[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6298044,"mediaKeyId","2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca","parentId",2505657,"title","Subcommittee amends online subscription transparency bill, delays final action (House Bill 420)","audioSeconds",1287,"startMs",4339000,"endMs",5626000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca&start=4339&end=5626","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca/thumbnail_4339000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6298044/Tennessee/Subcommittee-amends-online-subscription-transparency-bill-delays-final-action-House-Bill-420","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6298044-8a7050b76cb674cb7a1340364ad42299/orig.mp4?Expires=1770989936&Signature=n09RdapbYndGc6mkGjELQqY9VnYV2Yn~KNvh6d1PPw4JWdVC7-nns-dyA2o-doysqIifrR0J5~bTNoZqO3aZAc6aIBQM9uxmFTtqGDr7EqcBWTvlz28ucHPx0K~thnJy8yc2VlAdPiORejEJ5-lpTqRfmdPNHVrcl2jk08BYMpm8WJqZEqOP8Bt8qZiB8rLKqEsphJRBNhymIMXd0riJVpamU41ydNa6p2ecGQfiL6NL~lX-7EG9UQ-4F7KEmhD2tYg2-yupRhzW1RPKES5n2i089JCgSvEOdV~AVWUmOLL7goHaH9ncGaGoCfqqlzxv~VReFvaJEZGkEzUFZt0AZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","TN State Legislature","date","2025-03-05T00:00:00Z","article","The Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee amended House Bill 420, a measure intended to bring Tennessee consumer‑protection rules for automatic renewals into online transactions, and then voted to roll the bill one week to allow additional stakeholder negotiation.

Sponsor Representative Rudd told the committee the bill’s goals are to require clear, conspicuous disclosures for automatic renewal and continuous‑service offers, to obtain express consumer consent before charging a stored payment method, and to require easy cancellation. He said the draft excludes regulated utilities and certain financial services and that an amendment would move the bill’s effective date from July 1 to Dec. 31, 2025 to give vendors time to update contracts and website code.

\"What we're trying to do is rectify that and bring this in line with what we've already passed in the code,\" Rudd said, summarizing the intent to apply existing Tennessee consumer‑protection language to online subscription offers.

The committee adopted the amendment (voice vote: ayes) that: (1) carved out specified public‑utility, banking and similar regulated services from the statute’s scope, and (2) extended the implementation date to Dec. 31, 2025. Rudd also said he expects to drop one subsection that would have required an extra confirmation at the end of a free trial; stakeholders including technology and entertainment platforms had asked to avoid duplicative confirmations.

Committee members raised consumer examples (automatic, unnoticed renewals) and asked about overlap with federal law and other states. The sponsor said comparable online‑subscription rules exist in other states and that the goal is consumer protection. After discussion, a member moved and the committee agreed to roll the bill one week to finish technical drafting; no final passage occurred.

The subcommittee also noted that the changes mirror existing Tennessee Code language (testimony cited Tennessee Code section 47‑18‑133(a)(1) and (2)) but extend those requirements to online renewal and continuous‑service offers.

The subcommittee plans to take the bill up again after staff and stakeholders submit the clarified amendment language.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee\tMar 5, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Lawmakers adopted an amendment to House Bill 420 to exclude certain utilities and to delay the effective date; sponsor said industry stakeholders remain at the table and the committee rolled the bill one week for additional drafting.","taxTitle","Banking & Consumer Affairs, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, Tennessee","taxId",79843,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6298049,"Subcommittee approves higher acquisition charges for small‑loan classes, sends bill to full committee (House Bill 775)",320,3633000,3953000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca&start=3633&end=3953","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca/thumbnail_3633000.jpg","/articles/6298049/Tennessee/Subcommittee-approves-higher-acquisition-charges-for-smallloan-classes-sends-bill-to-full-committee-House-Bill-775","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6298049-270795758a300bd02c2ce1abdad30b5b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770989936&Signature=OVNTIFSno8o1kcjZc33Bhbbh7PptfY1-TYUFJMk0FeyGfd93INdnOjsgfVo7lhbQ1P5tyuExL676uavGCnvBXmM3w-PeQYQNUTtDFmajVD-ghN6T0o12U4~I8YdUG8OOd5zUMg7Bh27aYgnd003RskZZDol5RfTWeDJ7ot7PnAWFVuSiB~hz-j22Uz9g~ww82cTXLNIBCwj42vfy~73WKQ3J-rOTBOywLlKxT86WROSDQ89r-FanT6S~9HrT3fcgOxX5UAsWMUuX2e-RSId7MYSDi9y2faBYL3Wn2KlI7jfJs812saYImpwblDuwveGnuYBYA0KtUWVaGGY9F1APlQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee voted to advance House Bill 775, which raises acquisition charges on two categories of consumer loans, to the full Commerce Committee.

The bill, presented by Chairman Powers (former committee chair), proposes to raise the acquisition charge on Class A loans from 10% to 12% and to increase the Class B rate from 34% to 36%. Powers said the last increase for Class A occurred in 2012 and the last Class B change was in 2017. \"The increase will support improved service and access to credit for underserved and unbanked populations,\" Powers said.

Committee members asked for clarification about the differences between Class A and Class B loans. Mr. Swanson (staff) explained that Class A generally refers to traditional loans not subject to a dollar cap, while Class B often has a $2,000 cap and relies more on debt‑to‑income factors.

After brief questions and no substantive amendments, committee members voted. The clerk reported four ayes; the chair announced the bill advances to full commerce. No vote roll call with individual names was recorded in the transcript.","The Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee approved House Bill 775 to raise acquisition charges on two loan classes, sending the measure to full commerce after brief questioning; the committee recorded four ayes on the motion.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6298054,"Subcommittee rejects bill that would change who gets priority for investor securities in insolvency (House Bill 443)",3398,395000,3793000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca&start=395&end=3793","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505657-b918be9e384b52ebc82bdd0fc54b3cca/thumbnail_395000.jpg","/articles/6298054/Tennessee/Subcommittee-rejects-bill-that-would-change-who-gets-priority-for-investor-securities-in-insolvency-House-Bill-443","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6298054-c80b8df3d7cff1d80a75f42142907495/orig.mp4?Expires=1770989936&Signature=A2Eu0OOS6XDRMybtuMNg6QCLp-qMvOtsOg8PDDjyZsY3runyhVjuCzUzRDk51K3Pg4~9FMCSfZ6nfou2IzLbdwFskbMKTwNHHipk4KpH385jahga9yEsI-ks2ktBnL27mm2EoylUPANrec4iIStv5eVP-0XsjP5b0wDwkcjGztZBvQqJn~SaNl5LDzBiM~cilKvCNmwXmetkaEF8wi1SRru3AKnX9qKKIAfnUymaRV5MoT7dsEf2xXXfK8yx-f7qrjTXPvxfxIs60JV8qDORt~BUjBScNlTwPZaJLe3-Mn-I-wPVCSGvIgXexBgy6~SbJmx6sqjZmkl~~dQPSTBAvw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At a meeting of the Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee, members voted 1–4 to defeat House Bill 443, legislation that would change portions of the Uniform Commercial Code governing electronic securities accounts and the priority of claims if an intermediary becomes insolvent.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Halsey, would have made two principal changes: require disputes over customer securities to be governed by the law of the customer’s jurisdiction rather than the law chosen by a securities intermediary, and alter priority rules to place an investor (an “entitlement holder”) ahead of secured lenders if a custodian or intermediary becomes insolvent. \"This deals with the uniform commercial code, and my bill just does 2 things,\" Representative Halsey told the committee.

Proponents said the current Article 8 structure creates a class of secured creditors who can sweep pooled assets in insolvency. Don Grandy, an attorney representing True North Public Policy, testified that the 1994 revision to Article 8 created the concept of a \"security entitlement\" that differs from holding a paper stock certificate and that portions of Article 8 (referred to in testimony as section 8‑5‑11) contain carve-outs that can allow secured creditors to obtain priority in certain insolvencies. David Theis, a private citizen and former fund manager, told the committee the law \"essentially takes away the ownership rights of individual private citizens, private corporations and pension funds.\"

Opponents — including Tim Amos, a Tennessee uniform law commissioner; Amy Hazlett of the Tennessee Bankers Association; and Steven Sepanek, an adjunct professor at Vanderbilt Law School who chaired the American Bar Association UCC committee for three years — urged the committee to reject the bill. Hazlett said the indirect-holding system \"provides many advantages for investors\" and that the narrow exceptions proponents cite mostly apply to margin accounts or to secured credit extended to clearing corporations. Sepanek warned that altering choice-of-law rules \"could be disastrous for Tennesseans\" and undermine the uniformity the UCC aims to preserve.

Committee members pressed witnesses on who would benefit and who might be harmed if states diverged on these rules. Supporters said the measure was aimed at large, \"protected class\" banks and clearing houses; critics responded that the bill could harm Tennessee intermediaries and make counterparties unwilling to do business with them.

After roughly two hours of testimony and questioning, the clerk reported the tally: 1 aye and 4 noes, and the motion failed. The committee recorded the outcome but did not adopt any amendments or send the bill forward.

The debate touched on past insolvencies as examples: witnesses referenced the Lehman Brothers collapse in 2008 and related litigation to explain how pooled, fungible holdings and certain bankruptcy ","The Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee defeated House Bill 443, a measure that would have altered Uniform Commercial Code Article 8 rules to give individual entitlement holders priority over secured lenders and to restrict choice-of-law clauses; the vote was 1–4.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Subcommittee amends online subscription transparency bill, delays final action (House Bill 420)

Subcommittee approves higher acquisition charges for small‑loan classes, sends bill to full committee (House Bill 775)

Subcommittee rejects bill that would change who gets priority for investor securities in insolvency (House Bill 443)