-related rules and rules to implement our supervisory program for certain non-bank entities. This includes two proposed rulemakings that we published for comment on Monday, July 9, relating to the Bureau’s Know Before You Owe mortgage disclosure integration project and setting forth new protections for high-cost mortgages. This also includes an initial rule to define nonbank “larger participants” that are subject to examination. The Bureau is publishing today a final rule regarding the Bureau’s supervision of larger participants in the credit reporting marketplace. We are also seeking your input on an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking about the consumer general purpose reloadable prepaid card market.

Beyond specific rulemaking activity, we continue to work on a variety of initiatives that address issues in consumer financial markets. For example, last month we joined several other financial regulators in a memorandum of understanding to clarify the coordination of our supervision efforts. And Director Cordray recently met with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and ten college presidents to finalize a commitment by those college and university systems to present clear financial aid offer information to all incoming students. They’re modeling this effort on the Financial Aid Shopping Sheet that the Department of Education and the CFPB developed last fall.

Stay tuned in this space for further semi-annual updates to the Bureau’s rulemaking calendar as we look ahead to 2013.