• Connect
  • Bookmark Us
  • AF Twitter
  • AF YouTube
  • AF LinkedIn
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Link
Arent Fox
  • Firm

    • History

    • Awards & Recognitions

    • Diversity

      • Overview
      • Diversity Scholarship
      • Employees on Diversity
      • LGBT Initiative
      • Women’s Leadership Development Initiative
    • Alumni

    • Pro Bono

      • Overview
      • Current Pro Bono Work
      • Community Involvement
      • Pro Bono Newsletter
      • Pro Bono Awards & Honors
      • FAQ: Pro Bono & Working at Arent Fox
    • Leadership

      • Firm Management
      • Administrative Leadership
  • Deals & Cases

  • People

  • Practices & Industries

    • Practices

      • Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
      • Government Relations
      • Antitrust & Competition Law
      • Health Care
      • Appellate
      • Insurance & Reinsurance
      • Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Commercial Litigation
      • International Trade
      • Communications, Technology & Mobile
      • Labor & Employment
      • Construction
      • Municipal & Project Finance
      • Consumer Product Safety
      • OSHA
      • Corporate & Securities
      • Political Law
      • ERISA
      • Real Estate
      • Environmental
      • Tax
      • FDA Practice (Food & Drug)
      • Wealth Planning & Management
      • Finance
      • White Collar & Investigations
      • Government Contractor Services
    • Industries

      • Automotive
      • Energy Law & Policy
      • Fashion, Luxury Goods & Retail
      • Government Real Estate & Public Buildings
      • Hospitality
      • Life Sciences
      • Long Term Care & Senior Living
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Medical Devices
      • Nonprofit
      • Sports
  • Newsroom

    • Alerts

    • Events

    • Media Mentions

    • Press Releases

    • Social Media

    • Subscribe

  • Careers

    • Lawyers

    • Law Students

    • Professional Staff

  • Contact

    • Washington, DC

    • New York, NY

    • Los Angeles, CA

    Alerts

    • Newsroom Overview
      • Alerts

        Alerts by Criteria

        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
      • Events
      • Media Mentions
      • Press Releases
      • Social Media
      • Subscribe

    You are here

    Home » Newsroom » Alerts

    Share

    • Printer-friendly version
    • Send by email
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A
    • A
    • A

    FTC Delays Red Flags Enforcement Until Dec. 31

    June 2, 2010

    On May 28, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it would push the Red Flags Rule deadline to December 31, 2010. This extension will give Congress time to consider legislation that would affect the scope of entities covered by the Rule. In a statement about the delay, the FTC urged “Congress to act quickly to pass legislation that will resolve any questions as to which entities are covered by the Rule and obviate the need for further enforcement delays.”

    The Rule, which was supposed to go into effect on June 1, was developed under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, in which Congress directed the FTC and other agencies to develop regulations requiring “creditors” and “financial institutions” to address the risk of identity theft. The Rule requires businesses and organizations which are creditors to develop a written program to spot the warning signs — or “red flags” — of identity theft. The Rule defines “creditor” to include any entity that regularly defers payments for goods or services or arranges for the extension of credit. For example, a company is a creditor if it regularly bills individuals after the completion of services, including for the remainder of medical fees not reimbursed by insurance. Similarly, companies that regularly allow purchasers to set up payment plans after services have been rendered are creditors under the Rule. Some other examples of companies that may be covered are finance companies; automobile dealers that provide or arrange financing; mortgage brokers; utility companies; telecommunications companies; non-profit and government entities that defer payment for goods or services; and businesses that provide services and bill later, including many doctors.

    The Rule requires all such entities that have “covered accounts” to develop and implement written identity theft prevention programs. A covered account is defined as an account that allows multiple payments or transactions or any other account with a reasonably foreseeable risk of identity theft. If a company is a “creditor” with “covered accounts,” it must develop a written Identity Theft Prevention Program to identify and address the red flags that could indicate identity theft in those accounts.

    This is the fifth time the FTC has delayed enforcement of the Rule, which the FTC originally had planned to enforce beginning November 1, 2008. Most recently, the FTC announced in October 2009 that at the request of certain members of Congress, it was delaying enforcement of the Rule until June 1, 2010, to allow Congress time to finalize legislation that would limit the scope of business covered by the Rule.

    In this regard, the House has already passed a bill to exempt small health, legal, and accounting firms from the Rule. A nearly identical bill was also introduced in the Senate on May 25. The senators say the bill aims to protect small businesses like doctors’ and dentists’ offices, veterinary clinics and accounting offices that the FTC has mistakenly classified as “creditors.”

    In the meantime, health, legal, and CPA professional groups have all filed lawsuits against FTC to enjoin enforcement of the rule. In October 2009, a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia's ruled that the Rule does not apply to lawyers. Other industries seem to be following suit, as last week the American Medical Association, American Osteopathic Association and the Medical Society of the District of Columbia filed suit against the FTC charging that the Rule exceeds the powers delegated to it by Congress and that its application to physicians is “arbitrary, capricious and contrary to the law.”

    In its most recent announcement the FTC urges Congress to act quickly to pass legislation that will resolve any questions as to which entities are covered by the Rule and obviate the need for further enforcement delays.

    In the interim, FTC staff has continued to provide guidance, both through materials posted on www.ftc.gov/redflagsrule, and in speeches and participation in seminars, conferences and other training events to numerous groups. The FTC also published a compliance guide for business, and created a template that enables low risk entities to create an identity theft program with an easy-to-use online form (www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/redflagsrule/get-started.shtm).

    Arent Fox is monitoring this issue. For more information, please contact Anthony V. Lupo or Sarah Bruno.

    Anthony V. Lupo
    lupo.anthony@arentfox.com
    202.857.6353

    Sarah L. Bruno
    bruno.sarah@arentfox.com
    202.775.5760

    Related People

    • Sarah L. Bruno
    • Anthony V. Lupo

    Related Practices

    Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
    Intellectual Property
    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Contact

    Footer Main

    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Subscribe
    • Alumni
    • Diversity
    • Legal Notice
    • Privacy Policy
    • Social Media Disclaimer
    • Nondiscrimination
    • Site Map
    • Client/Staff Login

    Offices

    • Washington, DC
      1717 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: 202.857.6000
    • New York, NY
      1675 Broadway
      New York, New York 10019
      Tel: 212.484.3900
    • Los Angeles, CA
      555 West Fifth Street, 48th Floor
      Los Angeles, California 90013
      Tel: 213.629.7400
    • © Copyright 2013 Arent Fox LLP. All Rights Reserved.

      Legal Disclaimer
      Contents may contain attorney advertising under the laws of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.