Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Financial Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debates financial deregulation bill that would lift certain caps for depository institutions
Summary
Lawmakers debated a first-substitute to Senate Bill 113 that would deregulate caps on NSF and delinquency charges for depository institutions with borrower consent; critics warned of consumer harms while proponents argued for competitiveness and economic development. The House substituted the bill and later circled it for further work.
On March 3 the House considered a major financial-services measure, first substitute Senate Bill 113, that would remove statutory caps on certain fees (bounced-check and delinquency charges) for depository institutions if the borrower consents. Supporters framed the package as a pro‑competitive deregulation that helps Utah retain and attract financial firms; Representative Gladwell said the change allows institutions and borrowers to agree to terms rather than keeping a statutory cap.
Opponents criticized the change as risky for consumers. Representative Hogue described scenarios in which high fees could be imposed in small-print disclosures and urged stricter, narrower coverage of the deregulation. Representative Hogue offered amendments to limit the bill’s scope to institutions regulated by the Department of Financial Institutions and to preserve statutory protections; debate included points about industry threats to relocate and the historical context of prior deregulation in Utah.
The House ultimately moved to substitute the bill and then circled it for further consideration, signaling that lawmakers expected additional technical amendments and further negotiation rather than immediate final passage.
The transcript shows sustained floor attention to this bill, including concerns about consumer protection, industry competition, and the role of the Department of Financial Institutions. The bill’s supporters said any removal of caps would be opt-in for borrowers and that broader economic activity in the state depends on a competitive financial-services environment.
Next steps: SB113 was substituted and circled for further consideration; conferees and committee work are expected to refine language addressing consumer safeguards and the set of institutions covered.
