Regulation
Financial justice advocates criticize cryptocurrency regulation bill / Public News Service
Consumer advocates are opposing a bill aimed at regulating the cryptocurrency market, saying it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
THE Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act It would give regulatory power to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission instead of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Mark Hays, senior policy analyst at the nonprofits Demand Progress and Americans for Financial Reform, said that would be a mistake.
“You’re basically creating a more lax regulatory regime that allows cryptocurrency companies to basically do what they do with a veneer of protection,” Hays emphasized. “But it doesn’t really provide the same kind of protection that you get if you just deal with them like we do now.”
Supporters of the bill say it creates strong protections for consumers and provides regulatory certainty for the growing industry to thrive. The bill passed the U.S. House last month with a majority of Republican votes but also with some support from progressive Democrats, including Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., Rep. Jimmy Gomez , D-Calif., Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove, D-Calif., Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., Rep. Mike Levin, D-Calif., Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., and Rep. Jimmy Panetta, D -Calif.
Kevin Stein, chief legal and strategy officer for the nonprofit RISE Economy, said lawmakers should put the needs of vulnerable consumers first.
“There are all these horror stories and consumer violations, so we need regulation,” Stein said. “The cryptocurrency industry puts a lot of money and lobbying power into trying to get the rules it wants and that’s always a recipe for disaster.”
The US Senate will now consider whether to accept the bill.
Disclosure: Americans for Financial Reform contributes to our fund for reporting on policy and budget priorities, campaign finance reform/money in politics, and social justice. If you want to help support news of public interest, Click here.
get more stories like this via email
In a analysis of 100 cities in the United StatesCincinnati ranks 22nd in reducing credit limits, not for the city itself, but for its residents.
Large decreases in the average credit limit can indicate where people are having financial trouble. According to Cassandra Happe, analyst at WalletHubwhen credit card issuers evaluate the profitability and risks of particular users, they might lower someone’s credit limit to reduce their risk and increase long-term profitability.
Happe said people should be aware of how a credit limit reduction can impact their overall financial well-being.
“Adjust your spending accordingly,” he said, “so you don’t hurt your credit score in the long run by spending more, when you have less available to spend.”
He noted that Cincinnati has seen a sizable decline over the past year, with individual credit limits cut by more than 15% on average. In the same poll, Columbus, Toledo and Cleveland were near the middle of the pack at 45th, 72nd and 80th, respectively.
Happe said this indicates that people are managing their accounts well and that credit card issuers see no need to reduce those limits.
It’s a good idea,” he said, “for people to check their current credit limits, and make sure their balances don’t cause what’s known as their “credit utilization” to be higher than it would be. otherwise.
“If you see that your balance is substantially higher than your limit,” he said, “you may want to focus on paying off that balance, to ensure you don’t take a lot of damage to your credit score.”
The report shows that for accounts opened in the first quarter of this year, Cincinnati ranked 77th in terms of average credit limit per user, indicating higher credit limits for these new account holders, compared to many other cities in the study.
This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.
get more stories like this via email
A new online guide helps people in Connecticut and nationwide recover from scams.
The Better Business Bureau Scam Survival Kit connects people with services that allow them to recover mentally and financially from scams. Research shows that after being scammed, people feel angry, anxious, stressed and have a loss of trust.
Kristen Johnson, communications director for the Better Business Bureau Serving Connecticut, said they often feel isolated, too.
“Many of them don’t even want to admit it to their closest friends and family,” Johnson explained. “They feel so alone like they are the only ones who have experienced all of this and they don’t realize that there are thousands and thousands of people who have experienced the same scam, not to mention all the different scams out there.”
She added that this can lead to a loss of confidence and feelings of shame and embarrassment. The Scam Survival Kit aims to encourage more people to report scams. One feature of the kit is called Survivor Stories, with quotes from other people who have been victims of scams. People can also upload their own words of encouragement so that more people feel comfortable reporting their experiences.
While most people think of individuals being scammed, Johnson pointed out that the Scam Survival Kit can also help businesses by focusing on data breaches.
“We’re talking about data breaches because it’s not only one of the most common types of scams against companies, but it’s also one of the most impactful ones,” Johnson noted. “Because obviously they can get financial information for the company and for the employees.”
Businesses lose money about 30% of the time when they are targeted by scammers, much less than people vulnerable to scams. Businesses lose an average of $523 to scammers, compared to about $100 reported by consumers.
get more stories like this via email
THE “AM radio for every vehicle law“Now Congress will require that all new cars in the United States be equipped with AM radios, which is sparking debate in Missouri.
The legislation is supported by 60 bipartisan U.S. senators, including Rep. Josh Hawley, R-Mo. But it is being criticized by the Consumer Technology Association for its potential to increase vehicle costs and stifle innovation, particularly with the growing popularity of electric vehicles.
Gary Shapiro, CEO of the Consumer Technology Association, testified against the mandate in a House subcommittee. He highlighted the financial and technological burdens that a mandate would impose on both automakers and consumers.
“AM radio is wonderful but should not be required in all cars sold in the ‘forever future,’ because it is a trade-off for safety and other features, and it costs money,” Shapiro said. “Slow the transition to electric cars.”
Supporters of the mandate have countered that AM radio is critical for emergency broadcasts, particularly in rural areas where digital signals can be weak. Shapiro pointed out that integrating AM radios into electric vehicles is problematic because of signal interference from batteries, which would cause costly redesigns and divert resources from other advances.
For Missourians, especially those in rural areas who may rely more on AM radio for information, a mandate would present both benefits and challenges. While AM radio’s broad reach is valuable, Shapiro argues that such a requirement could hinder the state’s broader efforts to transition to electric vehicles.
He added that the need for AM radio is waning with the advent of digital and streaming options, which many consumers now prefer.
“AM radio is not going away; we don’t think it should be a requirement,” Shapiro explained. “There are simpler solutions, for example, if you’re not buying a car with an AM radio, the car seller should have to disclose that. Or you could hook up an AM radio.”
Shapiro stressed that a balanced approach is needed to electrify vehicles while satisfying the radio industry and respecting consumer choice and market dynamics.