Commercial Law - Earned Wage Access - Revisions
SB94 revises Maryland’s earned wage access law, which governs services that let workers access wages they have already earned before payday. The bill tightens consumer protections by prohibiting earned wage access providers and certain lenders from soliciting or accepting tips, gratuities, or other donations, and by barring any suggestion that tipping affects access to credit or service terms. It also shortens the period for returning improperly received tips from 30 days to 7 days and updates disclosure requirements to reflect the new prohibition on tips.
The bill also makes a series of operational and consumer-protection changes for earned wage access providers. Providers must continue to offer at least one no-cost option, clearly disclose fees and consumer rights, allow cancellation without a fee, comply with privacy and information-security laws, and reimburse consumers for overdraft or nonsufficient-funds fees caused by repayment attempts, subject to a fraud exception. The bill adds new provisions prohibiting false or misleading advertising, requiring nondiscrimination in access decisions, and preserving the Commissioner’s authority to require clearer fee disclosures. It also preserves the general framework that earned wage access services are not treated as money transmission and are exempt from most lending, credit, and debt laws, while carving out specified exceptions.
In terms of state law impact, SB94 amends multiple sections of the Commercial Law Article and adds new sections governing advertising, discrimination, and enforcement-related protections for earned wage access. It also revises cross-references and renumbers a section, while maintaining the licensing structure under the Financial Institutions Article. The bill narrows the ability of providers to use consumer tips as part of their business model and strengthens the state’s consumer loan-style oversight of these services.
The general sentiment reflected by the voting history appears supportive overall, with the bill passing both chambers by substantial margins. The Senate passed it 32-13, and the House passed it 96-35, suggesting broad bipartisan acceptance of the consumer-protection approach even if not unanimous. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record does not show detailed floor or committee debate.
The main point of contention appears to be the bill’s prohibition on tips and related restrictions on earned wage access business practices. Supporters likely viewed the changes as closing loopholes and preventing pressure on consumers to tip for access to wages, while opponents may have been concerned about limiting provider revenue models or reducing flexibility in a relatively new financial service market. The bill’s treatment of earned wage access as outside most lending laws, while still imposing consumer-loan-style requirements, also suggests a balancing act between regulation and preserving the service’s distinct legal status.
SB94 amends the Maryland Commercial Law Article to regulate earned wage access providers more tightly, especially by banning solicitation or acceptance of tips and by requiring clearer disclosures, no-cost access options, anti-discrimination protections, and limits on collection practices. It also updates related lender provisions, shortens the refund window for improperly received tips to 7 days, and preserves the state’s licensing and enforcement framework for consumer loan-related oversight. The bill affects earned wage access providers, certain lenders, consumers using wage-advance services, and the Commissioner’s regulatory authority.
The bill appears to have been generally well received in the legislature, as shown by comfortable passage in both chambers. The vote margins indicate substantial support for the consumer-protection changes and for restricting tip-based practices in earned wage access. At the same time, the non-unanimous votes suggest some legislators had reservations about the scope of the regulation or its effect on the industry.
The central controversy is the bill’s prohibition on tips, gratuities, and donations in earned wage access and related lending contexts. Supporters likely argued that tips can obscure true costs and pressure consumers, while critics may have viewed the ban as overly restrictive or harmful to provider business models. Secondary points of contention include the bill’s expanded disclosure and reimbursement obligations, the limits on collection activity, and the extent to which earned wage access should be treated like consumer lending rather than a separate financial product.