NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website. The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR:	Snyder		DATE TYPED:	2/10/03		HB
SHORT TITLE:		Restrict Disclosure of Credit Card Info				SB	253/aSCORC
					ANALYST:		Wilson

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained		Estimated Additional Impact		Recurring or Non-Rec	Fund Affected
FY03	FY04	FY03	FY04
		NFI

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Responses Received From

Attorney General’s Office (AGO)

Regulation and Licensing (RLD)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of SCORC Amendment

The Senate Corporations & Transportation Committee amendment changes the numbers from the cardholder’s credit card account that can be disclosed on the receipt issued by the vendor from four numbers to five numbers.

The SCORC amendment also adds an effective date of January 1, 2004.

Synopsis of Original Bill

Senate Bill 253 amends the Credit Card Act to prohibit the disclosure of a credit card number on receipts issued by the vendor, by stating receipts must contain not more than four numbers from the cardholder’s credit card account number.

Significant Issues

The AGO states that SB 253 will decrease the risk of fraudulent use of credit numbers for consumers and in turn their financial loss associated with these kinds of claims. This will decrease the potential cost on the behalf of credit card companies having to investigate, process, and cover fraud and theft claims. Finally, by decreasing the liability of merchants, their cost of defending these claims is in turn decreased.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

The AGO says that SB 253 is that it is not clear to whom the term “person” refers. This specific term should be changed to read either “merchant” or “business.” Alternatively, § 56-4-2, “Definitions”, should be amended to precisely define what type of people and entities fall within this definition of “person”. Otherwise, it provides loophole for a “person” in violation of this proposed amendment seeking to escape liability.

DW/sb