ISSUE: Should Florida increase the fee a merchant creditor can collect on a late credit payment.

DISCUSSION: Florida’s credit laws have capped the delinquency fee that merchants are allowed to collect on a late payment. Major credit-granting and neighboring states have increased their late fees, creating an incentive for a debtor to pay the out-of-state retail creditor first and the Florida retail creditor later or not at all. This has resulted in Florida businesses, by virtue of the operation of Florida law, being at a disadvantage in collecting credit payments. Retail creditors who opt to operate under Florida’s credit laws do so with a built-in disadvantage to an out-of-state retail lender in getting their bills paid. The question is often posed as to why Florida credit regulators cannot regulate the out-of-state lenders. Federal law allows each state to set its own credit laws without being subject to other states’ laws. Consumers may more easily qualify for credit from states with laws more friendly to credit operations. A merchant can have retail operations in Florida, yet domicile its credit operations in another state or contract with a credit grantor in another state to manage its credit program. Either way, credit with late fees higher than what Florida law allows is already in the hands of Florida citizens. Again, this puts Florida’s creditors in the position of their bills being paid later or not at all compared with bills from credit grantors in other states.

POSITION: The Florida Retail Federation favors increasing credit delinquency fees to an amount that is competitive with those allowed by other states.

Recent Developments:

(5/3/2013) SB 282 passed, increasing the allowable delinquency charge that may be imposed by stores issuing credit.

ISSUE: Should the Legislature adopt a statewide moratorium on impact fees.

DISCUSSION: Growth and development have slowed to a near halt in Florida. The cost of new development is daunting, and impact fees are a significant part of those costs. Many local governments have been proactive, reducing impact fees or putting moratoriums in place in order to encourage development. A statewide moratorium would go even further to defray the cost of development and encourage new construction and business growth throughout Florida.

POSITION: The Florida Retail Federation supports a statewide moratorium on impact fees in order to encourage business growth.

ISSUE: Should state declarations of emergency be more narrowly defined.

DISCUSSION: When Florida declares a state of emergency, this triggers state laws that protect Florida’s consumers from price gouging. These laws are in effect in every area that is covered by the declaration, for the duration of the declaration.
In order to avoid being viewed as non-compliant with these laws, many businesses significantly alter their typical and lawful pricing practices in the areas in which an emergency has been declared. When the declarations of emergency are overly broad, encompassing areas of the state that are unlikely to be impacted by an emergency, this creates additional operational challenges and expenses for businesses.

For a major disaster of statewide impact, a sweeping declaration is desirable. However, for the more localized emergency, declarations of emergency can and should be narrowly drawn in order to prevent confusion and instability in the marketplace.

POSITION: The Florida Retail Federation supports declarations of emergency that protect consumers without hindering compliant businesses.