|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
Address1 | 110 West Michigan Avenue |
Address2 | Suite 400 |
City | Lansing |
State | MI |
Zip Code | 48933 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
|
5. Senate ID# 25157-12
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 313020000
|
TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2022 |
Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) | Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) | Q3 (7/1 - 9/30) | Q4 (10/1 - 12/31) |
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report | Termination Date |
|
11. No Lobbying Issue Activity |
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
12. Lobbying | 13. Organizations | ||||||||
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period was: | EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period were: | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, of all lobbying related income for the client (including all payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying activities on behalf of the client). | 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense accounting method. See instructions for description of options. | ||||||||
Method A.
Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code |
Signature | Digitally Signed By: Heidi Kubinski |
Date | 1/30/2023 9:30:02 AM |
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code FIN
16. Specific lobbying issues
Lapses by the retail industry/merchants in securing consumer information continue to be extremely problematic and costly to consumers and financial institutions. MCUL is advocating that Congress hold retailers to the same or similar data security standards as the financial service industry has to abide by and require retailers notify credit unions sooner once a breach occurs. We support legislation, including H.R. 8152, the American Data Privacy and Protection Act, that ensures all businesses, institutions and organizations that collect, use or share personal data are subject to national standards, to include language that preempts state requirements, among other things.
MCUL supports modernizing the Federal Credit Union Act (FCUA). The financial service industry is rapidly changing. Advancements in technology, including high speed internet connectivity, have significantly changed our society and how financial institutions do business. Updating the FCUA has become necessary to ensure federally chartered credit unions have the powers and flexibility to be competitive and members can benefit from new technology. We are currently supporting S.762 and H.R. 5189, to increase the limit on federal credit union loan maturity. MCUL supports H.R. 6889/S.4325, the Credit Union Board Modernization Act, that would afford federal credit unions flexibility with regard to how often their boards meet.
We support passage of the H.R. 7003/S.4879, the Expanding Finance Access for Underserved Communities Act, which would allow federal credit unions to add underserved communities to their fields of membership, exempt business loans by FCU's in underserved areas from the member business lending cap and expand the definition of an underserved area to include areas that are more than 10 miles from the nearest financial institution branch. The bill passed the House of Representatives in 2022 as part of a multi-bill financial service-related package.
MCUL is monitoring developments for GSE/housing finance reform and will advocate to make sure any reforms reflect the significant role credit unions play in the secondary mortgage market and we will defend against anything that is potentially harmful to credit unions and our members.
MCUL supports congressional efforts, including H.R. 2040, to reform bank secrecy act/anti-money laundering reforms and provide financial institutions relief from unnecessary, duplicate and burdensome rules. H.R. 2040 would increase the CTR threshold from $10,000 to $30,000 and adjust the SAR threshold from $5,000 to $10,000 for most financial institutions.
MCUL is educating members of our congressional delegation on the growing interest among credit union members and credit unions in cryptocurrency. We believe Congress should explore ways to regulate the delivery of financial services using digital currencies to ensure consumers are protected in the same way if they received financial services from a financial institution. We urge Congress to look for ways to enable credit unions and other financial institutions to provide digital assets, so that these services can be properly overseen by federal regulators. Finally, credit unions seek parity with other financial institutions in this area as credit unions must be able to offer digital/crypto products and services directly to their members in the same way that other institutions can to their customers.
MCUL stands opposed to a proposal by the U.S. Treasury Department that would require financial institutions to report on an annual basis, the gross inflows and outflows, for member accounts (businesses and individuals). We have been educating our congressional delegation on the issue and urging them to reject including the proposal in legislation.
Lastly, credit unions are not-for-profit member-owned financial institutions, owned by members they service. Credit unions consumer-focused model is self-regulating and a principle reason why credit unions are not covered by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). MCUL will educate members of the delegation of the work credit unions are doing to serve low/moderate-income, diverse communities and the negative impacts of including credit unions in the CRA. We will oppose efforts that would result in credit unions of any size being included in the CRA.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Todd |
Jorns |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code TAX
16. Specific lobbying issues
MCUL continues to educate members of the delegation on the importance of the credit union not-for-profit tax status to members and how credit unions are different from other financial institutions. Currently, we are not advocating for or against any specific legislation on this issue.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Todd |
Jorns |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code BAN
16. Specific lobbying issues
While MCUL takes no position on the issue of cannabis legalization, it supports legislation in the 117th Congress that would provide a safe harbor for financial institutions to serve their members needs in states where cannabis use has become legal. MCUL supports the SAFE Banking Act of 2021, S. 910 and H.R. 1996 which would provide a safe harbor for credit unions and other financial institutions.
MCUL stands opposed to efforts to change the existing interchange system by expanding requirements under the so-called Durbin Amendment established under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. We have been educating our delegation on the importance of the current credit card interchange system with regard to ensuring consumer data remains secure and private and are asking our delegation to oppose S. 4674/H.R. 8874, the Credit Card Competition Act of 2022 because of the harm it would do to credit unions, their members, along with other financial institutions and their customers.
We continue to educate our congressional delegation on voluntary overdraft protection services offered by credit unions and the value our members place on these services. MCUL is opposed to legislation (H.R. 4277 and S. 2677) that would severely limit a financial institutions ability to offer these voluntary services to our members.
MCUL supports and is calling for passage of H.R. 3962 and S.1625, the SECURE Notarization Act that would establish minimum standards for electronic and remote notarization. We are also educating our delegation on the importance of updating the 20 year old E-sign Act to better reflect how customers can signal their acceptance of electronic transactions.
MCUL is opposed to S. 2508, the Veteran's and Consumer Fair Credit Act that would extend provisions of the Military Lending Act (MLA), which establishes a 36% all-in rate cap on most loans to service members, to all consumer loans. The all-in cap would make it very difficult for credit unions to maintain viable small-dollar programs and severely hinder a state credit union's ability to offer overdraft products.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Todd |
Jorns |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
Information Update Page - Complete ONLY where registration information has changed.
20. Client new address
Address |
|
||||||
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
21. Client new principal place of business (if different than line 20)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
22. New General description of client’s business or activities
LOBBYIST UPDATE
23. Name of each previously reported individual who is no longer expected to act as a lobbyist for the client
|
|
||||||||
1 |
|
3 |
|
||||||
2 |
|
4 |
|
ISSUE UPDATE
24. General lobbying issue that no longer pertains
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
25. Add the following affiliated organization(s)
Internet Address:
Name | Address |
Principal Place of Business (city and state or country) |
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
26. Name of each previously reported organization that is no longer affiliated with the registrant or client
1 | 2 | 3 |
FOREIGN ENTITIES
27. Add the following foreign entities:
Name | Address |
Principal place of business (city and state or country) |
Amount of contribution for lobbying activities | Ownership percentage in client | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
% |
28. Name of each previously reported foreign entity that no longer owns, or controls, or is affiliated with the registrant, client or affiliated organization
1 | 3 | 5 |
2 | 4 | 6 |
CONVICTIONS DISCLOSURE
29. Have any of the lobbyists listed on this report been convicted in a Federal or State Court of an offense involving bribery,
extortion, embezzlement, an illegal kickback, tax evasion, fraud, a conflict of interest, making a false statement, perjury, or money laundering?
Lobbyist Name | Description of Offense(s) |