Banking and Finance Law Daily Wrap Up, WORTH NOTING—Other regulatory, legislative, litigation, and industry developments, (Aug 28, 2025)

By WK Editorial Staff

A weekly roundup of other items of interest to the banking and finance law community.

CRIMES AND OFFENSES—The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control will remove its Syrian sanctions in the wake of a June 30 Executive Order, according to a final rule published in the Federal Register on August 26. The move officially ends sanctions regulations in place since 2004, following the ousting of the regime of Bashar al-Assad and the “positive actions” under its new President Ahmed al-Sharaa. The EO issued over the summer ended the national emergency justifying the Syria sanctions, “without providing relief to the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or other terrorist organizations, human rights abusers, those linked to chemical weapons or proliferation-related activities, or other persons that threaten the peace, security, or stability of the United States, Syria, and its neighbors.” The final rule is effective upon publication.

DEBT COLLECTION—Idaho Sup. Ct.: As articulated by the Idaho Supreme Court, “This case concerns the scope of the Idaho Collection Agency Act” (ICAA), Idaho Code §§ 26-2221 et seq., “Idaho's statutory scheme for regulating the debt settlement and collection industry.” More specifically, the Idaho Supreme Court was called to determine “whether businesses that help clients settle their tax debts with the Internal Revenue Service … and the State of Idaho fall within the regulatory purview of the ICAA.” As observed by the court, Wall & Associates, Inc., a Virginia company doing business in Idaho as a “tax debt settlement business,” refused to obtain a license under the ICAA, “despite being notified by the Idaho Department of Finance that it was required to do so.” In its administrative action against the Wall firm, the director of the Idaho Dept. ultimately issued a final order declaring that Wall & Associates needed to be licensed in the state and imposing civil sanctions (fines and restitution) for having failed to do so. The state trial court upheld the Idaho director’s final order. Affirming the lower court on appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court determined that: (i) the Wall firm, “as a tax debt settlement business, fits within the definition of a debt counselor under the plain language of the ICAA;” (ii) the ICAA is not preempted by federal law; (iii) the Idaho director did not abuse her discretion in evaluating the evidence and imposing civil sanctions on the firm; and (iv) the Idaho Dept. was entitled to its costs but not its attorney fees for purposes of the appeal (Wall & Associates v. State of Idaho, No. 51310 (Idaho Sup. Ct. Aug. 21, 2025)).

Attorneys: William F. Mohrman (Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P.A.) and Mark B. Perry (Perry Law, P.C.) for Wall & Associates, Inc. Raúl R. Labrador, Idaho Attorney General, for State of Idaho.

Companies: Wall & Associates, Inc.

IndustryNews: ConsumerCredit CrimesOffenses DebtCollection EnforcementActions IdahoNews StateBankingLaws UDAAP