Overview
Title
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Inflation Adjustment of Civil Monetary Penalties
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government made a small fix to a paper about money rules because they accidentally left out the date. Now it has the right date, "January 28, 2021," so everything is clear and correct.
Summary AI
A correction has been made to a rule document from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Treasury Department. In the issue from January 28, 2021, there was a mistake in the table titled "Table 1" on page 7349. The date originally said "[INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]" and has now been corrected to "January 28, 2021." This adjustment ensures accurate information is provided in the document.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Editorial Commentary
In the February 2, 2021, edition of the Federal Register, a correction was issued for a rule document authored by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a division of the Treasury Department. Originally, the document was released in the January 28, 2021, issue but contained a placeholder for the publication date in a table titled "Table 1." This placeholder has now been accurately replaced with the date "January 28, 2021."
General Summary
The core of this correction is the update of a specific entry in a table from a vague placeholder to a concrete date. The entry mistakenly included text intended for internal guidance—"[INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]"—which has now been properly updated. This correction ensures the document's data and instructions are complete and precise, enhancing its regulatory or advisory utility.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One of the key concerns with this document is the absence of context regarding "Table 1" and why this particular date correction is significant. The implication of having a placeholder in place could have led to misunderstandings or the dissemination of incomplete information. Furthermore, the document does not share the rationale behind the necessity for this correction, which might leave stakeholders or readers unclear about its importance or impact.
Additionally, the metadata accompanying the document shows a null value for an abstract, indicating that potential users of this information may not find the quick insights they need. This lack of a comprehensive preview could hinder broader engagement or understanding.
Public Impact
For the general public, this adjustment might seem minor, but it underscores the importance of accuracy in legal and regulatory documents. Such corrections uphold the standards of transparency and reliability expected in governmental publications. By ensuring every detail is accurate—especially dates, which often trigger legal or procedural changes—documents maintain their integrity and utility.
Impact on Stakeholders
For stakeholders directly affected by this rule document, such as financial institutions or regulatory compliance officers, the date correction could be crucial. A correct publication date can influence timelines, compliance requirements, or the inception of financial penalties or benefits outlined by the rule. An incorrect date might mislead these stakeholders into misaligning their operational timelines or compliance strategies, potentially resulting in financial or legal repercussions.
In summary, while the correction might appear minor at first glance, it plays an essential role in preserving the accuracy and reliability of federal regulations. The lack of additional context or detailed explanation does pose challenges, but the correction itself helps ensure stakeholders can function correctly within the prescribed legal framework.
Issues
• The document does not provide a detailed or clear explanation as to why the correction is necessary, potentially making it difficult for the reader to understand the implications.
• There is no information included about the impact of the initially incorrect publication date on the enforcement of the rule or on stakeholders, which might be important to understand the significance of the correction.
• The abstract in the metadata is noted as 'null', which could indicate insufficient summarization for users looking for a quick understanding of the document's importance.
• The document uses a placeholder '[INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]', which may confuse readers who do not have access to the updated entry.
• There is no context provided about what 'Table 1' entails or how the correction affects the content in Table 1, making it less comprehensible for readers who are not familiar with the original document.