The safe harbor in the first alternative and the cap in the second alternative are also intended to reduce the administrative compliance burden on industry participants and would improve the consistency and ease of enforcement by supervisors. 12  EFTA § 920(a)(5), 12 USC § 1693o-2(a)(5). BIS central bankers’ speeches  5  issuer must meet to qualify to receive it.
Instead, the Board requested comment on two general approaches and posed a number of questions related to those alternatives. Under the first approach, the fraud adjustment would allow issuers to recover costs incurred for implementing major innovations that would likely result in substantial reductions in total, industry-wide fraud losses.