1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FTC Extends Enforcement Date of Red Flags Rule

FTC Extends Enforcement Date of Red Flags Rule

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.03.09

The Federal Trade Commission (the "FTC") announced that it has postponed enforcement of the Red Flags Rule1 until November 1, 2009. This is the third enforcement extension by the FTC. The Red Flags Rule became effective January 1, 2008 and the mandatory enforcement date was originally November 1, 2008. The FTC suspended enforcement of the Rule until May 1, 2009 and subsequently suspended enforcement until August 1, 2009.2

The Red Flags Rule requires financial institutions and creditors to look for "red flags" that signal possible identity theft. The FTC announced that it has provided this additional extension since small businesses and entities with a low risk of identity theft remain uncertain of their obligations. The FTC intends to provide additional guidance to assist these companies. The FTC explained in a July 29th press release that these steps are consistent with the House Appropriations Committee's request that the FTC defer enforcement in conjunction with additional efforts to minimize the burden on health care providers and small businesses with a low risk of identity theft problems.

Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can help you in crafting a compliant Program.


1 72 Fed. Reg. 63717, 63771-63775 (Nov. 9, 2007) (codified at 16 C.F.R. Part 681).

2 The enforcement delay does not apply to the address discrepancy and credit card issuer rules. These rules are not addressed in this Health Law Alert.

Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.26.24

Banks and Financial Service Providers Take Note: EU Law on Greenwashing and Social-Washing Is Changing – And It Is Likely Going to Have a Wide Impact

The amount of litigation regarding environmental and climate change issues is, perhaps unsurprisingly, growing worldwide.[1] A significant portion of that litigation relates to so-called ‘greenwashing’, ‘climate-washing’ or ‘social-washing’ disputes. In other words, legal cases where people or organisations (often NGOs and consumer groups) accuse companies, banks, financial institutions or others, of making untrue statements. They argue these companies or financial institutions are pretending their products, services or operations are more environmentally-friendly, sustainable, or ethically ‘good’ for society – than is really the case. Perhaps more interestingly, of all the litigation in the environmental and climate change space – complainants bringing greenwashing and social washing cases have, according to some of these reports, statistically the most chance of winning. So, in a nutshell, not only is greenwashing and social washing litigation on the rise, companies and financial institutions are most likely to lose cases in this area....