[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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",[32,76,88,100],{"_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",6639656,"mediaKeyId","3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b","parentId",3494110,"title","Nevada bill would create ‘payments bank’ charter to attract fintech firms and fees","audioSeconds",2859,"startMs",9741000,"endMs",12600000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b&start=9741&end=12600","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b/thumbnail_9741000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6639656/Nevada/Nevada-bill-would-create-payments-bank-charter-to-attract-fintech-firms-and-fees","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6639656-4ede3b8686a5c9ef2ad6b67fc6922a40/orig.mp4?Expires=1770528117&Signature=e3PTq2FzuojU~DFp25ETRx7BQW~RZA4ca2tg8r5iq2ZW0T~A-SvPVdKpy~Z4qIrtlqTCuWjMM-SRgu4O4Bwg~xeJ0vLxQfFsj4JHA92exxXVL7rN7-9UMirdbTLiNk5QLLASa~-tKsR3XQ1E6xVl7jA1PdEzA3AzgAOdYrKc1LlskTpzcgPiMq8Nnh3TSKbh2lyvsOTpF4OIdXR3RkeeACyh5jIUqa5GOWjHrGqXihMFFNetZfWRQF0f3T-vUpLfYPGPjDBT-RDDUgGd9tqS0AHGOtYQYNuAPmCleMMQIyWJo6S1H9wZ-rIfihZkiitR0Yla~fp96yM~h6y6fww~8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-05-24T00:00:00Z","article","Assembly Bill 500 would create a new Nevada Payments Bank charter for institutions that focus on payment processing rather than lending, with supporters saying the framework could bring large private-sector operations and new state revenue.

Proponents including sponsor Assemblymember Steve Yeager and Brian Wachter of the Retail Association of Nevada told the Assembly Ways and Means Committee that a Nevada charter could reduce the fees small businesses pay today and generate substantial state revenue from a small per-transaction assessment. Wachter said a 0.025% transaction fee in a conservative scenario could translate into “tens of millions” and, if larger firms relocated payment operations to Nevada, could produce hundreds of millions annually. He said companies such as PayPal and large payment processors have told committee members they would consider a Nevada charter.

Supporters framed AB 500 as a narrow, supervised innovation: payments banks would not make loans or hold retail deposits in the usual way, and licensing would require oversight, capital and either FDIC insurance or an approved private equivalent. ‘‘This would allow payment companies to apply for access to systems like Fedwire, ACH, and FedNow,’’ Assemblymember Yeager said, adding that the legislation is designed to protect consumers and produce state revenue without raising taxes.

Opponents — notably the Office of Financial Institutions (FID), the Nevada Bankers Association and state-chartered credit unions — urged caution. FID’s commissioner, Sandy O’Loughlin, said the division’s fiscal note reflects real staffing and examination costs needed to supervise a new charter type, including travel if corporate headquarters are out of state. State-chartered credit unions and banks said regulatory assessments could shift startup supervisory costs onto existing state-chartered institutions unless the bill and appropriations explicitly prevent that.

The bill contains a host of technical details and amendments under discussion: which entity collects the new transaction fee (the treasurer was inserted at the committee’s request), application and licensing fees, and criteria for deposit insurance versus surety or private insurance where FDIC coverage is not used. Proponents also offered language removing ‘‘reputational risk’’ as an independent supervisory category, arguing federal regulators are moving away from that term and that supervision should focus on solvency, liquidity and compliance.

Regulators and industry groups sought clarity on two practical points: (1) who pays the bill’s upfront regulatory cost before ongoing license fees ramp up, and (2) how the state will ensure supervision does not cross-subsidize the new charter’s startup costs from existing licensees. The Nevada Bankers Association and credit unions asked that the Legislature make clear that the general fund cover initial regulatory investments so existing assessments do not rise.

Proponents stressed the state could capture fees now leaving Nevada’s economy and that consumers and small businesses could see lower merchant fees if payment processing is routed through Nevada-chartered entities. Several trade groups and local business associations testified in support; labor and consumer groups were neutral or not present.

Where it stands: The committee heard extensive testimony and follow-up questions about the fiscal note and regulatory scope. Supporters asked legislators to weigh potential long-term state revenue and economic development against the near-term cost and regulatory complexity. No final legislative action on AB 500 was recorded in the hearing transcript; sponsors and regulators said they would continue drafting technical amendments.

Looking ahead: If the bill advances, key issues for lawmakers will include how the first months of regulation will be funded, whether treasury or another office receives and administers the per-transaction fee, and whether enhanced consumer-protection reporting and examiner resources are provided up-front. Supporters said firms have already asked to be ‘‘in Nevada on day one’’ if a charter is available; regulators said they need time and staffing to perform oversight.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/24/2025 - Assembly Committee on Ways and Means","oneSentenceSummary","Assembly Bill 500 would license a new state-chartered \"payments bank\" focused on moving money rather than lending, a change proponents say could attract large fintech operations to Nevada, lower merchant fees and create new state revenue.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NV, Nevada","taxId",78440,"location","Nevada","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},6639644,"Assembly amendment delays expanded paid family and medical leave to 2028; employers push back on costs",1020,18180000,19200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b&start=18180&end=19200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b/thumbnail_18180000.jpg","/articles/6639644/Nevada/Assembly-amendment-delays-expanded-paid-family-and-medical-leave-to-2028-employers-push-back-on-costs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6639644-b91258d4e3db542993090f4af2874a5c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770528117&Signature=a~C8otCwDMWixN1pwdn5kAjTSBbubDluOMGUfvIwDK0ZdOs7qlDlhq~zfO7~joslaVf3xpu5fbhuXxYvyYLsDLMFr1NIED0qoNkxBRnwg8QE9tUSjzynyYTiNnw1iQUkoxAw0invmFsxLOBF3sXM3bY0AsX0ywsRWc~UdmHg2W8Q1jZovQuxec~XYq9JSjaNv2d-Vbzk-3WApzqFzygHxP388eTtl0r2VVeCNS8bQPr2OuZysKQQgf~kPp8hjkdMemNevDxdoRgjfdIGfUmRCkKMP4rxwioFDmP0r7sGqzVM9urnens9R8AuYcqzn8PFpAoic-btQ93WIqnIRfT28w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assembly Bill 388 — a proposal to expand paid family and medical leave in Nevada — was presented with a new amendment that delays the bill’s effective date to Jan. 1, 2028. Sponsor Assemblymember Selena LaRue Hatch and supporters described the date change as a way to give state agencies and private employers more time to plan implementation and to soften immediate fiscal pressures on the current biennium.

Supporters including labor organizations testified the policy supports working families and will help recruit and retain employees. Proponents emphasized that many state agencies earlier submitted zero or reduced fiscal notes and that a delayed start would allow agencies to build implementation costs into future budget requests. Julie testimony from public‑sector unions and educators argued the benefit would improve workforce stability in schools and public programs.

Opponents included the Retail Association of Nevada, the Nevada Resort Association, chambers of commerce and trade groups representing auto dealers, construction and trucking. They warned the bill’s cost to businesses, especially small firms and industries with project‑based or seasonal employment models, would be large and could force higher prices, reduced hiring or layoff risks. The Nevada Franchise Auto Dealers Association presented a scenario estimating substantial payroll costs per store; construction and contractor groups cited the risk of triggering paid‑leave obligations for short‑term project hires.

Sponsor LaRue Hatch said she and the Labor Commissioner worked on conceptual amendments earlier in the session but chose the implementation‑date change to give more time for policy and contractual work between sessions. Labor Commissioner Brett Harris confirmed the date change means no fiscal impact for FY 2026–27, while future biennial costs would be assessed based on the final policy. Several public employers (including NSHE representatives) told the committee they expect future fiscal impacts but that some revisions and collective bargaining could change departmental costs.

Where it stands: Committee members heard both policy and fiscal arguments; the sponsor indicated the delay was intended to allow more planning and to bring agencies into alignment with future budgets. Opponents remained concerned the delay postpones but does not eliminate long‑term costs. The committee did not adopt final language on the bill in the transcript extract; sponsors said they would continue policy work and possibly propose additional cleanup language later.","Sponsor Assemblymember Selena LaRue Hatch amended AB 388 to delay the expanded paid family and medical leave program’s implementation to Jan. 1, 2028, saying the change gives state agencies and employers more time to prepare.",{"_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},6639648,"Bill would let PERS seek collection help across agencies after charter school delinquencies",1038,2712000,3750000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b&start=2712&end=3750","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b/thumbnail_2712000.jpg","/articles/6639648/Nevada/Bill-would-let-PERS-seek-collection-help-across-agencies-after-charter-school-delinquencies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6639648-a82bceaa0b96bbbec0e35c141b722727/orig.mp4?Expires=1770528117&Signature=eta4LFvWDBmDxPW6SytmBO~CKFIKzKaxuYj6AJuBpFC4fqD4ZFZEmLYBp2I3PT4N2yCAODFlu48MaIi1XrB1oOdb0EhMNTz6t7xKpfZH~kN568osYCg-lCDLsXqO~amVC-fcziK7MrbSZQQd4wcgI3CO6-Ku8G1vt2gAyuG5Bt~wUmpsi1UZL7ZfGZrm~2bo~UzuwJzK9WtRKGwRGHkKyXS1TDfECB-8v3UhSDac42~t1VjRDbqnw5Z507wks-rx4wK3egFECbejlKVQL9ZxzRcyHpRlRnFiz6dhDVWIvVbh51dlbezVTOsECExDu2bCla2KVZ5YWUmL6Ng2~iUDMA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 418 was presented to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee as a measure requested by the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) to strengthen collection mechanisms for delinquent employer contributions.

PERS officials told the committee the system relies on employer payroll reports and monthly remittances to credit service and employee contributions. Tina Lis, executive officer at PERS, said most employers pay on time but the system has seen employers — notably some charter schools — fail to remit employer and employee contributions. When payroll reports or contributions are not received, PERS cannot credit service, refund employee contributions or reliably calculate benefits.

Current Nevada law requires PERS to notify the Department of Taxation when an employer is 90 days delinquent. PERS said Taxation has no authority over employers whose funds do not flow through the department — for example, some charter schools or other entities — leaving PERS with few options other than potentially expensive litigation. SB 418, as explained by PERS, would amend statutes to require PERS to notify the appropriate supervising agency for the type of public employer (for example, State Board of Examiners for executive branch agencies, Superintendent of Public Instruction for school districts and charter schools, Department of Taxation for local governments). The bill would add mechanisms allowing agencies with authority over the employer to help secure funds and permit certain administrative deductions (such as from funds otherwise payable to a district or charter) to satisfy contributions.

Committee members asked about past cases. Testimony from Nevada Faculty Alliance and the Nevada State Education Association described multiple charter‑school delinquencies totaling nearly $1 million that impaired teachers’ expectations of retirement credit. PERS witnesses said their staff typically identify missed monthly reports immediately and that PERS spends time negotiating and assessing statutory penalties, but collection remains difficult for entities outside Taxation’s authority.

The Department of Education initially submitted a fiscal note seeking a half‑time analyst to manage related workload but later removed that fiscal note after identifying existing staff capacity. PERS estimated that state executive branch agencies have not historically been 90 days delinquent in its experience and that the largest exposure would be if a centralized payroll source (for example, central payroll) were to fail; the agency offered a rough monthly contribution figure for major executive payrolls while stressing that such events have not occurred.

Where it stands: Committee members generally expressed support and asked clarifying questions about notification, member notices and the role of the Charter School Authority. Witnesses urged passage to protect employees and the retirement trust fund. No final vote on the measure appears in the transcript excerpt, but testimony strongly favored giving PERS clearer, cross‑agency collection authority.","Senate Bill 418 would give the Public Employees’ Retirement System more pathways to collect delinquent employer contributions by empowering PERS to request assistance from the appropriate supervising agency when public employers — including charter schools — are 90 days delinquent.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6639652,"Proposed Summerlin studio project draws guarantees, reporting and local pre-K funding in amended Nevada bill",1080,15000000,16080000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b&start=15000&end=16080","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3494110-64143272b2cd2e23adecfdf4332de43b/thumbnail_15000000.jpg","/articles/6639652/Nevada/Proposed-Summerlin-studio-project-draws-guarantees-reporting-and-local-pre-K-funding-in-amended-Nevada-bill","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6639652-776bc5bf65f7637f2999ebff512f7970/orig.mp4?Expires=1770528117&Signature=LBqGmEW-9skk5UF4QJB~RxnBHliRi36N1xX3Yl7KO17Kw8E1XQb2-pktbcp~NEWuAKe99hkswk9LmRN46fzShWc1YrVyT8TYsG2xO~nARJvLOvGr3h~qBS39megSucmzFhzAk2lAoES3mI~~5W3JYWRaeqv6PYKBIAc16pLtm6DJGD-YeONHtQQlkzAmTUz~nUSJHjZDEDVkKYNR1Le2jbKcUVOG43AUyitsHydoDYP2ng2gd0AaOK7NCgKYa7XDz-8LIqgEXRJtYCdrJGINNcwx31hGyQZnZ-XKkf2CiveLZUqcvnZdOolfXf-imoeP4w6~bM-6Xk1sEMcxc6yCpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A proposed Summerlin production-studio program drew intensive review in the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, and sponsors amended Assembly Bill 238 to add financial guarantees, production‑spend milestones and transparency measures intended to protect the public interest.

The bill, as presented to Ways and Means, would expand Nevada’s film tax credit rules and create a new infrastructure program tied to a proposed large-scale Summerlin production campus. Sponsors said the project would require a multihundred‑million‑dollar private capital investment and commit production companies to several billion dollars of production spending over the program’s life.

Committee members pressed sponsors for enforceable assurances. In response, majority leader and sponsor testimony described an amendment that sets staged capital‑investment milestones (for example, $400 million initially, rising to larger benchmarks across years) and production‑spend guarantees totaling $4.5 billion over 15 years. If the developer or lead participants fail to meet the thresholds, the amendment would permit penalties ranging from fixed repayments to liens on collateral and — in extreme cases — seizure of pledged assets. A two‑year cure period would precede lien enforcement.

Sponsors said the penalties are intended to be realistic but enforceable safeguards. ‘‘We’re putting a statutory guarantee that must be met: capital investment milestones and production‑spend thresholds,’’ a sponsor told the committee. Checkpoints are paired to rolling multi‑year windows to reflect how film production cycles across fiscal years.

The amended bill also creates a Summerlin Production Studios ‘‘entertainment district’’ that would capture a portion of local Clark County revenues — limited portions of property tax, a specified city/county sales‑relief share and the county room tax — and directs net receipts to a restricted Clark County School District account for pre‑K and early‑childhood programs. Clark County Education Association officials and White Pine and other rural school representatives testified on separate bills; under this bill the sponsor said pre‑K funding in Clark County could sum to roughly $10–12 million per year on average over the program period (about $190 million projected across 15 years), though sponsors cautioned that local revenue would vary with economic activity in the district.

Proponents said the bill is meant to be a public‑private partnership that brings studio infrastructure and long‑term production spend to Nevada. Howard Hughes representatives and other industry witnesses described construction plans, a pledge to use project labor agreements for major components and a willingness to fund certain startup costs such as boater and safety education earlier in other contexts; Howard Hughes counsel said a PLA is in place for studios themselves.

Opposition concerns were limited in the transcript but included questions about how local revenues were defined and whether the district would capture only narrowly defined local levies (sponsors repeatedly stressed the amendments exclude state‑level taxes and major dedicated levies such as voter‑approved room‑tax allocations for tourism promotion). Committee members also pressed for geographic targeting of an initial $6 million community contribution (sponsors said they would work to direct that money to East Las Vegas townships).

Where it stands: The committee accepted an amended bill and recorded a motion to move the measure out of committee. Sponsors said they will continue to refine reporting requirements and the mechanics of the entertainment district with county officials. The amendments put enforceable financial penalties and repeated reporting to the governor and legislature at regular intervals among the project’s conditions.

What readers should watch for: precise statutory language on milestone triggers, mechanics for a state lien on collateral, the calculation of any clawback repayments, the treasurer or another official designated to collect any repayments, and final definitions of the local taxes captured by the entertainment district.","Assembly Bill 238 would authorize a large Summerlin production studio program with transferable tax credits. After committee questions, sponsors added development and production-spend milestones, clawbacks, enhanced reporting and a local ‘entertainment district’ that would channel part of local tax revenue to Clark County pre-K programs.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Nevada bill would create ‘payments bank’ charter to attract fintech firms and fees

Assembly amendment delays expanded paid family and medical leave to 2028; employers push back on costs

Bill would let PERS seek collection help across agencies after charter school delinquencies

Proposed Summerlin studio project draws guarantees, reporting and local pre-K funding in amended Nevada bill