As we blogged about last week, the State of Michigan, attempting to find ways to decrease their projected $450MM budget deficit for the upcoming FY, had proposed significant changes to their escheat provisions for future reporting years. Since that time, Michigan legislators have indeed signed that bill into law.
While changes in unclaimed property statutes are very common, Michigan H.B. 6421 will impact reporting entities’ policies and procedures considerably. First, as many states are beginning to do in attempt to balance their budgets, Michigan decreased their dormancy periods for most all property types from 5 to 3-years, thus expediting escheat to the state. While the original bill had proposed decreasing the dormancy period for traveler’s checks similarly, this clause has been reversed and will remain as is (15-years) – this is likely due in part to several lawsuits that have been filed against states for reducing dormancy periods for traveler’s checks, citing violations of the U.S. Constitution’s Due Process Clause.
While the dormancy changes are significant, they do not impact holders’ unclaimed property processes. However, another amendment upheld in this bill does. That is, Michigan now mandates, beginning January 1, 2012, reporting entities to submit their unclaimed property report and remittance on or before July 1 of each year, rather than November 1. In addition, the dormancy cutoff will indeed be March 31 of each year. Both the deadline and cutoff established by the State of Michigan are the first of their kind amongst the 54 U.S. reporting jurisdictions.
Lastly, this bill requires that holders file a supplemental report to the State of Michigan prior to July 1, 2011, for the period ending March 31, 2011. This can be thought of as a “catch-up filing” used to accelerate the escheat of property that became dormant because of the changes cited above. A similar supplemental file was proposed by AZ last year for submission by June 1, 2010.
Clearly, the bill signed into law by the State of Michigan further increases the complexity of the Unclaimed Property reporting function for organizations across the world. This has been the trend, and will continue to be the trend, as the Uniform Unclaimed Property Act only goes so far in reducing the disparate reporting requirement state governments propose. A similar increase in complexity will soon take effect in the State of New Jersey where legislators continue to work out statutory changes regarding the escheat of stale gift cards, including the repeal of their gift card exemption and the introduction of a “third-priority rule” which mandates, in some cases, the escheat of gift cards to New Jersey if the card was sold in New Jersey…further details will be provided once they become clear.