The timing and funding of CHAPS sterling payments

Real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems such as CHAPS Sterling require large amounts of liquidity to support payment activity. To meet their liquidity needs, RTGS participants borrow from the central bank or rely on incoming payments from other participants. Both options can prove costly -- the latter in particular if participants delay outgoing payments until incoming ones arrive. This article presents an empirical analysis of the timing and funding of payments in CHAPS. The authors seek to identify the factors driving the intraday profile of payment activity and the extent to which incoming funds are used as a funding source, a process known as liquidity recycling. They show that the level of liquidity recycling in CHAPS is high and stable throughout the day, and attribute this result to several features of the system. First, the settlement of time-critical payments provides liquidity to the system early in the settlement day; this liquidity can be recycled for the funding of less urgent payments. Second, CHAPS throughput guidelines provide a centralised coordination mechanism, in effect limiting any tendency toward payment delay. Third, the relatively small direct membership of CHAPS facilitates coordination between members, for example, through the use of bilateral net sender limits. Coordination encourages banks to maintain a relatively constant flux of payments throughout the day. The authors also argue that the high level of recycling helps to reduce liquidity risk, and that the relatively smooth intraday distribution of payments serves to mitigate operational risk associated with highly concentrated payment activity. They note, however, that the benefits of liquidity recycling are not evenly distributed between members of CHAPS.Payment systems ; Bank liquidity ; Risk ; Electronic funds transfers

Small Dollar Loans, Big Problems: How States Protect Consumers From Abuses and How the Federal Government Can Help

Across America, drivers pass twice as many payday loan storefronts as Starbucks coffee shops.2 In twenty-nine states, there are more payday lender stores than McDonald’s restaurants.3 Numerous research studies warn of the dangers associated with payday loans, including significantly higher rates of bankruptcies, evictions, utility shut-offs, and involuntary bank account closures.4 Many states have recognized the dangers posed by payday and other types of small-dollar loans with predatory features, prompting them to adopt laws to combat the abusive nature of these loans. These laws, however, offer consumers varying degrees of protection. Historically, states have used their police powers to protect consumers from predatory lending. This Article discusses the extent to which each state’s current laws protect consumers from lending abuses associated with four common small-dollar loans: payday loans, auto-title loans, six-month installment loans, and one-year installment loans.5 Specifically, this Article highlights the findings from the 2010 Small Dollar Loan Products Scorecard (Scorecard), which updated the original 2008 Scorecard. 6 Both the 2008 and 2010 Scorecard grade state laws based on the maximum annual percentage rate (APR) they allow for the four typical small-dollar loan products listed above. Since the 2008 Scorecard, there has been significant state legislative activity across the country related to small-dollar loans. Only a handful of states, however, have enacted new measures that adequately protect consumers. This Article provides policy recommendations to guide ongoing reform efforts. The Article highlights three key points. First, states should continue their longstanding good fight on behalf of American families against abusive, small dollar lending, but they need help. Congress and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which President Obama established when he signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law on July 21, 2010, should join the battle.7 Second, the states and Congress should focus their reform efforts on enacting an across-the-board usury cap of 36% APR on all small-dollar loans. Third, the states, CFPB, and Congress should impose several restrictions on high-cost (over 36% APR), small-dollar lending to help curb its abusive nature. In this Article, Part II describes the methodology used by the 2010 Scorecard. Part III reports the major changes that have occurred in the two years since the Scorecard’s original 2008 publication. Finally, Part IV proposes several policy recommendations, at the state and federal level, with the focus in the latter category on opportunities for action by the newly created CFPB

The use of checks and other noncash payment instruments in the United States

Statistical estimates indicate that the use of checks in the United States has been declining since the mid-1990s, even as the population and the level of economic activity have been increasing. In contrast, the use of electronic payments has been growing at high and accelerating rates. Nonetheless, the paper check remains the predominant means of making retail payments and will likely continue to play a significant role in the U.S. payment system for the foreseeable future. The number and value of checks paid varies across depository institutions according to type, size, and location, in part a result of differences in the use of checks and electronic payments by households, businesses, and governments. Overall, household's share of total checks written has increased relative to that of businesses and governments.Payment systems ; Electronic funds transfers

Overview of Proposed Exchange, Medicaid and IRS Regulations

Explains the implications of draft regulations on Medicaid, health insurance exchanges, and premium tax credits under healthcare reform, including eligibility criteria, enrollment, and verification; minimum essential coverage; and credit computation

Recent payment trends in the United States

Payment systems

A beginner's guide to the U.S. payments system

A description of the U.S. payments system, outlining its evolution and examining some of the areas where improvements are needed.Payment systems

Private Pension Plan Bulletin Historical Tables and Graphs

DOL_Private_pension_plan_bulletin_historical_trables_and_graphs.pdf: 162 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020