Datasets:

---

Recag

/

Rp_CommonC_23

like 0

ERROR: type should be string, got "https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB954548898283465201\nD.C. Current\nThe Big Banking Reform Law Will Never Be Labeled ''Paperwork Reduction Act of 2000''\nJim McTague\nUpdated April 3, 2000 12:01 am ET / Original July 19, 2019 6:02 am ET\nD ouble-ought-one could turn out to be a banner year for the makers of extra-strength aspirin. A pandemic of writer's cramp is on the way.\nA new law intended to protect the privacy of financial records is expected to become effective sometime in 2001. When it does, customers of financial-services firms will be given the opportunity annually to ensure that their account data are not shared with unaffiliated third parties. All a customer has to do is fill out a form demanding privacy and return it to the financial-services provider within 30 days.\nIt sounds simple. But the customer winds up filling out form after form after form. The new law's definition of financial services is so broad, customers are likely be buried under an avalanche of missives from automobile clubs that sell insurance and travelers' checks, department stores that have proprietary credit cards and travel agencies that sell trip insurance, as well as banks, brokerage houses, mortgage firms and insurance companies. Pity your letter carrier: The regulations implementing the law could become effective at Christmas time.\nThe law permits financial-service providers to share a customer's information with affiliated companies. A bank, for example, will be permitted to let its brokerage affiliate know how much a depositor has in a savings account. But if the customer opts for privacy protection, the bank or financial firm won't be allowed to sell the data to an outside organization, as has been the practice in the past. Congress included the privacy provision in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act, signed into law by President Clinton last November, because consumers were outraged by banks selling their Social Security numbers, data on their balances and even their credit-card and account numbers to unaffiliated telemarketers. Under the new law, institutions are barred from sharing card numbers and account numbers under any circumstances.\nThe law also requires a financial institution to disclose to all customers its practices regarding the sharing of private information with its own affiliates and nonrelated companies. In fact, a customer seeking cash from an automatic teller machine probably will have to acknowledge reading an electronic version of the disclosure policy before being permitted to make a withdrawal.\nSeven federal regulatory agencies in consultation with state insurance commissioners have produced regulations for implementing the new law, and it will cost companies marketing financial products like credit cards an estimated $87 million a year in the first three years the rules are effective. The regulators are the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Treasury Department's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Office of Thrift Supervision, and the National Credit Union Administration. The proposed regulations are posted on each agency's Internet site. The FTC's site is the most user-friendly.\nThe agencies may decide to refine their handiwork in response to comments received through last week. Private detectives are particularly upset with the proposal because one version is so restrictive that names and addresses received from customers would be considered nonpublic, even if such data are available in phone directories. The gumshoes bombarded the agencies with electronic form letters, which state: \"Stalkers and scam artists seldom reside where their vehicles are registered, so current-address information is essential and law enforcement seldom has the manpower to develop these cases for prosecution.\"\nA proposed alternative would allow financial institutions to sell data obtained directly from customers if the same information is available from public sources.\nFinancial firms are objecting to language that would require their compliance within six months of enactment. They'd like up to two years.\nDon't Try Barter In Settling With IRS\nN o form is more painful to complete than the federal income-tax return. Taxpayers frequently make this known to the Internal Revenue Service by affixing personal attachments to the standard forms. Shirts commonly are mailed along with 1040s to underscore the severity of the tax bite. This season, a taxpayer sent collectors in Atlanta a bag of his locks, claiming that the IRS was causing him to lose his hair. \"Our employees determined he had cut his hair off with scissors,\" says IRS spokesman Frank Keefe.\nKeefe had believed such stories about humorous missives, like signatures inked with blood, were folklore until we asked him to check with regional collection centers. He came back with a report of a taxpayer who had carved a check out of wood. It was rejected. Other persons who are short of cash send goods instead, he discovered. This year the IRS has received and returned an antique rifle, a hand-crocheted blanket and antique jewelry.\nW-2 forms are supposed to be stapled to returns. And what if you run short of staples? One taxpayer stitched a W-2 form to a return, the Kansas City center reports.\nThe IRS also gets its share of misdirected mail. The Cincinnati center recently received a shipment of baby chicks. Another center's deliveries included a human eyeball that was intended for transplant. The Memphis service center last week received a photo album meant for \"Margaret and the kids.\" They have no idea to whom it belongs. And a widow accidentally mailed the same center $2,000 cash intended for her husband's funeral. The money was returned in time for the service.\nR ep. John Boehner is promoting a bill that would encourage companies to offer incentive options to their rank-and-file employees. Under the Ohio Republican's proposal, publicly traded companies would get a tax deduction for offering his \"super option\" to at least half their employees. The employees would get long-term-capital-gains tax treatment after exercising the option if the underlying stock were to be held at least a year.\nBoehner notes that options have proved to be a powerful tool for increased productivity and worker retention in Silicon Valley. But many of the instruments are taxed at ordinary income rates and the stock must be sold after the options are exercised to pay Uncle Sam. Remaining funds often are spent. Boehner, who chairs the House Employer-Employee Relations Subcommittee, says his plan's tax provisions would promote savings. Chances for passage this year are slim; Boehner says he is building support for future action.\nT here's a legal way to make money from insider trading. The Securities and Exchange Commission offers a bounty of 10% of recovered ill-gotten gains to any citizen who reports a violation of the insider rules. The program isn't attracting many squealers, however. Since its inception in 1988, only one bounty has been paid -- $3,500 in 1991.\nE-mail comments to editors@barrons.com\nD ouble-ought-one could turn out to be a banner year for the makers of extra-strength aspirin."