Transcript Highlights:

• Banks have a hard time offering minimum standards of customer service to their own customers.
• The networks and banks providing should be fairly compensated for that service.
• And would you say, to give the committee an idea, what services do most community banks or even small
• banks.
• from charging a fee for banking services.

Bills: HB245 , HB245 , HB700 , HB2783 , HB3526 , HB3900 , HB4061 , HB4124 , HB4166 , HB4395 , HB4534 , HB4609 , HB4641 , HB4736 , HB4738 , HB4739 , HB4945 , HB5015 , HJR175

Committee: House Pensions, Investments & Financial Services

Keywords: property tax, delinquent taxes, ad valorem, penalties, interest cap, military service, retirement, law enforcement, custodial officer, Employees Retirement System, commercial financing, brokers, registration, disclosures, finance, consumer protection, fees, deferred compensation, automatic participation, county employees

Transcript Highlights:

• In banking, you know, factors borrow and they participate with banks.
• Again, these institutions will go out for requests for proposals on a periodic basis for banking services
• at Texas banks.
• We are a young bank, a quickly growing bank.
• In Canada, they only have five or six banks, and they're all big banks.

Bills: HB245 , HB700 , HB2783 , HB3526 , HB3900 , HB4061 , HB4124 , HB4166 , HB4395 , HB4534 , HB4609 , HB4641 , HB4736 , HB4738 , HB4739 , HB4945 , HB5015 , HJR175 , HB245

Committee: House Pensions, Investments & Financial Services

Keywords: military service, retirement, law enforcement, custodial officer, Employees Retirement System, commercial financing, brokers, registration, disclosures, finance, consumer protection, fees, deferred compensation, automatic participation, county employees, payroll deductions, retirement plans, fiscal transparency, local government, bond issuance

Transcript Highlights:

• A basic banking service we previously had access to.
• customers' crypto, but to stop the demand deposit services of a bank.
• Banks don't offer the services people want.
• You provide banking services, period. Now, if you have judged as...
• This is how you see a bank-linked Armed Services Bank generate $92 of overdraft per customer, relative

Committee: Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• They can also be alternatives for existing banking services, both deposit and cash-like services, but
• also lending... ...banking services, both deposit and cash-like services, but also lending, investment
• services into fewer and fewer, more systemically risky banks has led in the past to reduced access to
• local banking services, especially for low-income individuals in communities that are not, you know,
• They form the major sort of substrate of normal banking services in Germany and Japan.

Summary: The committee first received a JLARC work session on the 2025 tax preference performance reviews, covering nine tax preferences and recommending legislative action on eight. JLARC reviewed natural gas transportation fuel preferences, travel agent and tour operator B&O rates, a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income housing developers, and several shorter reviews including senior center property tax relief, a disabled veteran adapted housing remittance, trade convention nexus treatment, wholesale sales of fertilizer/pesticides/seed, a hazardous substance tax exemption for pesticides stored for out-of-state shipment, and three energy-related preferences for a silicon smelter. JLARC generally recommended continuing preferences that met stated or inferred objectives, modifying some to improve reporting or performance metrics, and allowing the unused silicon smelter preferences to expire. The Citizen Commission endorsed JLARC’s recommendations, and committee members asked a few clarifying questions, including about trends in travel agent/tour operator beneficiaries and the housing exemption’s performance metric and data issues. The committee then heard a work session and public hearing on Senate Bill 5754, which would create a Washington State public bank. A presentation from California public banking advocates and the Bank of North Dakota described public banks as government-owned financial institutions intended to keep public funds working locally, support lending for housing, infrastructure, and community development, and partner with community banks and credit unions. Committee questions focused on leverage, liquidity, constitutional issues, and how the model would interact with existing state investment and debt structures. Staff summarized the bill’s structure, including activation conditions, governance, powers, and fiscal impacts, noting the fiscal note was largely indeterminate and startup costs could be significant. Public testimony on SB 5754 was divided. Supporters included statewide elected officials, county and city officials, labor, educators, community advocates, and residents, who argued the bank could lower borrowing costs, improve access to capital, keep public money in Washington, and help finance infrastructure, housing, and disaster resilience. Opponents included community bankers and county treasurers, who warned about risks to safety and liquidity of public funds, questioned the need for a new institution given existing programs, and argued the proposal lacked a proven track record in Washington. The hearing concluded with no vote taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lacking access to traditional banking not only means that you pay more for basic financial services,
• We appreciate and absolutely share the goal of expanding safe and affordable banking services to the
• Like, what would be the incentive for the credit unions or the banks to actually provide the service
• California is now going to provide a financial service banking system for unbanked.
• So it's not full banking services, and like I mentioned before, this is an on-ramp.

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 407, which would expand the California Pollution Control Financing Authority. The author said the measure would increase flexibility and access to resources, and the bill was approved 7-0 and sent to the Committee on Local Government. The committee also adopted the consent calendar, which included AB 76, by a 7-0 vote. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on AB 1065, which would prohibit swipe fees on the sales tax portion of credit card transactions. Supporters, including small business owners, restaurant and grocery representatives, and a payments-policy expert, argued the bill would reduce costs for merchants and consumers and rein in dominant card networks. Opponents, including banks, credit unions, and payment industry groups, argued the bill is likely preempted by federal law, would be difficult to implement, and could disproportionately affect community banks and credit unions. After extensive questioning about preemption, fraud, implementation, and consumer impacts, the committee rejected the bill on a 6-0 vote, but then granted reconsideration by a 7-1 vote. The committee then heard AB 1365, which would create the Cal Account Program, a zero-fee, zero-penalty state banking account for unbanked and underbanked Californians. Supporters said the program would help low-income households, survivors of abuse, and others facing barriers to traditional banking, while opponents from community banks and credit unions argued existing low-cost accounts and the Bank On program already address the need and raised concerns about cost, feasibility, and duplication. The bill advanced on a 6-0 vote and later received enough votes on the reopened roll to move forward to the Committee on Labor and Employment. The committee also approved AB 1052, which would create a legal framework for digital assets and address unclaimed digital property and restrictions on public officials issuing or promoting digital assets, and AB 1180, which would create a pilot program for paying state fees with digital financial assets and require a report on broader adoption. Both bills passed with broad support after brief testimony and discussion. Final roll calls later confirmed AB 1052 and AB 1180, along with AB 407 and AB 1365, were moved out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lacking access to traditional banking not only means that they pay more for basic financial services,
• accounts for Californians, we believe these services are already available. at banks and credit unions
• We appreciate and absolutely share the goal of expanding safe and affordable banking services to the
• Is it that the state of California is now going to provide a financial service banking system for the
• So it's not full banking services.

Committee: House Banking and Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• The Banking Act permits that a bank, when it provides a banking service, allows those banks to charge
• Lawyer not knowing the litigation, but the statement made that providing banking services...
• It’s a valuable service. The banks have nothing to do with the collection and redemption of...
• That’s not a banking service they provide.
• I don't view that as a banking service.

Bills: SB231 , SB584 , SB600 , SB668 , SB841 , SB986 , SB1003 , SB1244 , SB1625 , SB1960 , SB1963 , SB1964 , SB2026 , SB2056 , SB2368

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• I speak to you today as a provider and consumer of banking services.
• Senate and consumer of banking services.
• Each bank is unique; there are 135 banks in Alabama with over 1,300 branches.
• Yes sir, under this bill, how many banks—other than the national banks—how many Alabama banks... ...
• National Banks. How many Alabama banks would this bill apply to?

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• And there's examples of, you know, someone coming into the bank with their bank information, completely
• It does go to banking? I do believe that there is a fiscal price check. No, it does go to Banking?
• If the parent does not want services, they can decline services.
• If the parent does not want services, they can decline services.
• These are public services. Much of it is federal money. These services are available.

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• and the banks?
• Many savings banks and cooperative banks have it; many don't.
• Processors and acquiring banks offer a number of services to merchants, and those get bundled into the
• other services get added in.
• banks.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on financial security, banking regulation, and payment-card fees. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg supported the Massachusetts baby bonds proposal (H. 48) and also endorsed bills on matched savings (H. 1158/S. 737) and retirement planning/Secure Choice (H. 1143/S. 722), arguing these measures would help address wealth inequality, build assets, and improve retirement readiness. Supporters of baby bonds included policy experts and health advocates from Children’s Health Watch and Boston Medical Center, who said early-life asset building could improve long-term economic and health outcomes for children in low-income families. AARP also urged passage of the retirement planning bill, citing the large share of private-sector workers without access to an employer retirement plan. Representative Donato testified for H. 1143, describing it as a voluntary retirement-savings opportunity for workers at small employers. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3933, concerning the Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation, from former Bank Commissioner Mike Hanson, who defended the state’s full deposit insurance system for credit unions and savings institutions as a longstanding consumer-protection model. The Massachusetts Bankers Association raised concerns about the bill’s technical provisions and broader credit union/bank competitive issues, while the Cooperative Credit Union Association supported related legislation allowing modest compensation for credit union directors (S. 821/H. 1338) and flexibility for state financial institutions to grow through partnerships (S. 723). Bankers opposed those credit union bills, arguing they would upset a level playing field and blur long-standing distinctions between banks and credit unions. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1259/S. 688, which would prohibit card interchange fees on the tax and gratuity portions of restaurant transactions. Restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association testified in favor, saying the fees are a significant and growing expense, especially as most customers now pay by card; they argued the bills would save restaurants money without affecting state revenue. Credit union, banking, and payments-industry representatives opposed the bills, saying interchange helps fund fraud protection and payment infrastructure, that the proposal would create compliance burdens and likely litigation, and that it would mainly affect Massachusetts-chartered institutions while national banks could be preempted. Committee members noted that a commission on payment-card fees is being established and said the issue would be studied further. The hearing also included support for a separate bill on virtual credit cards for dental providers, with dentists saying automatic virtual-card payments impose hidden processing fees and fraud risks.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said many credit unions today operate like full-service commercial banks while enjoying tax-exempt
• He said many credit unions today operate like full-service commercial banks while enjoying tax-exempt
• Um, Friend Bank is a of Friend Bank.
• Our public entities, like our volunteer fire departments, provide essential services to our banks, our
• Our public entities, like our volunteer fire departments, provide essential services to our banks, our

Committee: House County and Municipal Government

Transcript Highlights:

• customers more for banking products and services.
• </c> more for banking products and services. more for banking products and services.
• making it easier for new banks to form in those places where there are no financial services?
• financial services has kinds of non-bank financial services has has<04:53:21.360><c> to</c><04:53:21.520
• </c><04:59:00.160><c> is</c><04:59:00.480><c> all</c> service uh that branch banking is all service uh

Transcript Highlights:

• And whereas, prior to his legislative service, Senator Banke served more than 21 years in the United
• I'm enormously proud to offer this resolution honoring Senator Matt Banke for his years of service here
• Senator Banke and I worked together on the Human Services Committee, and we both know humans cost money
• Talk about inter-service stuff.
• But thank you for your service.

Bills: SCR8410 , SCR8410

Keywords: returning bills to house of origin, sine die, end of session, legislative procedure, Rules Committee, third reading, unfinished business, pending bills, joint resolutions, concurrent resolutions, joint memorials, special session, bill numbering, legislative records, House of Representatives, Washington Legislature, session adjournment, procedural resolution

Transcript Highlights:

• It does go to Banking? I do believe that there is a fiscal price check. No, it does go to Banking?
• If the parent does not want services, they can decline services.
• If the parent does not want services, they can decline services.
• These are public services. Much of it is federal money. These services are available.
• These are public services, much of it's federal money. These services are available.

Summary: The Assembly Judiciary Committee met without quorum for part of the hearing and proceeded on several bills, with testimony focused on probate access, domestic violence protections, child support services, and an immigration resolution. On AB 1660, the author and county public administrators said financial institutions often delay or refuse lawful requests for account information and assets, causing harm to estates and vulnerable people; banks and credit union representatives opposed the new penalties, arguing the underlying statute may be outdated and that fraud concerns require more verification. The author agreed to amend the bill to make penalties discretionary rather than mandatory, and the bill ultimately passed out of committee to the floor with a due-pass recommendation and later add-on approval. AB 1657, by Assembly Member Rogers, would bar courts from requiring domestic violence survivors seeking temporary restraining orders to notify the alleged abuser before filing; the Sonoma County district attorney and others supported it as a safety measure, and it passed unanimously to the floor with multiple members requesting coauthor status. The committee also heard AB 1643, which would automatically enroll custodial parents in child support services after a support order is entered unless they opt out. The author and child support officials argued the bill would increase access to free enforcement and collection services, reduce child poverty, and help families who do not complete the current application process; some members raised concerns about fees, opt-out clarity, and whether automatic enrollment could interfere with amicable co-parenting arrangements. After discussion about the program’s funding and the need for a clear opt-out process, the bill was moved to the Human Services Committee, with some members voting no or not voting and later add-on action placing it on call and then advancing it. The committee also considered SJR 8, urging Congress to modernize the federal immigration registry so long-term undocumented residents could qualify for lawful permanent residency on a rolling basis; supporters described it as a long-overdue pathway for immigrant families and workers, and the resolution was adopted to the floor after a vote and later add-on action. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly emphasized the need to balance enforcement, fraud prevention, and access to services. Several members supported the domestic violence and probate bills as necessary fixes to existing systems, while others urged continued work with stakeholders on standardized forms, clearer procedures, and modernized safeguards. The committee also took up consent items and add-ons, including AB 1597, AB 1651, and AB 1652 on consent, and later finalized votes on the measures discussed above.

Transcript Highlights:

• in there for non-bank, uninsured national banks when it comes to other non-banks.
• The OCC is very unclear about whether those non-banks can engage in a broader set of digital asset service
• </c> um banks in particular community banks um banks in particular community banks but<00:40:07.599><
• </c> coins as a service, crypto as a service coins as a service, crypto as a service and<01:01:01.119
• will be a bank-to-bank or internal within the bank type of use case.

Summary: The meeting began with roll call and introductions of commission members and guests, followed by approval of the agenda and a motion to approve the February 10 minutes with a correction clarifying that one quoted statement was misattributed. The commission then moved into presentations. The main presentation came from the Conference of State Bank Supervisors on implementation of the federal GENIUS Act for stablecoins. The speaker reviewed the OCC’s recent 367-page proposed rule, noting it raises many open questions and design choices for states, and discussed expected upcoming rulemaking from the FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Treasury. The presentation focused on six areas: permissible issuer activities, reserve assets and redemption, risk management and supervision, treatment of state-qualified issuers, capital/operational backstops, and foreign issuers. It also flagged unresolved issues around Bank Secrecy Act/AML requirements and the meaning of “digital asset service provider” activities. A substantial portion of the discussion addressed yield restrictions, with the presenter explaining the OCC’s broad definition of yield and its rebuttable presumption against issuer-affiliated or related third-party yield arrangements. The speaker said this likely forecloses many existing white-label structures but leaves some room for third-party payments depending on distance from the issuer, and noted ongoing Senate debate over similar provisions. The presentation also covered reserve valuation, liquidity and diversification requirements, redemption timing, and supervisory expectations such as third-party oversight, IT security, exam cycles, and reporting. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the amended minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• . services. services.
• ><01:15:46.719><c> civily</c><01:15:47.440><c> immune</c> bank. the bank is held civily immune bank.
• bank.
• And the bank relationship of the bank.
• </c> service to purchase service credit. service to purchase service credit.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sims has a 24-year background in SBA lending and previously worked at Simmons Bank and Regions Bank.
• I'm a senior vice president with First National Bank, a $1.1 billion community. bank based in Ames, Iowa
• Yet banks and credit unions are our primary source of referrals. We don't compete with banks.
• Referring banks keep their customers as depositors and continue to provide other banking services to
• Yes I'm an SBA lender that works for First Security Bank and we're a community bank.

Committee: Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee

Keywords: SBA, 7A loan program, underwriting standards, loan defaults, Community Advantage Program, small business funding, testimony

Summary: The committee meeting focused on discussions regarding the SBA's 7A loan program and its implementation challenges. Members raised significant concerns about recent changes to the underwriting standards, which have been criticized for leading to an increase in loan defaults. Ranking members expressed a desire for a return to stronger guidelines to protect taxpayers and ensure the program remains a viable source for small businesses struggling to secure funding. Testimonies from community lenders highlighted their efforts to support underserved communities and stressed the importance of the Community Advantage Program.

Transcript Highlights:

• in support of the banks.
• You've got not only your acquiring banks and issuing banks, you've got the acquiring bank, the merchant's
• Banks don't know what you bought.
• to his bank account.
• Instead, banks offset those losses by increasing account fees and reducing services.

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Business held a public hearing focused on credit card interchange fees, cashless transactions, chargebacks, fraud, and possible reforms affecting small businesses in Massachusetts. Chair Paul Feeney opened the meeting, outlined the commission’s charge, and noted that the hearing would hear from small business owners, industry representatives, and others on the effects of payment trends and proposed policy changes. Representative Sean Garballey testified first, arguing that universal card acceptance and the current interchange system are important to Massachusetts tourism and should not be disrupted ahead of a busy summer season. A large portion of the hearing featured independent restaurant owners and advocates, who said processing fees are especially burdensome because restaurants operate on very thin margins and are charged fees on sales tax and tips that are not retained as revenue. Testifiers including Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, and Kerry Colzer described rising operating costs and gave examples of annual or monthly fee totals, urging relief from fees on tax and gratuity amounts. Ryan Lotz also asked for chargeback reforms, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses before disputing charges, proportional fees, and safeguards against repeat abuse. Several witnesses, including Dan Swanson, argued that states have authority to regulate aspects of the payment system and cited the Illinois litigation and federal court rulings as support for state action. Opposing testimony came from credit unions, banks, payment industry representatives, and policy groups, who warned that changing interchange rules could create compliance burdens, reduce rewards, raise account fees, and shift costs elsewhere. Witnesses such as Alex Vereen, Brad Popolado, Keely McEwen, David Montero, Hunter Hamburlin, and Luke Bondar emphasized fraud prevention, network security, consumer protections, and the need for a stable, uniform payment system. Some suggested alternatives such as vendor compensation, surcharging, instant payments, or QR pay code standards, while others argued that sales tax and tip amounts cannot easily be separated within current card-network architecture. The chairs said the commission is still exploring options, discussed possible state-level solutions, and announced plans for one more public hearing before moving toward recommendations and a report. The commission then voted to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Current law only allows for banks to be the surviving entity. Banks are tax-paying institutions.
• Current law only allows for banks to be the surviving entity. Banks are tax-paying institutions.
• When she finally fell behind, that bank sold it to Select Portfolio Services.
• Okay, a bank like that you could walk into, a bank here in Massachusetts, or do you... you might not
• of New York Mellon, Bank of America, and I think Deutsche Bank, maybe—I don't remember the other banks—they

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on consumer debt, mortgage regulation, credit unions, and foreclosure prevention. The Attorney General’s Office strongly supported the Debt Collection Fairness Act (S. 735/H. 1275), saying it would curb abusive debt collection, prevent stale claims, limit civil arrest warrants, modernize wage garnishment rules, and reduce judgment interest rates. Senator Eldridge and legal aid advocates echoed that support, while the Massachusetts Bankers Association and the Massachusetts Mortgage Bankers Association supported bills on credit union mission/competition, consumer privacy in mortgage applications, subprime loan definitions, UCC updates, and protections for vulnerable adults, but opposed foreclosure mediation proposals and several credit union expansion measures, arguing they would distort competition and add unnecessary burdens. A large portion of the hearing focused on foreclosure prevention bills (S. 765/H. 1090), with testimony from homeowners, housing organizers, and legal advocates describing predatory lending, confusing servicing practices, health harms, and displacement caused by foreclosure. Supporters said a statewide pre-foreclosure mediation program would give borrowers and lenders a chance to reach alternatives such as loan modifications or repayment plans, and cited local experience in Lynn where mediation reportedly produced high rates of foreclosure alternatives. Opponents from the banking industry argued Massachusetts already has strong foreclosure protections and that a new mandatory process could delay resolution without added benefit, though they also noted a 2024 pilot should be evaluated first. The committee also heard strong support for H. 1282/S. 684, which would update the Massachusetts Uniform Commercial Code. State Street and a bankruptcy attorney said the changes are needed to keep commercial law current with electronic transactions, tokenized assets, and blockchain technology, and to maintain competitiveness with other states. The hearing concluded after public testimony, with no bill votes taken during the session; the chair thanked speakers and the committee voted to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• in support of the banks.
• You've got not only your acquiring banks and issuing banks, you've got the acquiring bank, the merchant's
• to his bank account.
• Instead, banks offset those losses by increasing account fees and reducing services.
• Instead, banks offset those losses by increasing account fees and reducing services.

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses held a public hearing focused on interchange fees, sales tax and tip processing, chargebacks, fraud, surcharging, and the broader future of payment systems. Chair Paul Feeney and co-chair Rep. Jamie Murphy opened by explaining the commission’s charge and inviting testimony from small businesses, industry groups, banks, and policy experts. Representative Sean Garballey testified first, arguing that Massachusetts tourism depends on universal card acceptance and stable interchange, and urging the commission not to disrupt the current system ahead of major events expected to bring millions of visitors to the Commonwealth. A large portion of the hearing featured independent restaurant owners and advocates describing thin margins and the burden of paying percentage-based processing fees on sales tax and tips that are not business revenue. Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others said restaurants often operate on very small profits and that processing fees on taxes and gratuities can amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses before disputing charges, and limiting repeat abuse. Commission members pressed witnesses on whether tax and tip amounts could be separated at the point of sale, and several witnesses said current consumer card systems do not transmit that level of detail. Testimony from credit union, banking, and payments representatives largely opposed state-level changes that would carve out taxes or tips from interchange, warning of compliance burdens, higher costs, reduced rewards, and possible effects on fraud protection and access to credit. Alex Verine of America’s Credit Unions and Deb Peters and Keely McEwen of the Electronic Payments Coalition said the payment system is complex, that interchange funds fraud prevention and network infrastructure, and that new state mandates could create operational and legal uncertainty. Dan Swanson argued states have authority to act and pointed to Illinois litigation and federal court rulings, while Julian Morris and Brad Popolado emphasized the benefits of card acceptance, the decline of cash, and the need to consider other payment methods and check fraud as well. Several witnesses discussed international payment systems, instant payments, and QR standards as possible future directions. The chairs and members engaged in extended back-and-forth with witnesses about whether Massachusetts could exempt sales tax from swipe fees, whether surcharging should be revisited, and whether vendor compensation or other targeted relief might be more workable than broad changes to interchange. No votes were taken. At the close of the hearing, the chairs said the commission would hold one additional public hearing date to be determined, after which members would begin developing next steps and a report.