Florida legal aid groups warn bank-backed legislation could slash their funding
A long-simmering feud over the money that banks pay to legal aid organizations to fund legal help for the poor is in front of the Legislature again.
Florida bankers are supporting a bill (SB 498) to cap the rate paid on interest on trust accounts (IOTA). An attorney trust account is a special bank account used to hold client funds separately from a lawyer's business funds to follow legal and ethical rules.
Legal aid organizations believe the move will cut their budgets, preventing them from providing services to those in need, including veterans seeking to access benefits, hurricane victims, families looking to adopt and more.
'The changes proposed would come at expense of vulnerable Floridians who rely on Florida legal aid programs even though those banks are not required to participate in the program,' said Leslie Powell-Boudreaux, executive director of Legal Services of North Florida.
Because of a change made by the Florida Supreme Court in 2023, banks were required to pay out rates on trust accounts that were tied to the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate, which averages rates made on loans.
That rate was higher than the prior IOTA rate rule, and combined with the surge in interest rates set by the Federal Reserve which drove loan rates higher, it resulted in a massive boost to the interest paid on trust accounts and the funds received by legal aid groups.
In the 2021-22 fiscal year, IOTA funds provided $9.5 million to Funding Florida Legal Aid, the group formerly known as the Florida Bar Foundation. It provides money to legal services groups around the state.
In the 2024-25 year, the funds jumped to $280 million, or about 29½ times more. Through the first six months of the current fiscal year, IOTA funds ran up to $155.4 million.
Bankers argue the new higher rates they pay on trust accounts are unfair. Trust accounts involved a high volume of transactions and more work for the banks to maintain, while paying higher rates than they do for other low-volume accounts they maintain.
'We are fully in support of legal aid but it's got to be done in a way that makes sense,' said Dennis Murphy, president and CEO of Gulfside Bank, a Sarasota-based bank.
'These accounts literally have hundreds if not sometimes thousands of in-and-out type of transactions on a monthly basis,' he added. 'The rule change ... doesn't allow us to offset the interest with wire fees and all the other transactions we've got.'
The banks in support of the bill also claim the rule change by the court was an inappropriate regulation of their business by the justices; the legal aid groups argue it was a change in the rules for lawyers.
The Florida Bankers Association asked the court to reconsider its decision but the Florida Supreme Court rejected that move in August 2024. The court did approve of allowing the FFLA to set aside $143 million in its current budget for reserves – more than half of the $280 million it received.
For the bankers, this showed that the legal aid groups can't spend all the money they've received in the last few years and the rate for IOTAs should be lowered. But legal aid groups counter that the reserves will allow them to mitigate for fluctuations in interest rates that could lead to lean times in the years ahead.
The bill passed through the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday on a 7-2 vote, with two Democrats, Sens. Lori Berman of Lantana and Rosalyn Osgood of Tamarac voting against it. Another Democrat, Sen. Tina Polsky of Boca Raton, voted with Republicans in favor of it.
Berman noted that banks don't have to participate in the IOTA program. As of December, 170 banks offer IOTA to lawyers, 16 more than in March 2023 when the Florida Supreme Court issued the rule change.
'I would like to see us have a dedicated funding source for legal aid,' Berman said. 'I would like to see a resolution where everybody can get on board … but until that time I'm going to support what the Florida courts have done.'
Sen. Don Gaetz, R-Niceville, noted that while the bill might cut funding for legal aid groups, they have so much stored away in reserves it wouldn't disturb services for those in need. Saying he was a supporter of legal aid, he still took issue with how the courts made the change in the first place.
'I'm troubled that the Supreme Court would tell banks what interest rates they have to pay,' he said.
The bill faces two more committee hurdles in the Senate before reaching the floor in that chamber. Its companion measure (HB 173) hasn't yet received a hearing in the House.
Last year, a similar bill advanced in the Senate but didn't gain traction in the House.
Gray Rohrer is a reporter with the USA TODAY Network-Florida Capital Bureau. He can be reached at grohrer@gannett.com. Follow him on X: @GrayRohrer.
This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Senate panel advances bill limiting legal aid funding from banks
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business of Fashion
27 minutes ago
- Business of Fashion
Beauty's Hottest New Trend: The Founder Buyback
On Tuesday, influencer-turned-mogul Huda Kattan announced that she had regained majority ownership of her eponymous makeup brand, Huda Beauty, after buying back the minority stake private equity firm TSG Consumer Partners took in 2017, The Business of Beauty reported. The news arrived months after Kattan's sister Mona Kattan purchased Kayali, the fragrance brand she co-founded, alongside PE firm General Atlantic; that transaction set up funding for Huda Beauty's buyback. It was a sister act of multimillion dollar proportions. After last week's billion dollar acquisition of Rhode by E.l.f. Beauty and Church & Dwight's $700 million purchase of hand sanitiser label Touchland, the 2025 M&A beauty market appears to be looking up. But the arc of Huda Beauty traces along a bigger shift in the beauty industry. When the brand launched in 2013, it did so in the heat of the celebrity makeup moment; Kylie Jenner's pigmented lip kits and Rihanna's 40-shades of foundation came next. Billion dollar valuations followed for an elite set that included Kattan, Jenner and makeup artists like Anastasia Soare, Charlotte Tilbury and Pat McGrath. In the years since, some have seen their businesses flourish (see: Puig's majority acquisition of Charlotte Tilbury, valued at $1.2 billion) while others have lost their grip. In the decade since Huda Beauty's debut, a shiny new class of celebrity founders, like Bieber's Rhode and Selena Gomez's Rare Beauty, have risen to the vanguard, succeeding with direct customer relationships and outsize sales, strong operational teams and a simple but refined focus on exactly what they do well. A following is no longer enough in the cut-throat beauty business, unless you can continuously convert them to shoppers. The Social Network What does Kattan have? In addition to an estimated $450 million in annual sales as of 2024, the brand benefits from a wide international distribution and a wide array of best-sellers. But its most impressive feat may be that, despite 12 years in business — 120 years in beauty — Kattan hasn't lost her relevance online. Huda Beauty's best asset is Huda herself. As a vlogger, the US-born and Dubai-based Kattan was perhaps something of the original beauty influencer. Her own line, which she founded with her sisters Mona and Alya, was an instant hit, as her high-definition makeup looks (fluffy lashes, sleek contours) and a critic's eye toward formulas translated seamlessly into a cosmetic range that still mints regular hits, like last year's Easy Blur airbrush foundation. In 2014, four years after Instagram launched, Kattan hit 1 million followers; three years later, she had 18 million, and has 57 million today, according to the app. RivalIQ calculated that @hudabeauty's engagement rate is eight times the going average for beauty brands. If Kattan's public support of Palestinians in the Gaza war has polarised some of her audience, the tens of thousands of comments her posts draw seem only to strengthen her reach. Trends like the clean girl aesthetic and 'Euphoria' makeup may have come and gone, but Kattan's influence still powers Huda Beauty the brand; it consistently outranks others when it comes to social media performance. It was the #4 top ranked makeup brand in 2024, beating out LVMH's Dior and Fenty, said Launchmetrics. In the first quarter 2025, it was the top of CreatorIQ's list, narrowly besting Selena Gomez' Rare Beauty. Spate analyst Mathilde Riba reported that Huda Beauty charts nearly a 7 out of 10 on the firm's 'sentiment index.' Buyback to Bounce Back As a Revlon makeup artist living in opulent Dubai, Kattan's ultra-glam look hooked a generation of beauty obsessives on her cosmetics almost immediately. But two subsequent skincare forays, Wishful (launched in 2020) and Glowish (in 2021) were less successful, and ultimately didn't satisfy customers who had fallen for Kattan's contours and cut creases. The lines were eventually phased out of Sephora, and now linger on the line's e-commerce website. Kattan heads into the next phase 'hyper-focused' on Huda Beauty, she told Women's Wear Daily — an easier task without the distractions of the fragrance and skincare businesses. But the founder-led buyback can be tricky: French conglomerate Coty took a $71 million loss when it sold its stake in skincare brand Skkn back to founder Kim Kardashian three years after its purchase. And the clean label Beautycounter, which founder Gregg Renfrew bought out of bankruptcy last year, has taken time to reposition itself ahead of a relaunch scheduled for this summer. Huda Beauty and TSG may not have had the fairytale exit that Charlotte Tilbury scored with Puig, but given the glut of colour cosmetics brands currently in market, maybe it was the best outcome. The San Francisco-based TSG Consumer Partners, is known to be more of a short-term investor; the firm took a minority stake in It Cosmetics in 2012, cashing out in 2016 when the brand sold to L'Oréal for $1.2 billion. It made a similar manoeuvre with E.l.f., in which it bought a minority stake in 2011 that grew to a majority stake by 2014, two years before the line's IPO. More recently, it announced a 'strategic growth investment' in Marianna Hewitt and Lauren Ireland''s Summer Fridays, implying that influencer-fronted brands still have bright futures ahead. And what of the fierce competition? As more and more beauty brands come to market and also languish in the M&A waiting room, they'd be wise to stay close to their core. That's the thing about a once-in-a-lifetime founder: There's only one person who can see the vision through. Otherwise, they have to let it go. With additional reporting by Priya Rao. Sign up to The Business of Beauty newsletter, your complimentary, must-read source for the day's most important beauty and wellness news and analysis.
Hamilton Spectator
34 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
New Mexico appeals court rejects lawsuit against oil and gas regulators
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — A New Mexico appeals court rejected a lawsuit alleging that the nation's No. 2 oil-producing state failed to meet constitutional provisions for protecting against oil and gas industry pollution, in an opinion Tuesday. Environmental advocates vowed to appeal the matter to the state's top court. A panel of three judges on the New Mexico Court of Appeals found that it was beyond the judiciary's authority to weigh whether the pollution controls are adequate, writing that the state Constitution directs the Legislature to balance the benefits of environmental regulation with natural resources development. The 2023 lawsuit from a coalition of environmental groups was the first to invoke the constitution's pollution-control clause, a 1971 amendment requiring that New Mexico prevent the contamination of air, water and other natural resources. 'While plaintiffs correctly observe that, as the 'Land of Enchantment,' the state's beauty is central to our identity, we cannot ignore the long history of permitting oil and gas extraction within our borders,' the panel wrote, invoking the state motto. 'If anything, the law, history, and tradition of our state demonstrates that resource extraction must be considered alongside, and must coexist with, pollution control legislation.' Gail Evans, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity and lead counsel on the case, said Tuesday's opinion would dismiss the case entirely if unchallenged and 'displays a fundamental misunderstanding of our constitution and constitutional rights.' She said plaintiffs intent to appeal to the state Supreme Court. 'Fifty years ago, New Mexico voted to amend the constitution and to provide protections from industry pollution and the court has found today that the amendment — the pollution control clause — is essentially meaningless, and that has to be wrong,' Evans said. The court challenge comes as New Mexico's state government rides a wave of record income from development in the Permian Basin, one of the world's most productive, oil-producing regions. Oil-related revenue collections underwrite a considerable amount of the state's budget , including public education. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's administration is policing the industry with regulations that target methane and other emissions. But the Center for Biological Diversity and other groups say these efforts are not enough and that the state is failing to enforce existing pollution-control measures. Attorneys for the Democratic-led Legislature and environmental regulators said the lawsuit threatened their constitutional authority. Appeals Judge Katherine Wray issued an additional concurring opinion, expressing further limitations of the pollution control clause. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US doubles steel, aluminum tariffs as OECD ministers gather
The United States doubled steel and aluminum tariffs Wednesday, casting a pall on a gathering of OECD ministers as President Donald Trump's intensifying trade war weighs on the world economy. Trump's sweeping tariffs on allies and adversaries alike -- including levies on imported steel and autos -- have strained US ties with trading partners and sparked a flurry of negotiations to avoid the duties. And pressure is mounting as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a 38-nation grouping of mostly developed countries, cut its global growth forecast on the back of Trump's levies. Trade, consumption and investment have been affected by the tariffs, OECD chief economist Alvaro Pereira earlier told AFP, warning that the US economy will see the biggest repercussions. While some of Trump's most sweeping levies face legal challenges, they have been allowed to remain in place for now as an appeals process is ongoing. Against this tense backdrop, the Paris-based grouping is holding a ministerial meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and EU trade commissioner Maros Sefcovic are set to hold talks on the sidelines of the gathering, with the bloc seeking to stave off higher levies from July 9 absent a compromise. Similarly, UK Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds met Greer on Tuesday to try and avert fresh tariff hikes on steel and aluminum. Despite the doubling of steel and aluminum tariffs Wednesday, imports from the UK will remain at 25 percent for now, while both sides work out duties and quotas in line with the terms of their trade pact. In their talks, Reynolds and Greer discussed a "shared desire to implement" the pact, including agreements on sectoral tariffs, as soon as possible, a UK readout said. But Trump's latest salvo raises temperatures with various partners. The European Union has said it "strongly regrets" Trump's plan to raise metals tariffs, cautioning that it "undermines ongoing efforts to reach a negotiated solution" with the United States. The bloc added that it was ready to retaliate. - Looming deadline - The Group of Seven advanced economies -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States -- is due to hold separate talks on trade on Wednesday too. "We need to come up with negotiated solutions as quickly as possible, because time is running out," German economy minister Katherina Reiche said Tuesday, on the sidelines of OECD talks. French trade minister Laurent Saint-Martin added: "We have to keep our cool and always show that the introduction of these tariffs is in no one's interest." Mexico will request an exemption from the higher tariff, Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard said, arguing that it is unfair because the United States exports more steel to Mexico than it imports. "It makes no sense to put a tariff on a product in which you have a surplus," Ebrard said. Mexico is highly vulnerable to Trump's trade wars because 80 percent of its exports go to the United States, its main trading partner. On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the Trump administration sent letters to trading partners to push for offers by Wednesday as a deadline approached. Besides imposing 10 percent tariffs on almost all US trading partners in early April, Trump had announced higher rates for dozens of economies including the EU and Japan as he sought to pressure countries to correct practices Washington deemed unfair. These higher rates were paused for 90 days, but the halt is due to expire July 9. All eyes are also on rising tensions between Washington and Beijing. Trump has taken special aim at China this year, imposing additional levies of 145 percent on Chinese imports -- triggering Beijing's counter tariffs of 125 percent on US goods. Both sides agreed to temporarily de-escalate in May, but Trump accused China of violating the deal. The issue was China "slow walking the approval" of critical mineral exports and rare earth magnets, US Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender told CNBC on Monday. But he maintained Washington is making "good progress" overall in talks. alb-aue-bys/jgc/dw
