12 CFR 226.28 - Effect on State laws.
(a)Inconsistent disclosure requirements.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, State law requirements that are inconsistent with the requirements contained in chapter 1 (General Provisions), chapter 2 (Credit Transactions), or chapter 3 (Credit Advertising) of the act and the implementing provisions of this regulation are preempted to the extent of the inconsistency. A State law is inconsistent if it requires a creditor to make disclosures or take actions that contradict the requirements of the Federal law. A State law is contradictory if it requires the use of the same term to represent a different amount or a different meaning than the Federal law, or if it requires the use of a term different from that required in the Federal law to describe the same item. A creditor, State, or other interested party may request the Board to determine whether a State law requirement is inconsistent. After the Board determines that a State law is inconsistent, a creditor may not make disclosures using the inconsistent term or form.
(i) State law requirements are inconsistent with the requirements contained in sections 161 (Correction of billing errors) or 162 (Regulation of credit reports) of the Act and the implementing provisions of this regulation and are preempted if they provide rights, responsibilities, or procedures for consumers or creditors that are different from those required by the Federal law. However, a State law that allows a consumer to inquire about an open-end credit account and imposes on the creditor an obligation to respond to such inquiry after the time allowed in the Federal law for the consumer to submit written notice of a billing error shall not be preempted in any situation where the time period for making written notice under this regulation has expired. If a creditor gives written notice of a consumer's rights under such State law, the notice shall state that reliance on the longer time period available under State law may result in the loss of important rights that could be preserved by acting more promptly under Federal law; it shall also explain that the State law provisions apply only after expiration of the time period for submitting a proper written notice of a billing error under the Federal law. If the State disclosures are made on the same side of a page as the required Federal disclosures, the State disclosures shall appear under a demarcation line below the Federal disclosures, and the Federal disclosures shall be identified by a heading indicating that they are made in compliance with Federal law.
(ii) State law requirements are inconsistent with the requirements contained in chapter 4 (Credit billing) of the Act (other than section 161 or 162) and the implementing provisions of this regulation and are preempted if the creditor cannot comply with State law without violating Federal law.
(b)Equivalent disclosure requirements. If the Board determines that a disclosure required by state law (other than a requirement relating to the finance charge, annual percentage rate, or the disclosures required under § 226.32) is substantially the same in meaning as a disclosure required under the act or this regulation, creditors in that state may make the state disclosure in lieu of the federal disclosure. A creditor, State, or other interested party may request the Board to determine whether a State disclosure is substantially the same in meaning as a Federal disclosure.
(c)Request for determination. The procedures under which a request for a determination may be made under this section are set forth in appendix A.
(d)Special rule for credit and charge cards. State law requirements relating to the disclosure of credit information in any credit or charge card application or solicitation that is subject to the requirements of section 127(c) of chapter 2 of the act ( § 226.5a of the regulation) or in any renewal notice for a credit or charge card that is subject to the requirements of section 127(d) of chapter 2 of the act ( § 226.9(e) of the regulation) are preempted. State laws relating to the enforcement of section 127 (c) and (d) of the act are not preempted.