Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 75825 

1Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). 

2These agencies are: The Board of Governors of 

the Federal Reserve System (Board), the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Federal 

Trade Commission (FTC), the National Credit 

Union Administration (NCUA), the Office of the 

Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Office of 

Thrift Supervision (OTS), and the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 

3On July 21, 2011, the Bureau published a list of 

the rules and orders that it will enforce. See 76 FR 

43569 (July 21, 2011). The Bureau assumed 

rulemaking authority for all the items on this list, 

except items 1 and 6 through 12 in section F 

(Federal Trade Commission). The Bureau also has 

assumed responsibility over Regulation FF, 12 CFR 

part 232, which the Board issued pursuant to its 

authority under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and 

which was inadvertently omitted from the list. 

4These fourteen laws are: The Consumer Leasing 

Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (except with 

respect to Section 920 of that Act), the Equal Credit 

Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act 

(except with respect to Sections 615(e) and 628 of 

that act), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 

Subsections (b) through (f) of Section 43 of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, Sections 502 

through 509 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (except 

for Section 505 as it applies to Section 501(b)), the 

Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate 

Settlement Procedures Act, the S.A.F.E. Mortgage 

Licensing Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth 

in Savings Act, Section 626 of the Omnibus 

Appropriations Act, 2009, and the Interstate Land 

Sales Full Disclosure Act. 

5This request for information is based in part on 

guidance provided by the Office of Management 

and Budget Memorandum for the Heads of 

Independent Regulatory Agencies, M–11–28, 

Continued 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 1901–1906; 21 

U.S.C. 451–470, 601–695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. 

19. In § 424.21, revise footnote 3 in 

the table in paragraph (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 424.21 Use of food ingredients and 

sources of radiation. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

3Provided that its use is functional 

and suitable for the product and it is 

permitted for use at the lowest level 

necessary to accomplish the desired 

technical effect as determined in 

specific cases prior to label approval 

under part 412. 

* * * * * 

22. In § 424.22, revise paragraph 

(c)(4)(i) introductory text to read as 

follows: 

§ 424.22 Certain other permitted uses. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(i) The labels on packages of meat 

food and poultry products irradiated in 

their entirety, in conformance with this 

section and with 21 CFR 179.26(a) and 

(b), must bear the logo shown at the end 

of this paragraph. Unless the word 

‘‘Irradiated’’ is part of the product name, 

labels also must bear a statement such 

as ‘‘Treated with radiation’’ or ‘‘Treated 

by irradiation.’’ The logo must be placed 

in conjunction with the required 

statement, if the statement is used. The 

statement is not required to be more 

prominent than the declaration of 

ingredients required under § 317.2(c)(2). 

Done in Washington, DC, on November 29, 

2011. 

Alfred V. Almanza 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2011–30992 Filed 12–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

12 CFR Chapter X 

[Docket No. CFPB—2011–0039] 

Streamlining Inherited Regulations 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice of streamlining project; 

request for information. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection (the Bureau) is 

requesting specific suggestions from the 

public for streamlining regulations it 

recently inherited from other Federal 

agencies. This document asks the public 

to identify provisions of the inherited 

regulations that the Bureau should make 

the highest priority for updating, 

modifying, or eliminating because they 

are outdated, unduly burdensome, or 

unnecessary. This document discusses 

several specific requirements that may 

warrant review. It also seeks suggestions 

for practical measures to make 

complying with the regulations easier. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted by 

March 5, 2012. Commenters will have 

30 additional days, until April 3, 2012, 

to respond to other comments. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to ‘‘Docket No. 

CFPB–2011–0039.’’ Comments should 

be submitted to: 

• Electronic: http://www.regulations.

gov. Follow the instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Mail: Research, Markets & 

Regulations Division, Bureau of 

Consumer Financial Protection, 1500 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., (Attn: 1801 

L Street NW), Washington, DC 20220. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier in Lieu of 

Mail: Research, Markets & Regulations 

Division, Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection, 1700 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20006. 

In general, all comments received will 

be posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In addition, 

comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying at 1700 G Street 

NW., Washington, DC 20006, on official 

business days between the hours of 

10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You 

can make an appointment to inspect 

comments by telephoning (202) 435– 

7275. 

All comments, including attachments 

and other supporting materials, will 

become part of the public record and 

subject to public disclosure. Sensitive 

personal information, such as account 

numbers or social security numbers, 

should not be included. Comments will 

not be edited to remove any identifying 

or contact information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane 

Gell, Senior Counsel and Special 

Advisor; Daniel Brown, Counsel, 

Research, Markets & Regulations 

Division, Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection, (202) 453–7700. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

and Consumer Protection Act (DoddFrank Act or Act) 1 established the 

Bureau and, on July 21, 2011, 

transferred to the Bureau rulemaking 

authority under Federal consumer 

financial laws previously vested in 

seven other Federal agencies.2

Accordingly, the Bureau assumed 

responsibility over the various 

regulations that these agencies had 

issued under this rulemaking authority.3

In the coming weeks, the Bureau will 

republish the prior agencies’ regulations 

implementing fourteen consumer laws 4

(the ‘‘inherited regulations’’) as 

regulations of the Bureau, which will be 

codified in Chapter X of Title 12 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations. These 

republished regulations will incorporate 

only technical changes and will not 

impose new substantive obligations. 

The technical changes reflect the 

transfer of authority to the Bureau and 

certain other amendments made by the 

Dodd-Frank Act to the underlying 

statutes. 

The inherited regulations serve 

important public policy purposes and 

provide key protections to consumers, 

as discussed further below. But the 

Bureau believes there may be 

opportunities to streamline the 

inherited regulations by updating, 

modifying, or eliminating outdated, 

unduly burdensome, or unnecessary 

provisions. With this document, the 

Bureau is seeking specific suggestions 

from the public for the highest priority 

areas for streamlining.5


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75826 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘Executive Order 13579, ‘Regulation and 

Independent Regulatory Agencies’ ’’ (July 22, 2011). 

6Public Law 111–203 § 1411, 124 Stat. 1376, 2142 

(to be codified at 15 U.S.C. 1639c). 7Public Law 111–203 §§ 1461–1465, 124 Stat. 

1376, 2178–85 (to be codified at 15 U.S.C. 1639dg). 8Public Law 111–203 § 1021, 124 Stat. 1376, 1980 

(to be codified at 12 U.S.C. 5511). 

9See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 1667f (Consumer Leasing 

Act); 15 U.S.C. 1693b(c) (Electronic Fund Transfer 

Act); 15 U.S.C. 1691b (Equal Credit Opportunity 

Act); 12 U.S.C. 2804(a) (Home Mortgage Disclosure 

Act); 12 U.S.C. 2617(a) (Real Estate Settlement 

Procedures Act); 15 U.S.C. 1604(a) (Truth in 

Lending Act); 12 U.S.C. 4308(a)(3) (Truth in Savings 

Act). 

10As the Bureau republishes the inherited 

regulations in the coming weeks, it will consolidate 

separate regulations issued by different agencies to 

implement the same law. Because the Bureau will 

make only technical changes with republication, 

the republished rules will preserve some small but 

arguably substantive differences among the 

predecessor rules. The Bureau seeks comment on 

whether and how best to harmonize the remaining 

differences. 

Setting priorities is necessary to 

ensure that the Bureau’s resources—and 

the resources of stakeholders who 

would comment on any proposed 

revisions—are spent identifying the 

most promising areas for streamlining 

and addressing them appropriately. 

Public input is essential to selecting 

these priorities. 

II. Streamlining the Inherited 

Regulations 

Regulation is critical to achieving 

important public objectives such as fair, 

stable, and efficient markets. Regulation 

of consumer financial services, in 

particular, is an essential tool for 

achieving key purposes and objectives 

Congress set forth for the Bureau, 

including: providing consumers with 

timely and understandable information 

about transactions; protecting 

consumers from unfair, deceptive, or 

abusive practices and from 

discrimination; ensuring markets 

operate fairly, transparently, and 

efficiently; and ensuring access to 

consumer financial products and 

services for all consumers. In addition, 

each of the laws on which the inherited 

regulations are based has its own 

objectives, such as better informing 

consumers in the market or markets 

subject to the law. 

Regulation is critical to address 

failures in markets for consumer 

financial services that markets will not 

correct on their own. Sometimes 

regulation is necessary to produce 

information for the marketplace that the 

market will not generate on its own. For 

example, before adoption of the Truth in 

Lending Act (TILA), different lenders 

disclosed credit costs in different ways 

for the same product, making 

comparison difficult or impossible. 

TILA generally requires uniform 

disclosure of the cost of credit. The 

Dodd-Frank Act requires the Bureau to 

streamline disclosure of mortgage costs 

by consolidating TILA disclosures with 

disclosures of mortgage settlement costs 

under the Real Estate Settlement 

Procedures Act. 

Sometimes better disclosures and 

better consumer education are not 

sufficient to protect consumers and the 

marketplace, making substantive 

regulations necessary to accomplish 

these goals. In the lead-up to the 

financial crisis, market forces did not 

ensure adequate underwriting of 

mortgage loans and lenders made large 

numbers of loans without due regard to 

borrowers’ repayment ability. The 

Dodd-Frank Act requires lenders to 

make a reasonable and good faith 

determination that a borrower can repay 

his or her mortgage.6 The Act also 

addresses the failure of the market to 

curb certain servicing practices that 

harm consumers. Consumers cannot 

feasibly switch servicers, so servicers 

often lack sufficient incentives to treat 

consumers appropriately. The DoddFrank Act creates new protections for 

consumers against certain harmful 

servicing practices.7

For the next year the Bureau is 

focusing most of its rulemaking 

resources on these and other mortgage 

reforms that Congress instructed the 

Bureau to implement. This focus is 

dictated by the January 2013 statutory 

deadline for most of these rules. 

At the same time, the Bureau wants to 

start reviewing the inherited 

regulations. In document, the Bureau is 

focused on identifying the highest 

priorities for streamlining these 

regulations. In addition to authorizing 

new rules to address market failures, 

Congress also authorized the Bureau to 

‘‘reduce unwarranted regulatory 

burden’’ by regularly identifying and 

addressing ‘‘outdated, unnecessary, or 

unduly burdensome regulations.’’ 8

Some of the consumer protection 

statutes also authorize the Bureau to 

make adjustments and exceptions to 

statutory requirements where necessary 

or appropriate to facilitate compliance.9

Different circumstances may point to 

opportunities for streamlining rules and 

facilitating compliance. Some 

regulations may have become overly 

complex and unnecessarily difficult to 

understand and comply with, 

presenting an opportunity for 

simplification. Differences between 

regulations, such as differences in 

definitions of key terms, may cause 

confusion, presenting an opportunity for 

standardization where underlying 

statutes permit. In some cases, the 

Bureau has inherited from different 

agencies several regulations 

implementing the same law, which may 

present opportunities for 

harmonization.10

Due to changing technology or market 

practices, some provisions of 

regulations may be less necessary or no 

longer needed. Provisions may refer to 

technologies that are no longer 

frequently used; fail to reflect 

technologies that are now in use; or 

inhibit the use of existing or emerging 

technologies. These types of 

circumstances may call for updating 

regulations. Regulations may also need 

to be reviewed to determine if they 

unnecessarily restrict consumer choice, 

inhibit innovation, or inappropriately 

favor certain business models. 

Provisions of regulations may be more 

stringent than necessary to achieve the 

objective, or they may have little 

incremental effect over and above other 

existing laws or market forces. 

Provisions may suit larger market 

participants but impose unnecessarily 

disproportionate costs on smaller 

participants. These types of 

circumstances may call for relaxing, 

reducing, or eliminating provisions of 

regulations at least for some types or 

sizes of providers. 

Various circumstances can also 

warrant stronger rules. For example, 

market changes may have produced 

gaps in coverage of certain types of 

entities or transactions. Disclosures may 

have to be supplemented or replaced 

with restrictions on sales practices or 

product terms that are unfair according 

to established legal standards. The 

Bureau will consider in due course how 

the inherited regulations may need to be 

strengthened. In this document, the 

Bureau is focused on identifying 

streamlining opportunities. 

III. Goals, Approaches, and Potential 

Outcomes of This Targeted Review 

The principal goal of this initial, 

targeted review is to identify the highest 

priority areas for attempting to 

streamline the inherited regulations by 

updating, modifying, or eliminating 

outdated, unduly burdensome, or 

unnecessary provisions. The Bureau is 

focused on identifying improvements it 

can make without Congressional 

action—that is, improvements that are 

consistent with the underlying statute in 

question and with the discretion 

Congress has given the Bureau to 

implement that statute, including any 

discretion to adopt exceptions from, or 

adjustments to, statutory requirements. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 75827 

11The inherited regulations implement the 

statutes listed in footnote 4. 

If the Bureau judges that a desired 

change requires a statutory amendment, 

the Bureau will consider making 

recommendations to Congress. But the 

purpose of this document is not to 

solicit recommendations for changes, 

however important, that require 

Congressional action. 

After the Bureau receives public input 

and determines its priorities, the Bureau 

will consider whether to issue a notice 

of proposed rulemaking to streamline 

specific provisions of regulations. 

Examples of specific provisions the 

Bureau may consider revising are listed 

in Part V. The Bureau could also, or 

instead, fold proposals to revise specific 

provisions into one or more of the 

broader rulemakings that will 

implement the Dodd-Frank Act’s 

changes to the Truth in Lending, Real 

Estate Settlement Procedures, Home 

Mortgage Disclosure, and Equal Credit 

Opportunity Acts. The Bureau also 

could address specific provisions of 

regulations when it reviews those 

regulations in due course. The Bureau 

will also consider practical measures to 

make it easier for firms, especially 

smaller ones, to comply with the 

inherited regulations. 

In setting priorities for streamlining, 

the Bureau will consider five factors: 

first, the potential benefits and costs of 

a potential regulatory change for 

consumers and covered entities; second, 

the likelihood that the Bureau would be 

able to achieve the benefits consistent 

with the underlying statute; third, the 

speed with which the public would 

realize the benefits; fourth, the 

governmental and private resources it 

would take to realize the benefits; and 

fifth, the state of the evidence with 

which to judge these factors. 

These criteria have certain 

implications. The Bureau will not 

consider changes that would undermine 

important public policy objectives 

simply to reduce compliance burdens. 

The Bureau also is mindful that the 

benefits of regulatory stability, which 

allows firms to plan with confidence, 

sometimes outweigh the benefits of 

small improvements to a regulation. In 

addition, a change that reduces costs in 

one respect may increase costs in 

another respect, and the Bureau will be 

mindful of these tradeoffs. For example, 

making two regulations more consistent 

with each other may make compliance 

easier but set more stringent 

requirements for at least some 

transactions. 

The Bureau will seek the most reliable 

available evidence, including 

quantitative data where feasible, to 

facilitate analysis of key issues. The 

Bureau will be sensitive to the 

sometimes substantial cost of obtaining 

data and will seek to ensure that the 

benefits of procuring the data are worth 

their cost. However, the Bureau will 

also expect that advocates of specific 

revisions to regulations provide 

evidence to justify any assertion that the 

benefits of these revisions would justify 

the costs. 

Another goal of this document is to 

facilitate planning for reviewing the 

inherited regulations more broadly. The 

Bureau’s review of inherited regulations 

must proceed in stages. It would not be 

feasible for the Bureau or the public to 

review or revise all of the inherited 

regulations at once. Considering 

changes to regulations takes time—the 

law and prudence require robust 

analysis and public comment on 

substantive changes to regulations. This 

process takes substantial public 

resources. It also takes substantial 

private resources of the stakeholders 

that engage in the process. 

The Bureau’s highest rulemaking 

priority in the near term is careful 

implementation of mortgage reforms of 

the Dodd-Frank Act, most of which have 

a January 2013 deadline. The Bureau 

must set priorities for addressing other 

regulations—those in need of 

streamlining and those in need of 

strengthening—and decide where to 

begin, and then it will seek to proceed 

in the way that best uses public and 

private resources. For this reason, the 

Bureau also seeks input on how it 

should approach reviewing the 

inherited regulations, including the 

order in which it should review them. 

Comment is sought on these goals, 

approaches, and potential outcomes. 

IV. General Requests for Information 

The questions below solicit comment 

on (a) Planning for reviews of the 

inherited regulations generally; (b) 

specific opportunities for streamlining 

the inherited regulations; and (c) 

practical measures to facilitate 

compliance and promote innovation. 

The inherited regulations will be 

republished shortly.11 Comments 

should prominently identify the specific 

provision (as republished) of the 

specific regulation addressed. 

1. The Bureau could define its 

priorities for reviewing the inherited 

regulations in at least two different 

ways. It could focus on a particular 

regulation or set of regulations. Or it 

could focus on a market sector and all 

of the regulations that apply to that 

sector. Commenters may suggest other 

approaches. What approach should the 

Bureau take, and why? In what order 

should the Bureau review the inherited 

regulations, and why? 

2. Commenters are invited to offer 

their highest priorities for updating, 

modifying, or eliminating specific 

provisions of regulations that are 

outdated, unduly burdensome, or 

unnecessary. Commenters are asked to 

single out their top priority. Suggestions 

should focus on revisions that would 

not require Congressional action. 

Commenters may wish to take into 

account the five factors the Bureau 

plans to consider to set its priorities: 

The size, likelihood, and speed of 

potential gains from streamlining; the 

resources needed to achieve the gains; 

and the strength of the evidence with 

which to judge these factors. 

Commenters may consider suggesting 

provisions of regulations that should be: 

• Simplified, rationalized, or 

consolidated; 

• Relaxed, modified, or eliminated, 

perhaps for smaller firms or certain 

classes of transactions, without 

undermining essential protections; 

• Updated to reflect current practices 

and technology; 

• Adjusted to avoid unintended 

consequences; or 

• Changed to remove an obstacle to 

responsible innovation. 

3. The Bureau is in the midst of 

testing new mortgage disclosures under 

the Truth in Lending Act and Real 

Estate Settlement Procedures Act. Are 

there other required disclosures that 

available evidence suggests should be 

considered for modification or removal? 

4. For each suggestion in response to 

questions 2 and 3, commenters are 

asked to describe and, where possible, 

quantify the potential benefits and costs 

to consumers and providers of changing 

the regulation as recommended. 

5. For each suggestion, commenters 

are asked to submit or identify empirical 

models, data, research, case studies, or 

other evidence the Bureau could use to 

analyze and, if possible, to quantify or 

describe the potential costs and benefits 

of the changes the commenter 

advocates. 

6. Are there pilots, field tests, or 

demonstrations that the Bureau could 

launch to better assess benefits and 

costs of potential revisions to 

regulations? 

7. The Bureau is interested in 

identifying practical measures it can 

take, apart from revising regulations, to 

make compliance with the inherited 

regulations easier. For example, are 

there systematic ways the Bureau could 

improve guidance about how to comply 

with regulations? Are there ways the 

Bureau could make it easier for financial 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75828 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

institutions to obtain answers to specific 

compliance questions they may have? 

The Bureau will evaluate 

recommendations according to the same 

factors it will use to evaluate 

suggestions to revise regulations. 

8. The Bureau also is interested in 

identifying practical measures it could 

take to promote, or remove obstacles to, 

responsible innovation in consumer 

financial services markets. 

V. Specific Illustrations of Potential 

Streamlining Opportunities 

In this part, the Bureau seeks 

information and views about specific 

potential revisions to the inherited 

regulations. The Bureau has not 

necessarily determined its authority to 

address the examples discussed below. 

In some cases, the Bureau may 

determine after further consideration 

that statutory amendments may be 

required. Nor has the Bureau 

determined whether it should adopt any 

of the revisions discussed below, or 

whether these particular revisions, if 

warranted, would be more important 

than other possible revisions the Bureau 

may consider after receiving public 

input. 

Consistent and Sufficient Definitions 

Several of the inherited regulations 

define key terms differently. For 

example, Regulation Z (12 CFR part 

226), Regulation E (12 CFR part 205), 

Regulation DD (12 CFR part 230), 

Regulation V (12 CFR part 222), and 

Regulation P (12 CFR part 216 and 

parallel regulations at 12 CFR part 332 

(FDIC), 16 CFR part 313 (FTC), 12 CFR 

part 716 and 741.220 (NCUA), 12 CFR 

part 40 (OCC), 12 CFR part 573 (OTS)) 

each define ‘‘consumer’’ differently. 

Similarly, Regulation B (12 CFR part 

202) and Regulation Z define ‘‘credit’’ 

differently. Regulation Z defines 

‘‘business day’’ differently than 

Regulation CC (12 CFR part 229), for 

which the Bureau shares certain joint 

rulewriting authorities with the Federal 

Reserve Board. 

Sometimes different definitions are 

necessary to fulfill different statutory 

objectives, but other times those 

differences may be unnecessary. What 

terms, if any, should be defined more 

consistently across these regulations? 

How, precisely, should they be defined? 

Sometimes key terms are not defined. 

For example, under Regulations B and 

C (12 CFR part 203), important 

obligations of a creditor depend upon 

whether an application is ‘‘approved,’’ 

‘‘denied,’’ or ‘‘withdrawn,’’ but neither 

regulation defines these terms, leaving 

room for different applications of the 

same terms. What terms, if any, should 

be defined for the first time or defined 

more clearly? 

Annual Privacy Notices 

Regulation P of the Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System and parallel regulations of other 

Federal agencies govern the treatment of 

nonpublic personal information about 

consumers. These regulations generally 

require that financial services providers 

give a privacy notice to a customer 

annually during a customer 

relationship. Providers have questioned 

the value of providing consumers 

annual notices where the provider’s 

privacy practices have not changed 

since the last notice, at least where the 

provider does not share information 

with other firms (or shares in narrow 

cases). Should there be an exception 

from the requirement to provide an 

annual privacy notice in these or any 

other circumstances? 

ATM Fee Disclosure 

Under Regulation E, any person that 

operates an automated teller machine 

(ATM) that imposes a fee on any 

consumer for withdrawing funds or 

inquiring about a balance must disclose 

the amount of any fee the operator 

charges. The operator must disclose the 

fee on the ATM screen or in a paper 

notice before the consumer must pay a 

fee. In addition, the regulation requires 

the operator to post a sign on the ATM 

itself that fees ‘‘will’’ or ‘‘may be 

imposed’’ but does not require the sign 

to state the fee amount. 12 CFR 

205.16(c). Should the requirement to 

post a sign be eliminated? Are other 

disclosures of ATM fees adequate to 

inform consumers? 

Coverage/Scope of Regulation C (Home 

Mortgage Disclosure) 

Under Regulation C, a depository 

institution generally must collect, 

report, and disclose certain mortgage 

data if it originated or refinanced one 

home purchase loan in the preceding 

calendar year, its assets exceed a 

specified minimum, and it is located in 

a metropolitan statistical area. 12 CFR 

203.2(e). As a result, some depository 

institutions that do not originate home 

purchase loans but occasionally 

refinance a home purchase loan as an 

accommodation for a customer are 

required to collect, report, and disclose 

mortgage data. Should depositories that 

make or refinance small numbers of 

loans be exempted? If so, what number 

of loans would be appropriate? 

Coverage/Scope of Regulation B (Equal 

Credit Opportunity) 

Under Regulation B, all creditors that 

take applications for home purchase 

loans or refinancings of home purchase 

loans must request information about 

applicant characteristics such as race 

and ethnicity. 12 CFR 202.913(a). 

Regulators can use these data to monitor 

compliance with fair lending 

obligations. Under Regulation C, some 

depository and other mortgage lending 

institutions are exempt from collecting 

applicant characteristic information 

based on factors such as location, size, 

and loan volume. 12 CFR 203.1(c), 

203.2(e). Should Regulations B and C 

have a consistent exemption for data 

collection, or do the data collections 

serve different purposes justifying 

different scopes of coverage? 

Under Regulation B, all creditors that 

take action on applications for credit 

must timely notify applicants of the 

action. 12 CFR 202.9(a). Should 

creditors that receive a small number of 

applications be exempted from this 

requirement? If so, what is the 

appropriate number of applications? 

Should the existence or size of an 

exemption vary based on type of 

product? If the Bureau adopted an 

exemption, what adjustments would it 

need to make to requirements for 

adverse action notices under the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act? 

Coverage/Scope of Regulation Z (Truth 

in Lending) 

In general, Regulation Z covers a 

creditor if it extended consumer credit 

more than 25 times in the past calendar 

year (or more than 5 times, for 

transactions secured by a dwelling). 12 

CFR 226.2(a)(17)(v). Should these 

thresholds be raised? What would be an 

appropriate threshold? And should a 

similar exemption be applied to 

disclosure requirements under the Real 

Estate Settlement Procedures Act that 

the Bureau will integrate with Truth in 

Lending disclosure requirements? 

Regulation Z generally covers a 

creditor if it makes more than 25 

consumer loans in total of any type. 

Should different types of consumer 

credit have different thresholds? For 

example, should creditors be exempted 

from the student loan requirements if 

they made less than a certain number of 

student loans in the preceding calendar 

year, regardless of how many other 

consumer loans they made? 

Ability To Pay Credit Card Debt 

Regulation Z requires credit card 

issuers, before extending credit, to 

assess the individual borrower’s ability 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 233 / Monday, December 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 75829 

to repay the loan. 12 CFR 226.51. This 

requirement is based on a provision of 

the Credit Card Accountability 

Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 

2009 (Credit CARD Act), Public Law 

111–24, 123 Stat. 1734 (2009). Concern 

has been expressed by some card issuers 

and also some members of Congress that 

these rules may have the unintended 

consequence of precluding some 

individuals, especially non-working 

spouses, from obtaining credit they are 

capable of repaying. Should this section 

of Regulation Z be amended, and, if so, 

how? 

Electronic Disclosures 

The inherited regulations require that 

certain disclosures, including periodic 

statements and receipts under 

Regulations E and Z, be provided to 

consumers in writing in a form that they 

may keep. The Electronic Signatures in 

Global and National Commerce Act 

(E-Sign Act) (15 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.) 

permits disclosures that must be 

provided in writing to be provided 

electronically if the provider meets 

certain requirements, including 

obtaining the consumer’s consent. Some 

parts of the inherited regulations permit 

certain disclosures to be provided 

electronically or in writing. Should the 

Bureau permit other disclosures now 

required to be in writing to be delivered 

in electronic form? 

In addition, mobile banking has 

become more prevalent and widely used 

by consumers since the E-Sign Act was 

adopted. For mobile banking 

applications, should the Bureau 

consider allowing certain disclosures to 

be provided by text messaging, even 

though text messages are not readily 

retainable and, if so, under what 

circumstances and with what 

safeguards? 

Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure 

Act 

The Interstate Land Sales Full 

Disclosure Act (ILSA) (15 U.S.C. 1701 et 

seq.) imposes reporting, disclosure, and 

anti-fraud protections on some interstate 

land sales. Commentators have 

questioned whether improvements in 

consumers’ access to information about 

these sales warrant changes to reporting 

and disclosure requirements. They have 

also indicated that technological 

changes may warrant updates to the 

form and manner of reporting and 

disclosure. Changes in state property 

regulations in past decades may also 

warrant changes to ILSA regulations. 

For these or other reasons, what changes 

to implementing regulations, if any, 

should the Bureau make? 

Dated: November 29, 2011. 

Raj Date, 

Special Advisor to the Secretary of the 

Treasury on the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31030 Filed 12–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–130777–11] 

RIN 1545–BK45 

Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities 

Issued at a Premium 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

by cross-reference to temporary 

regulations and notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: In the Rules and Regulations 

section of this issue of the Federal 

Register, the IRS is issuing temporary 

regulations that provide guidance on the 

tax treatment of Treasury InflationProtected Securities issued with more 

than a de minimis amount of premium. 

The text of those regulations also serves 

as the text of these proposed 

regulations. This document also 

provides notice of a public hearing on 

these proposed regulations. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

must be received by March 5, 2012. 

Outlines of topics to be discussed at the 

public hearing scheduled for March 28, 

2012, must be received by March 7, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: 

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–130777–11), Room 

5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. 

Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, 

Washington, DC 20044. Submissions 

may be hand-delivered Monday through 

Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 

4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–130777– 

11), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue 

Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC, or sent electronically, 

via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG– 

130777–11). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the proposed regulations, 

William E. Blanchard, (202) 622–3950; 

concerning submissions of comments, 

the hearing, and/or to be placed on the 

building access list to attend the 

hearing, Oluwafunmilayo (Funmi) 

Taylor, (202) 622–7180 (not toll-free 

numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background and Explanation of 

Provisions 

Temporary regulations in the Rules 

and Regulations section of this issue of 

the Federal Register amend the Income 

Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 1) relating 

to section 1275. The temporary 

regulations provide that the coupon 

bond method described in § 1.1275–7(d) 

applies to Treasury Inflation-Protected 

Securities (TIPS) issued with more than 

a de minimis amount of premium. The 

temporary regulations apply to TIPS 

issued on or after April 8, 2011. The text 

of the temporary regulations also serves 

as the text of these proposed 

regulations. In addition to comments on 

the text of the temporary regulations, 

the IRS and the Treasury Department 

request comments on whether the rules 

in the temporary regulations should be 

extended to other types of inflationindexed debt instruments. 

Special Analyses 

It has been determined that this notice 

of proposed rulemaking is not a 

significant regulatory action as defined 

in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a 

regulatory assessment is not required. It 

also has been determined that section 

553(b) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply 

to these regulations, and because the 

regulations do not impose a collection 

of information on small entities, the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to 

section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue 

Code, this notice of proposed 

rulemaking has been submitted to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration for comment 

on its impact on small businesses. 

Comments and Public Hearing 

Before these proposed regulations are 

adopted as final regulations, 

consideration will be given to any 

written comments (a signed original and 

eight (8) copies) or electronic comments 

that are submitted timely to the IRS. The 

IRS and the Treasury Department 

specifically request comments on the 

clarity of the proposed rule and how it 

may be made easier to understand. All 

comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying. 

A public hearing has been scheduled 

for March 28, 2012, beginning at 10 a.m. 

in the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue 

Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC. Due to building 

security procedures, visitors must enter 

through the Constitution Avenue 

entrance. In addition, all visitors must 

present photo identification to enter the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS