Michigan Senate Bill SB0774

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/29/26
• Refer: 1/29/26

Caption

Financial institutions: money transmitters; foreign remittance transfers; prohibit under certain circumstances. Amends secs. 2, 3 & 25 of 2006 PA 250 (MCL 487.1002 et seq.) & adds secs. 21a & 35.

Summary

Senate Bill 774 would amend Michigan’s Money Transmission Services Act to add a new restriction on foreign remittance transfers. Under the bill, a licensee or authorized delegate could not initiate a remittance transfer to a recipient outside the United States unless the sender has been verified as not being an “unauthorized alien” using documentation and procedures prescribed by the Department of Insurance and Financial Services. The department would be required to adopt rules specifying acceptable documents and a verification form, and licensees would have to keep records of the verification and report foreign remittance activity to the department each quarter. The bill also creates an enforcement framework tied to this verification requirement. The department could request records at any time, receive complaints about noncompliance, and conduct random quarterly audits after the rules take effect. If a licensee or authorized delegate violates the verification requirement, the bill imposes a civil fine equal to 25% of the amount transferred, with unpaid fines collectible by the attorney general and deposited into the state general fund. The bill limits other civil sanctions for this specific violation, though it preserves the department’s broader authority under the act.

Impact

The bill would amend the statutory definitions and recordkeeping provisions in the Money Transmission Services Act, adding new terms such as “foreign remittance transfer,” “unauthorized alien,” and “verification form,” and expanding required records for licensees and authorized delegates. It would impose new compliance, reporting, and audit obligations on money transmitters operating in Michigan, especially those sending funds abroad. The Department of Insurance and Financial Services would gain rulemaking and enforcement responsibilities, and the attorney general would gain authority to collect unpaid civil fines.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or roll-call support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a strong regulatory and enforcement-oriented approach to foreign remittances, with a clear intent to restrict certain transfers unless identity or immigration-status-related verification is completed. The absence of discussion records means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from hearings or floor debate in the provided context.

Contention

The central point of contention is likely the bill’s requirement that money transmitters verify whether a sender of a foreign remittance transfer is not an “unauthorized alien,” which raises immigration-enforcement, privacy, and administrative-burden concerns. Potential opponents could include money transmitters, consumer advocates, and immigrant-rights groups, who may object to the use of immigration-status verification in financial transactions and the risk of false complaints or errors. Supporters would likely frame the bill as a compliance and enforcement tool aimed at preventing unlawful transfers and ensuring oversight of remittance activity.