Proposition 50K1021

Projet de loi réglant les intérêts débiteurs dus sur les comptes à vue.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

Feb. 18, 2000

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

bank interest

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Abstained from voting

CD&V N-VA FN VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Alfons Borginon (Open Vld) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

March 7, 2001 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the draft law regulating the debit interest rate on vision accounts. Our group has some difficulties with this bill. We will therefore remember.

In summary, the draft consists in the fact that whoever enters into debit on a view account - better known as going in the red - within a three-month period and for an amount less than 50,000 francs, from now on, maximum only 14% debit interest rate will pay the bank. Anyone who exceeds the maximum allowed deposit amount will have to pay a maximum penalty of 10%.

Our comments are of a dual nature. First, legislative-technical: a separate law of four articles addresses a single consumer credit problem, although we have a comprehensive consumer credit law that could perfectly regulate this proposal. The Consumer Credit Act already regulates a lot in relation to the problem of the maximum cost percentages. In implementation of the Consumer Credit Act, the King has established maximum cost rates for credit opening, for sale on repayments, for loan on repayment and for some other credit agreements. The Consumer Credit Act now excludes credit opening up to 50,000 francs from its scope. The reasons for this are that the legislator at the time did not want to generate heavy administrative burden on the banks for small balances and because the benefit for the consumer was ultimately minimal. If one wanted to settle the small balances, this would have been perfectly possible through the Consumer Credit Act.

Allow me to link for a moment with the government statement by Mr. Verhofstadt, which put the emphasis on good legislation. It would have been done from a technical point of view to listen to laws. Unfortunately, this is exactly what is happening now. In order not to touch some interests and to blast the vanity of some, our legislative apparatus has become an unnecessary law richer. From the responses of the Minister in the committee, we thought to understand that he fundamentally shares this opinion.

As for the substance of the case, the Parliament must still ask the fundamentally substantial question whether we can ⁇ the goal we aim for with our battery laws. Thanks to this new law, banks will have to limit the interest rate they apply when someone goes in the red to a maximum of 14%. Today this is an average of 16%. The impact or profit of this law on the consumer who is constantly at the credit limit of 50 francs is of the order of 1,000 francs on an annual basis. Whoever goes in the red only now and then, for a few days, will pay a few dozen francs less on an annual basis. Who is better off this law? Is the consumer better protected? Is the excessive debt burden, which is a very serious problem, addressed? Is there a minimum solution to the excessive debt burden? on the contrary.

This law will not stop people from going in the red. It gives a wrong signal to the consumer. This law gives the signal that there is a maximum for the debit interest rate on vision accounts. Banks will no longer be able to ask what they want in the future, because there is a maximum. However, the bottom line of the case is that a 14% interest rate is a very high interest rate. A loan opening with a 14% interest rate is and remains a very expensive form of credit. There are a lot of cheaper alternatives on the market. Those who need money for the purchase of a consumer goods can take a loan with a maximum of maybe 7% to 8% payments. Here you pay 14% from the first day you go in the red. This is a very expensive form of credit and this message must be transmitted. I have read that the banks admit that for an amount up to 49,999 francs an interest rate of 6% to 7% would actually be enough.

This law is probably good-intentioned, but it will not reduce the excessive debt burden, on the contrary. This law will in no way prevent people from going in the red. They will now pay 14% instead of the average 6 to 10%. This is an illusion law.

The Senate may revise a number of other things, as an amendment has been submitted to the Chamber Committee. This amendment has already been voted. There is a new amendment, but since this amendment has already been adopted in the House, this draft must be returned to the Senate. I hope that the Senate will take this opportunity to rethink the whole matter. This is an unnecessary law, which also gives a wrong signal.

General discussion is closed. The general discussion is closed.

April 19, 2001 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I refer to the written report.