How do California, Texas and New York treat a company that collects payments as an agent of a payee (a merchant), and does Florida's statute list a similar exemption?

Question

Accepted Answer

Texas has the most defined payee-agent exemption and California has a lighter one. New York's section allows acting as an agent of a payee but states no conditions and does not say whether the payee agent itself needs a license. Florida's exemption section lists nothing similar.

What the rule says:
- Texas: the chapter does not apply to a person appointed as an agent of a payee to collect and process a payment from a payor for goods or services, other than money transmission services, that the payee provides to the payor (Tex. Fin. Code § 152.004(2)). All three conditions are required: a written agreement directing the agent to collect payments for the payee; the payee holds the agent out to the public as accepting payments on its behalf; and payment counts as received by the payee when the agent receives it, the payor's obligation is extinguished, and the payor bears no risk of loss if the agent fails to remit.
- California: the Money Transmission Act does not apply where the recipient of the money is an agent of the payee under a preexisting written contract and delivery to the agent satisfies the payor's obligation to the payee (Cal. Fin. Code § 2010(l)). "Payee" means the provider of goods or services who is owed payment.
- New York: no one may sell or issue checks, or receive money for transmission, without a license from the superintendent, and no one may engage in that business as an agent except as an agent of a licensee or of a payee (N.Y. Banking Law § 641(1)). The payee clause is an exception to the bar on acting as an agent. It states no conditions, and the section does not settle whether a payee agent itself needs a license. It is not stated as an exemption comparable to the Texas or California ones. The express exclusion from the section covers banks and similar institutions.
- Florida: the exemptions cover banks and similar depository institutions, the United States and its agencies, and the state and its political subdivisions (Fla. Stat. § 560.104). No payee-agent exemption appears there.

What we would look at:
- Whether you have a written agency contract with each merchant, and whether it covers holding out, when payment is treated as received, and who bears the risk of loss if you fail to remit.
- In New York, do not assume the Texas or California conditions apply, or that payee-agent status removes a license requirement. Get counsel's view.
- In Florida, check the chapter's definitions and other sections before concluding that payee-agent collection is treated differently.

How do California, Texas and New York treat a company that collects payments as an agent of a payee (a merchant), and does Florida's statute list a similar exemption?

Sources

Have a question this doesn't cover?