[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38510-38513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12507]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC Collaboration Act of 2021 Study
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Request for public comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FTC Collaboration Act of 2021 directs the Federal Trade
Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'') to ``provide opportunity for
public comment and advice'' relevant to the production of a study
concerning certain specified topics related to ``efforts with State
Attorneys General to prevent, publicize, and penalize frauds and scams
being perpetrated on individuals in the United States.'' The Commission
is soliciting written comments from interested persons, entities, and
organizations on one or more of the topics described in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.
DATES: Comments must be received by August 14, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by
following the instructions in the Public Comments portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write ``FTC Collaboration Act
of 2021 Study (Project No. P238400)'' on your comment and file your
comment online through https://www.regulations.gov.
If you prefer to file a comment in hard copy, please write ``FTC
Collaboration Act of 2021 Study (Project No. P238400)'' on your comment
and on the envelope and mail your comment to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex R), Washington, DC 20580.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Quigley, Attorney, (310)
824-4334, and Miles D. Freeman, Attorney, (310) 824-4332, Western
Region Los Angeles, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade
Commission, 10990 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 400, Los Angeles, CA 90024.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Background Information
The mission of the Federal Trade Commission is to protect the
public from deceptive or unfair business practices and from unfair
methods of competition through law enforcement, advocacy, research, and
education. Many State Attorneys General have similar missions within
their States, in addition to other responsibilities. These
complementary missions present numerous opportunities for the
Commission and State Attorneys General to share information and
collaborate on matters involving consumer protection.
On October 10, 2022, President Biden signed into law the FTC
Collaboration Act of 2021.\1\ The Act directs the Commission to
``conduct a study on facilitating and refining existing efforts with
State Attorneys General to prevent, publicize, and penalize frauds and
scams being perpetrated on individuals in the United States.'' \2\ The
results of this study will inform a report, which the Commission shall
submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.\3\ In addition to setting forth the
results of the study, the report shall contain ``[r]ecommended best
practices to enhance collaboration efforts between the Commission and
State Attorneys General with respect to preventing, publicizing, and
penalizing fraud and scams''; ``[q]uantifiable metrics by which
enhanced collaboration can be measured''; and ``[l]egislative
recommendations, if any, to enhance collaboration efforts between the
Commission and State Attorneys General to prevent, publicize, and
penalize fraud and scams.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 117-187, 136 Stat. 2201 (2022).
\2\ Id. at sec. 2(a)(1).
\3\ Id. at sec. 2(b).
\4\ Id. at sec. 2(b)(2) through 2(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission welcomes the comments of State Attorneys General,
other law enforcement and regulatory agencies, public interest
organizations, industry representatives, consumers, economists,
lawyers, academics, information technology professionals, and other
interested parties.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In addition to providing this notification and opportunity
for public comment, the Commission has been directed to consult with
the National Association of Attorneys General, public interest
organizations dedicated to consumer protection, relevant private
sector entities, and any other Federal or State agency that the
Commission considers necessary. Id. at sec. 2(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Topics for Public Comment
Commenters are invited to address one or more of the following
topics generally, or with respect to a specific industry or area of
consumer protection.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See id. at sec. 2(a)(2). The Commission shall also examine
in the study the ``policies, procedures, and mechanisms that
facilitate cooperation and communications across the Commission,''
id. at sec. 2(a)(2)(B), which the Commission intends to do primarily
through communications with relevant parts of the agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The roles and responsibilities of the Commission and State
Attorneys General that best advance collaboration and consumer
protection.
Of particular interest to the Commission:
(1) What do commenters view as the respective roles and
responsibilities of the Commission and State Attorneys General as they
relate to consumer protection and preventing, publicizing, and
penalizing frauds and scams?
(2) How, in practice, do the Commission and State Attorneys General
effectively collaborate and support each other's consumer protection
missions, in the context of: (a) investigating potential frauds and
scams; (b) bringing joint or parallel law
[[Page 38511]]
enforcement actions to prevent and penalize frauds and scams; and (c)
reaching out to specific consumer audiences or the community as a whole
to raise awareness and prevent and publicize frauds and scams? How
could existing practices be improved to enhance effective
collaboration?
(3) How, if at all, has the United States Supreme Court's decision
in AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission \7\ impacted
effective collaboration between the Commission and State Attorneys
General or otherwise impacted enforcement programs?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See AMG Cap. Mgmt., LLC v. FTC, 141 S. Ct. 1341, 1352 (2021)
(holding that equitable monetary relief, including consumer redress,
is unavailable under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) How does the work of State and local consumer protection law
enforcement agencies or regulators outside of State Attorneys General,
such as State financial services regulators and City Attorneys,
facilitate and refine efforts between the Commission and State
Attorneys General to prevent, publicize, and penalize frauds and scams?
Similarly, how does the work of federal agencies that enforce laws
prohibiting unfair and deceptive acts and practices (UDAP), such as the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Department of
Transportation, facilitate and refine efforts between the Commission
and State Attorneys General to prevent, publicize, and penalize frauds
and scams? How do these organizations effectively collaborate with and
support State Attorneys General and the Commission in fulfilling their
respective consumer protection missions? How could existing practices
be improved to enhance effective collaboration?
(5) To what extent has federal law that has preempted State
jurisdiction affected the ability of State Attorneys General to protect
consumers from unlawful business practices?
(6) To what extent do differences or similarities between the FTC
Act and State UDAP laws affect the respective abilities of the
Commission and State Attorneys General to collaborate on preventing,
publicizing, and penalizing frauds and scams? To what extent does the
private right of action available under many State UDAP laws affect
collaboration between the Commission and State Attorneys General? What
differences are there between the remedies that the Commission and
State Attorneys General may obtain under the statutes that they
respectively enforce, and to what extent do these differences affect
the respective law enforcement priorities of the Commission and State
Attorneys General, and collaborative efforts between them?
(7) How can the Commission maximize use of, and contributions to,
the Consumer Sentinel Network?
(B) How resources should be dedicated to best advance such
collaboration and consumer protection.
Of particular interest to the Commission:
(1) How should resources be dedicated to best advance collaboration
and consumer protection missions between the Commission and State
Attorneys General in the context of: (a) investigating potential frauds
and scams; (b) bringing joint or parallel law enforcement actions to
prevent and penalize frauds and scams; and (c) reaching out to specific
consumer audiences, industry stakeholders, or the community as a whole
to raise awareness and prevent and publicize frauds and scams?
(2) Are there any strategic, logistical, or technical challenges
arising from such collaboration between the Commission and State
Attorneys General?
(3) Has the exchange of technical or subject-matter expertise
between the Commission and Attorneys General when collaborating on
consumer protection matters been effective? Why or why not? Would
States benefit from technical assistance from Commission staff, such as
technologists and economists, in consumer protection matters? Are there
any legal or practical restrictions on the Commission providing, and
State Attorneys General receiving, technical assistance of this nature?
(4) How can information-sharing practices and technologies between
the Commission and State Attorneys General be improved?
(5) What new resources or authority may be needed to enhance the
Commission's collaboration with State Attorneys General?
(C) The accountability mechanisms that should be implemented to
promote collaboration and consumer protection.
Of particular interest to the Commission:
(1) With respect to the Commission, one of the Commission's
Strategic Objectives is to ``[c]ollaborate with domestic and
international partners to enhance consumer protection.'' \8\ The
Commission currently reports on certain performance indicators and
metrics bearing on this Objective that relate to collaboration with
State Attorneys General.\9\ Are there any additional performance
indicators or metrics that the Commission should consider reporting, or
other mechanisms that should be implemented?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Federal Trade Commission Annual Performance Report for
Fiscal Year 2021 and Annual Performance Plan for Fiscal Years 2022
to 2023, at 8, available at https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/21apr_22-23app.pdf.
\9\ Id. at 13 (Indicator 1.1.IND.3: ``Number of contributors to
the Consumer Sentinel Network (CSN)''); id. at 65 (Performance
Metric 1.3.1: ``Number of investigations or cases in which the FTC
and other U.S. federal, state and local government agencies shared
evidence or information that contributed to FTC law enforcement
actions or enhanced consumer protection'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Do any of the changes in practices, new resources, or authority
recommended by commenters warrant new reporting requirements or other
mechanisms to promote accountability and transparency? If so, what
kinds of reporting requirements or mechanisms are recommended?
III. Public Comments
You can file a comment online or on paper. For the FTC to consider
your comment, we must receive it on or before August 14, 2023, 2023.
Write ``FTC Collaboration Act of 2021 Study (Project No. P238400)'' on
your comment. Your comment--including your name and your state--will be
placed on the public record of this proceeding, including the https://www.regulations.gov website.
Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening. We encourage you to submit your comments
online through the https://www.regulations.gov website.
If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write ``FTC
Collaboration Act of 2021 Study (Project No. P238400)'' on your comment
and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex R), Washington, DC 20580. If possible,
submit your paper comment to the Commission by overnight service.
Because your comment will become publicly available at https://www.regulations.gov, you are solely responsible for making sure that
your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential
information. In particular, your comment should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social
Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state
identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number;
financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also
solely
[[Page 38512]]
responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any
sensitive health information, such as medical records or other
individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment
should not include any ``trade secret or any commercial or financial
information which . . . . is privileged or confidential''--as provided
by Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule
4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)--including in particular competitively
sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories,
formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer
names.
Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is
requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled
``Confidential,'' and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular,
the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the
comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and
must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from
the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept
confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in
accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has
been posted publicly at www.regulations.gov, we cannot redact or remove
your comment unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the
requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General
Counsel grants that request.
The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit
the collection of public comments to consider and use in this
proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and
responsive public comments that it receives on or before August 14,
2023. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including
routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.
By direction of the Commission.
April J. Tabor,
Secretary.
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly
Slaughter and Commissioner Alvaro M. Bedoya
The FTC Collaboration Act of 2021 directs the FTC to examine how we
can improve collaboration with state attorneys general to prevent,
publicize, and penalize fraudulent business practices. As we undertake
this inquiry, we are issuing a Request for Information to gather public
input.
State regulators and attorneys general play an essential role in
protecting Americans from unlawful business practices. For decades they
have initiated key lawsuits and filled in regulatory gaps, often paving
the way for broader federal efforts. State governments have also
trailblazed a variety of important consumer protection laws--from
banning certain uses of facial recognition technologies to protecting
Americans' right to repair their products.
Unfortunately, federal agencies at times have sought to block
consumer protection efforts by states. For example, in the leadup to
the subprime mortgage crisis in 2007, some federal regulators sought to
cripple states' oversight function by wiping out their anti-predatory
lending laws.\1\ States still took action against non-bank subprime
lenders, protecting the public at a time when federal actors were slow
to mobilize.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ WookBai Kim, Challenging the Roots of the Subprime Mortgage
Crisis: The OCC's Operating Subsidiaries Regulations and Watters v.
Wachovia Bank, 21 Loy. Consumer L. Rev. 278 (2009).
\2\ Press Release, State of Conn. Dep't of Banking, Ameriquest
to Pay $325 Million for Predatory Lending Practices that Bilked
Consumers (Jan. 23, 2006), https://portal.ct.gov/DOB/Newsroom/2006/
Ameriquest-to-Pay-$325-Million-in-Nationwide-Settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FTC is committed to working closely with state partners to
maximize our collective efficacy in combatting unlawful business
practices and protecting Americans. States bring to cases not only an
important set of remedial tools, but also more direct visibility into
business practices that are harming their citizens.
Led by our regional offices, the FTC has a long history of
collaborating with state enforcers. Over the last year alone, for
example, we have partnered with states to bring:
our largest-ever fair lending action against a multistate
auto dealer; \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Takes Action Against
Multistate Auto Dealer Napleton for Sneaking Illegal Junk Fees onto
Bills and Discriminating Against Black Consumers (Apr. 1, 2022),
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/04/ftc-takes-action-against-multistate-auto-dealer-napleton-sneaking-illegal-junk-fees-bills.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
our first action under the Military Lending Act; \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC and 18 States Sue to
Stop Harris Jewelry from Cheating Military Families with Illegal
Financing and Sales Tactics (July 20, 2022), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/07/ftc-18-states-sue-stop-harris-jewelry-cheating-military-families-illegal-financing-sales-tactics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a major action against Google for airing deceptive ads;
\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC, States Sue Google and
iHeartMedia for Deceptive Ads Promoting the Pixel 4 Smartphone (Nov.
28, 2022), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/11/ftc-states-sue-google-iheartmedia-deceptive-ads-promoting-pixel-4-smartphone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
an action against pesticide giants who used illegal pay-
to-block schemes to inflate farmers' costs; \6\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC and State Partners Sue
Pesticide Giants Syngenta and Corteva for Using Illegal Pay-to-Block
Scheme to Inflate Prices for Farmers (Sept. 29, 2022), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/09/ftc-state-partners-sue-pesticide-giants-syngenta-corteva-using-illegal-pay-block-scheme-inflate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
our first-ever lawsuit with California's Division of
Financial Protection and Innovation to shut down a mortgage relief
operation that preyed on struggling homeowners.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, Federal Trade Commission,
California Take Action To Shut Down Mortgage Relief Operation that
Preyed on Struggling Homeowners (Sept. 19, 2022), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/09/federal-trade-commission-california-take-action-shut-down-mortgage-relief-operation-preyed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to filing these joint lawsuits, the FTC has supported
states against efforts to undermine their consumer protection
authorities. For example, we recently filed an amicus brief refuting
Google's argument that all state-law claims involving children's online
privacy are nullified because they are ``inconsistent'' with the
Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), a federal privacy
law.\8\ Last year we filed an amicus brief explaining that companies
cannot use the FTC's Franchise Rule to circumvent state-level labor
protections.\9\ We have also supported efforts to strengthen state-
level consumer protections. For example, FTC staff recently testified
before a California State Senate committee in support of legislation
that would expressly grant people a right to repair several types of
consumer products.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Files Brief in Jones
v. Google in Support of Appeals Court Ruling that COPPA Does Not
Preempt Plaintiffs' State Privacy Claims (May 22, 2023), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/05/ftc-files-brief-jones-v-google-support-appeals-court-ruling-coppa-does-not-preempt-plaintiffs-state.
\9\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Files Amicus Brief in
Patel, v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (Dec. 6, 2021), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/12/ftc-files-amicus-brief-patel-v-7-eleven-inc.
\10\ Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Testifies Before
California State Senate on Right to Repair (Apr. 11, 2023), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/04/ftc-testifies-california-state-senate-right-repair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many thanks to the FTC team who crafted this RFI.\11\ I look
forward to receiving and reviewing public comments on how we can deepen
our
[[Page 38513]]
partnership with state enforcers to protect Americans from fraudulent
business practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ In particular, I am grateful to Maricela Segura, Faye
Barnouw, Robert Quigley, and Miles Freeman in the Western Region Los
Angeles Office, as well as Dotan Weinman and Lois Greisman in the
Division of Marketing Practices.
[FR Doc. 2023-12507 Filed 6-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P