LIVE BLOG of the U.S. House hearing on UIGEA regulations

[vinism]

Rep. Sherman is up wondering why credit card system to code transaction won't work for other payment systems.

Roseman: If you look at the check system, there is no code, or no capablity to have such a code put in. It would be very difficult to extend the credit card concept to wires or checks systems.

Sherman: Why doesn't money laundering processes work?

Roseman: Money laundering is global concern. Banks around the world cooperate. But the banking industries in countries where gambling is legal have no reason to work on this.

Sherman: So we might have to cut ties with small Caribbean coutnries?

Roseman: It goes much beyond that.

Sherman: What's the largest economy that sanction online gambling?

Roseman: I don't know off the top of my head?

Vinism note: Apparently, they've never heard of the U.K. or the EU.

[vinism]

Chairman Guittierrez tells witnesses to be careful with the regulations. This is a very difficult issue.

[vinism]

The hearing is back after a lunch and vote break.

[vinism]

Up now: Ms. Harriet May, President and Chief Executive Officer, GECU of El Paso, Texas on behalf of the Credit Union National Association

[vinism]

Says compliance under act difficult if not impossible.

[vinism]

Credit unions are already under extraordinary regulations and this (UIGEA) just adds to it.

[vinism]

Supports Frank regulation bill.

[vinism]

Says certainty needed on which transactions are permissible. Monitoring and analyzing transaction patterns are time consuming and take away from core responsibilities.

[vinism]

Need clear guidance for what is "reasonable."

[vinism]

Wants institutions to have at least 18 months to institute any regulations. Asks that the regulations not be finalized and Congress take action to give financial institutions relief.

[vinism]

Up now: Mr. Wayne A. Abernathy, Executive Vice President, Financial Institutions Policy and Regulatory Affairs, American Bankers Association

[vinism]

Says UIGEA take banks beyond the role of reporting suspicious activities to become the police, law and judge. The ABA believes punting this responsibility has no practical chance of success. And that they payment system can't handle this responsibility. At the core of the problem is the lack of a definition of unlawful gambling. "This is not a reasonable undertaking." It's one thing to report suspicious activities, it's another for a bank to act on its own judgment and impose penalties." Identifying customers engaged in unlawful internet gambling is very difficult. Entirely depend on information obtained form the customers. Customer won't be upfront, so it won't work. There are realistic limits to how the payment system can be used to stop Internet gambling. And the propose regulations don't provide a rational path for it. And they add burdens.

[vinism]

Up now:

Mr. Leigh Williams, BITS President, The Financial Services Roundtable

[vinism]

He's concerned that policing activity is reaching a point of diminishing returns. Doesn't like the fact that banks are all adopting their own guidelines, that nothing is uniform. If institutions are given policing powers, they need a liability shied.

[vinism]

Up now:

Mr. Ted Teruo Kitada, Senior Company Counsel, Legal Group, Wells Fargo & Co.

[vinism]

He doesn't like the definition of Unlawful Internet Gambling. Says it's not clearly defined. By referencing state laws in definition, bank is required to be in compliance of those laws. Wells Fargo has 1.2 million credit transaction, 11 million checks, 25-30 thousand wire transfers and 5-6k to foreign banks and 3.1 billion debit transactions. Monitoring those transactions is a significant undertaking. Has 24 consumer customer and 1.8 business customers and the rules will apply to them. Under the Patriot Act, we have been complying with the due diligence regulations, but there are still a significant number that we don't have extensive information on because it's not required by the Act. With respect to foreign banks, we believe that amendments to deals with foreign banks will be needed (over 200).

[vinism]

Ron Paul up again. Wants to know potential costs for compliance. He also wants to know about the record-keeping aspect of this and wonders if its too much data that ends up clogging the system. He's also asking about the burden of the banks responsibility is legal or illegal.

[vinism]

ABA guy says the legal/illegal question is the key. Not only do banks have to determine legality, but they also have to impose a sentence (cancel account, suspend account, etc.). ABA says that's a step to far. In terms of cost, it is difficult to put a cost on something that isn't in place yet. But $100 million bank has 2-3 employees that deal with bank secrecy compliance. That could be the case here. Plus, we don't know what is unlawful. That makes it close to impossible.

[vinism]

Fashion note: Ted Teruo Kitada is wearing the weirdest yellow ruffle tie I've ever seen. Almost like a fan tie instead of a bow tie.

[vinism]

ABA: Banks will either have to cut off either all transactions that might be suspicious, or ask really intrusive questions.