Bills: SB59, SB221, SB59, SB221

Keywords: military families, immunization, education, public health, school enrollment, Mobile County, judge of probate, compensation, salary, expense allowance, higher education, funding, annual report, state funds, federal funds, budget oversight, sales tax, credit card fees, tax exemption, merchants

Bills: HB151, HB152, HB138, SB221, SB190, SB69, SB225, SB272, HB151, HB152, HB138, SB221, SB190, SB69, SB225, SB272

Keywords: fire chaplains, distinctive license plate, firefighter, volunteer service, criminal penalties, sales tax exemption, baby supplies, baby formula, maternity clothing, menstrual hygiene products, pregnancy, pregnant defendant, incarceration, jail intake, pregnancy test, bail, pre-incarceration probation, supervised probation, electronic monitoring, electronic supervision

Transcript Highlights:

• Merchant processing fees in one month...
• And merchants act as nodes.
• and everyone in between, because merchants cannot not re- from the consumer to the merchant and everyone
• But the merchants now—we're talking hundreds of millions of merchants across the globe—have to be able
• The interchange or the merchant discount, excuse me, the merchant discount fee is higher on a credit

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 chaired by Senator Paul Feeney and Representative Jamie Murphy. The commission reviewed its charge to gather input on payment trends, cashless transactions, credit card fees, mobile payments, buy now/pay later, and related issues affecting small businesses. Representative Sean Garballey testified in support of maintaining the current card system, emphasizing tourism’s importance to Massachusetts and arguing that universal card acceptance and interchange stability are especially important with major upcoming events and visitors. A large portion of the hearing focused on independent restaurants and small businesses arguing that credit card processing fees are burdensome and unfair when applied to sales tax and gratuities that are not business revenue. Testifiers including Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others described razor-thin margins and said restaurants pay fees on money passed through to the state or employees. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses first, and making fees proportional. In response, credit union and banking representatives, including Alex Vereen, Brad Popolado, Deb Peters, and Keely McEwen, argued that interchange funds fraud protection, card infrastructure, and consumer protections, and warned that state-specific changes could create compliance burdens, higher costs, or reduced access to services. Several witnesses addressed legal and policy questions. Dan Swanson and David Montero said states have authority to regulate aspects of the payment system, but Montero warned that state-specific rules could create uncertainty and conflict with federal banking law. Julian Morris and other industry witnesses argued that card payments benefit consumers and merchants by reducing cash-handling costs and increasing spending, while critics of reform said changes could shift costs into bank fees or reduced rewards. Commission members questioned whether sales tax could be separated from card transactions, whether surcharging should be considered, and whether vendor compensation or other state-level relief might be more workable. The chairs said they were exploring a narrower, targeted approach rather than a broad overhaul, and announced plans for one additional public hearing to allow further testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Merchant processing fees in one month...
• Merchants benefit from increased throughput at the till.
• sometimes four percent, depending on the merchant.
• Merchants actually pay higher rates between...
• The interchange or the merchant discount, excuse me, the merchant discount fee is higher on a credit

Keywords: 1212, all

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:

• Merchant processing fees in one month...
• sometimes four percent, depending on the merchant.
• And merchants act as nodes.
• And I'll stand by for questions. from the consumer to the merchant and everyone in between, because merchants
• The interchange or the merchant discount, excuse me, the merchant discount fee is higher on a credit

Keywords: 995, all

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition, merchants through payment cards have faster settlements.
• The merchant is fully protected from non-payment.
• The issuing bank absorbs 100 percent of the loss, not the merchant.
• The argument that a merchant has to accept all credit cards...
• is actually negotiated rates between the merchants and their banks.

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses held what was described as its last public hearing. Chair Paul Feeney opened by noting the commission’s mandate under Chapter 238 of the Acts of 2024 and explained that members would continue working on a final report after the hearing. The meeting featured testimony from banks, payment industry groups, restaurant advocates, convenience store representatives, and others, with repeated discussion of interchange fees, surcharging, fraud, and federal preemption issues. Banking and card-industry witnesses, including the Massachusetts Bankers Association, the Card Coalition, and the Electronic Payments Coalition, argued that state-level interchange restrictions would disrupt a global payment system, create compliance problems, and likely apply only to a small share of transactions because of federal preemption. They emphasized consumer and merchant benefits of cards, the role of banks in absorbing fraud losses, and recent federal and state developments, including Illinois litigation, OCC and NCUA actions, and a settlement that they said would give merchants more flexibility. Several witnesses also suggested alternatives such as vendor compensation for tax collection and modernizing Massachusetts’ surcharge ban. Restaurant and convenience-store advocates took the opposite view, saying swipe fees are a major burden on thin-margin businesses and that merchants should not pay interchange on sales tax or gratuities that are not their revenue. Mass Restaurants United and individual restaurant owners described severe financial strain, rising costs, and the need for transparency and relief. NACS supported swipe fee reform and argued that current fees are excessive and inflationary. A few members questioned witnesses about whether industry should share more of the burden and about the feasibility of changing the current system. No votes or formal policy actions were taken. The chair said the commission would meet again to discuss a draft framework and final report, and members of the public were invited to submit additional written testimony before the commission concludes its work.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition, merchants through payment cards have faster settlements.
• The merchant is fully protected from non-payment.
• The issuing bank absorbs 100 percent of the loss, not the merchant.
• Massachusetts has meaningful tools available to provide relief for merchants.
• is actually negotiated rates between the merchants and their banks.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission studying the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses held what leaders described as its last public hearing, though they said the commission would continue meeting to develop a report and recommendations. Chair Paul Feeney and other members noted the issue is complex and that they had sought testimony from a wide range of stakeholders before moving into a more deliberative phase. The commission adjourned after hearing from several in-person and virtual witnesses. Banking and card-industry witnesses, including the Massachusetts Bankers Association, the Card Coalition, the Electronic Payments Coalition, and others, argued that payment cards provide major benefits to consumers and merchants, including convenience, fraud protection, fast settlement, and broad access to electronic commerce. They warned that state-level changes to interchange rules could create a patchwork of conflicting requirements, disrupt global payment systems, and especially affect state-chartered community banks and small businesses. Several also said recent federal actions and litigation, including OCC and NCUA preemption rules and the Illinois interchange-fee litigation, have limited the practical reach of state laws. Restaurant, retail, and convenience-store witnesses pushed for relief from swipe fees, saying independent businesses operate on thin margins and pay fees on amounts that are not really their revenue, such as sales tax and gratuities. They urged transparency, the ability to surcharge, vendor compensation for tax collection, and limits on interchange or related fees. Some witnesses said merchants bear significant fraud and chargeback costs and that banks and card networks have not offered enough direct relief. Commissioners asked questions about surcharging, fee regulation, fraud, and whether industry should share more of the burden. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond adjourning the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• of fact indicates that the merchant is responsible.
• There are costs of doing business for merchants and our taxpayers.
• I mean, it's unlike for a merchant.
• Merchants don't have anything to do with it.
• The 2021 Federal Reserve report showed that merchants actually...

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

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:

• It's the merchants who bear the burden.
• How about merchants? What? I haven't really heard from merchants. That's what they have to end up.
• That merchant then has to wait for the finding.
• It will prohibit retaliation against a merchant.
• Fox Scientific's merchant fees were very low.

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

Keywords: temporary emergency electric energy facility, temporary generation, emergency power, backup generation, mobile generator, portable generator, grid resilience, power outage restoration, transmission and distribution utility, TDU, Public Utility Commission of Texas, PUCT, Utilities Code Section 39.918, competitive bidding, lease authorization, emergency procurement, bulk power system, locational marginal pricing, reliability model, black start

Transcript Highlights:

• These are all pressures that small retailers and small merchants are facing.
• These are all pressures that small retailers and small merchants are facing.
• about five and six and seven percent merchant discounts.
• about five and six and seven percent merchant discounts.
• So we want small merchants and small restaurants to have the choice.

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses heard testimony from credit union, retail, banking, and payments industry representatives. Much of the discussion focused on proposals to exclude sales tax and tips from interchange fees, the Illinois Interchange Fee Prohibition Act and related litigation, and whether similar state action in Massachusetts would help small businesses or instead create a patchwork that burdens state-chartered institutions. Witnesses from defense and community credit unions argued interchange helps fund fraud prevention, cybersecurity, member services, and low-fee products, while retail and NRF representatives said merchants are paying significant swipe fees and that state laws like Illinois’s are aimed at reducing costs that are not being passed on to consumers. Several witnesses emphasized that the current payment system provides security, fraud protection, rewards, and access to credit, and that many of the costs merchants complain about are actually bundled processor or acquirer fees rather than interchange itself. Others countered that small businesses are struggling with rising overall costs and that Massachusetts should consider reforms such as allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs. There was also discussion of the recent Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement, with industry witnesses describing it as meaningful relief for merchants and opponents saying it is temporary and incomplete. No formal votes were taken on legislation. The commission accepted oral testimony, noted that written testimony would be accepted through July 31, and concluded the meeting by unanimously voting to adjourn. The chair and members said they would continue gathering testimony and work toward recommendations, with the chair stressing the need to find a fair middle ground that supports both small businesses and the broader payments ecosystem.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are all pressures that small retailers and small merchants are facing.
• Merchants are right, though.
• The contract between the merchant and their acquirer Built on top of that.
• about five and six and seven percent merchant discounts.
• So we want small merchants and small restaurants to have the choice.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card heard extensive testimony from credit union, banking, retail, restaurant, and payments-industry representatives about proposals to limit interchange fees, especially on the tax and tip portions of transactions. Several witnesses opposed state-level restrictions, arguing they would create a patchwork of rules, burden state-chartered institutions, raise compliance complexity, and ultimately reduce resources for fraud prevention, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit. Others, including retail and merchant advocates, said swipe fees are a significant and growing cost for small businesses and that states should consider reforms such as limiting fees on taxes and tips, allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs more closely. Witnesses also discussed recent legal and regulatory developments, including Illinois’s interchange-fee law, OCC and NCUA interim rules, and the ongoing Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement. Industry representatives said the Illinois law has been delayed and is likely preempted for most transactions, while merchant advocates argued the state efforts and court rulings show that networks and banks do not set fees competitively. The proposed antitrust settlement was described by some as a meaningful but limited merchant victory, with temporary fee reductions and expanded surcharge/steering rights, while others said it still falls short of structural reform. The commission members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of fees, the cost of cash, whether merchants can pass costs through, and whether small businesses are actually seeing benefits from the current system. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for a fair middle ground that protects both small businesses and the payment system. No substantive votes or policy actions were taken beyond accepting testimony, and the meeting ended with adjournment after all scheduled witnesses had spoken.

Transcript Highlights:

• These fees are crushing merchants and small businesses who have These fees are crushing merchants and
• for gun merchants, but it was only able to do that after the ISO approved the new merchant category
• ... ...the bank charges back the fraud to the debit card holder or to the merchant, and merchants end
• You'll find merchant processors saying any merchant can do it now.
• You'll find merchant processors saying any merchant can do it now.

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:

• There's no way for small merchants or the taco truck or even the There's no way for small merchants or
• Merchants are right though.
• about five and six and seven percent merchant discounts.
• about five and six and seven percent merchant discounts.
• So we want small merchants and small restaurants to have the choice.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, payment industry groups, and a credit card issuer. Much of the discussion focused on proposed state laws that would limit interchange fees on the tax and tip portions of transactions, especially Illinois’s Interchange Fee Prohibition Act and similar efforts in other states. Witnesses opposing the proposals argued that interchange helps fund fraud protection, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit, and warned that state-by-state rules would create a patchwork that could harm state-chartered banks and credit unions, raise compliance costs, and reduce consumer access to credit. Supporters of reform argued that swipe fees are a significant burden on merchants, especially small businesses, and that current pricing is opaque and often bundled with other processor charges. Several witnesses emphasized that the current payment system provides major benefits to merchants and consumers, including security, convenience, faster settlement, online commerce, and broader access to credit. One witness from Capital One said the industry’s losses from fraud and default are substantial and that interchange helps offset those risks; he also noted that merchants already have some tools, such as surcharging where allowed and negotiating clearer processor contracts. Retail representatives and the National Retail Federation countered that small businesses are under pressure from many costs and that interchange and related fees remain a real pain point, with some urging the commission to consider reforms that would return more money to businesses without disrupting the system. There was also discussion of the recent Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement, with industry witnesses describing it as a significant merchant win that includes temporary rate reductions, more surcharge flexibility, and the ability to decline certain card tiers. No votes were taken. The meeting concluded after all scheduled testimony was heard, with the commission chair saying the session had been productive and that the committee would continue gathering testimony and written comments before making recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, a merchant can decide...
• Merchants have no ability to negotiate.
• They have to get merchants to agree to accept them.
• It's open to every Texas merchant that sells legal goods, but the merchants...
• Um, but the merchant gets paid immediately. Yes, they get... Unless it's their merchant discount.

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

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:

• That bill required to recognize the merchant category code that was newly created for gun merchants.
• You'll find merchant processors saying any merchant can do it.
• And merchant profit margins did not go up.
• We don't think merchants were able to hoard savings from this.
• Merchants and retail are very competitive.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The merchant is on the hook for that.
• The merchant is on the hook for that.
• The merchant is on the hook for that.
• The merchant is on the hook for that.
• And that's even before they charge back that fraud to the merchants.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met for its second hearing to study the future of credit card payments and sales transactions and their impacts on small businesses. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurants, and payment-industry representatives on interchange fees, processing fees, fraud, chargebacks, rewards programs, and the ability of businesses to pass fees on to customers. Several witnesses argued that swipe fees have risen sharply, are especially burdensome for restaurants and other small businesses, and are charged on taxes and tips that are merely pass-through amounts. They urged state action to prohibit fees on tax and tip portions, improve transparency, and allow surcharging or convenience fees, while opponents warned that state regulation could reduce fraud protections, increase compliance costs, and threaten consumer rewards programs. Business owners and trade groups described thin margins, rising costs, and the difficulty of understanding merchant statements or negotiating with processors. Restaurant witnesses said card-not-present and online transactions create the greatest fraud and chargeback risk, with money often removed immediately from merchants’ accounts and disputes rarely resolved in their favor. Retail witnesses gave examples of rising effective rates, higher fees on rewards cards, and the burden of processing fees on low-value transactions. A representative from the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and others said restaurants are effectively paying fees on meals tax and gratuities, which they argued should not be subject to interchange charges. On the other side, the Cooperative Credit Union Association said interchange revenue helps credit unions fund fraud prevention, rapid card replacement, and member protections, and warned that state limits on interchange could weaken those safeguards and lead to higher consumer costs or reduced services. Airlines for America testified that airline credit card rewards are popular, support travel and jobs in Massachusetts, and could be harmed by interchange reform. The National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that interchange fees are set by card networks rather than competitive markets, that banks remain highly profitable even with rewards, and that states can act after recent court decisions. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questions from commissioners.

Transcript Highlights:

• The merchant discount is the total of what a merchant pays when they accept a credit card.
• The amount of total merchant discount varies by what the merchant chooses to purchase in their bundle
• But that's up to the merchant. The merchants control their menu prices. They control their rules.
• It doesn’t affect the merchant discount or the network fee.
• The acquiring bank, the merchant, the bank that the merchant works with, they may charge more or less

Keywords: 995, all

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:

• It deals with the merchant of record issue here.
• It deals with the merchant of record issue here.
• </c> &gt;&gt; it deals with merchant of record Mr. &gt;&gt; it deals with merchant of record Mr.
• And merchant of record uh issue here.
• So are they supposed to be the merchant of record?

Bills: SB294, HB296, HB300, SB269

Keywords: public officers, bonding, risk management, notification, delinquency, consumer protection, rental home, marketplace guarantees, insurance, commissioner of insurance, healthcare, breast cancer screening, insurance coverage, deductible, copayment, emergency medical services, ambulance reimbursement, health care insurers, balance billing, provider networks

Transcript Highlights:

• Rates with merchants.
• I negotiate with my contracted partner, a merchant. and acquirer.
• You are correct that small merchants do not get that opportunity.
• Fox Scientific's merchant fees were very low.
• This forces the card issuers to negotiate with every merchant.

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

Keywords: temporary emergency electric energy facility, temporary generation, emergency power, backup generation, mobile generator, portable generator, grid resilience, power outage restoration, transmission and distribution utility, TDU, Public Utility Commission of Texas, PUCT, Utilities Code Section 39.918, competitive bidding, lease authorization, emergency procurement, bulk power system, locational marginal pricing, reliability model, black start

Transcript Highlights:

• The merchant is on the hook for that.”
• The merchant is wrong.” Chair: “Thank you. Any further questions?
• And the protections to the merchant are only with chip or chip and PIN.
• Everybody has their hands out, and the merchants last.”
• And that's even before they charge back that fraud to the merchants.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The commission met to continue studying credit card payments, interchange fees, fraud, chargebacks, and the impact of card processing costs on small businesses, especially restaurants and retailers. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurant owners, payment-industry representatives, and an airline trade group. Supporters of reform argued that swipe fees are a major and rising expense, that businesses are paying fees on sales tax and tips that are merely pass-through amounts, and that merchants have little negotiating power. Several restaurant and retail witnesses described thin margins, higher costs for card-not-present transactions, and chargebacks that they said usually favor cardholders and leave merchants absorbing losses and fees. Witnesses from the Cooperative Credit Union Association cautioned that state-level interchange regulation could reduce revenue used for fraud prevention, compliance, and member services, and could lead to higher rates or reduced access. Retail and restaurant representatives countered that fees have risen sharply, that statements are difficult to decipher, and that rewards programs and card-network pricing are subsidized by merchants and ultimately by all consumers. The Massachusetts Restaurant Association and independent operators urged legislation to bar fees on tax and tip portions of transactions and to allow businesses to pass along card fees if they choose, saying this would improve transparency and fairness and help keep small restaurants open. Other testimony came from the National Restaurant Association, which supported interchange reform and said modern point-of-sale systems can already separate tax and tip amounts, and from a payments-industry group that emphasized the broader economic benefits of digital payments and warned against state-by-state rules. Airlines for America opposed changes that could undermine airline credit card rewards programs. Commission members asked detailed questions about fee structures, card types, chargebacks, POS systems, and whether consumers paying cash are also affected. No votes or formal actions were taken at the meeting.