SB 2364 — Relating to the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions.
Last action — Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 20 nays 27
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill is in committee in the Senate. Introduced January 27, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Next likely step: a committee vote, then a floor vote in the Senate.
Odds of enactment
Low chanceBased on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a low chance of becoming law.
Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.
A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.
Prognosis
-
In Committee
Current position in the legislative process.
-
6 sponsors
1 primary, 5 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (4 R).
-
Failed a recorded vote
Failed 1 recorded vote so far — a real headwind.
Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.
Summary
A BILL for an Act to provide for a legislative management study relating to the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
18 added · 128 removedPlain-language change summary
The amendments to Senate Bill No. 2364 involve shifting focus from specific legal provisions related to security interests and financial assets to a broader study of property rights in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) transactions. This new approach intends to examine how ownership rights interact with state and federal laws, seeking input from stakeholders in the securities industry. This change matters because it aims to address potential gaps in understanding and regulating property rights, which can help improve legal clarity and protections for entitlement holders.
25.0840.0200125.0840.03000 Prepared by the Legislative Council Title.03000 staff for Senator Paulson February 19, 2025 Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly of North Dakota PROPOSEDFIRST AMENDMENTSENGROSSMENT TOENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO.
Olson A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact section 41-08-10, subsection 1 of section 41-08-43, section 41-08-51, and subsection 1 of section 41-09-25 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to choice of law, the property interest in a financial asset held by a securities intermediary, priority among security interests and entitlement holders, and the law governing perfection and priority of security interests in investment property.for an Act to provide for a legislative management study relating to the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions.
AMENDMENT.
Section 41-08-10 of the North Dakota Century Code is amended and reenacted as follows:
41-08-10.
(8-110) Applicability - Choice of law.
1.
The local law of the issuer's jurisdiction, as specified in subsection 4, governs:
a.
The validity of a security;
b.
The rights and duties of the issuer with respect to registration of transfer;
c.
The effectiveness of registration of transfer by the issuer;
d.
Whether the issuer owes any duties to an adverse claimant to a security;
and e.
Whether an adverse claim can be asserted against a person to whom transfer of a certificated or uncertificated security is registered or a person who obtains control of an uncertificated security.
Page No.
1 25.0840.02001 Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly 2.
The local law of the securities intermediary's jurisdiction, as specified in subsection 5,law of this state governs:
a.
Acquisition of a security entitlement from the securities intermediary;
b.
The rights and duties of the securities intermediary and entitlement holder arising out of a security entitlement;
c.
Whether the securities intermediary owes any duties to an adverse claimant to a security entitlement;
and d.
Whether an adverse claim can be asserted against a person who acquires a security entitlement from the securities intermediary or a person who purchases a security entitlement or interest therein from an entitlement holder.
3.
The local law of the jurisdiction in which a security certificate is located at the time of delivery governs whether an adverse claim can be asserted against a person to whom the security certificate is delivered.
4.
"Issuer's jurisdiction" means the jurisdiction under which the issuer of the security is organized or, if permitted by the law of that jurisdiction, the law of another jurisdiction specified by the issuer.
An issuer organized under the law of this state may specify the law of another jurisdiction as the law governing the matters specified in subdivisions b through e of subsection 1.
5.
The following rules determine a "securities intermediary's jurisdiction" for purposes of this section:
a.
If an agreement between the securities intermediary and its entitlement holder governing the securities account expressly provides that a particular jurisdiction is the securities intermediary's jurisdiction for purposes of this part, this chapter, or this title, that jurisdiction is the securities intermediary's jurisdiction.
b.
If subdivision a does not apply and an agreement between the securities intermediary and its entitlement holder governing the securities account expressly provides that the agreement is governed by the law of a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the securities intermediary's jurisdiction.
Show all 87 changed lines (47 more)
c.
If neither subdivision a nor b applies and an agreement between the securities intermediary and its entitlement holder governing the securities account Page No.
2 25.0840.02001 Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly expressly provides that the securities account is maintained at an office in a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the securities intermediary's jurisdiction.
d.
If none of the preceding subdivisions applies, the securities intermediary's jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the office identified in an account statement as the office serving the entitlement holder's account is located.
e.
If none of the preceding subdivisions applies, the securities intermediary's jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the chief executive office of the securities intermediary is located.
6.
A securities intermediary's jurisdiction is not determined by the physical location of certificates representing financial assets, or by the jurisdiction in which is organized the issuer of the financial asset with respect to which an entitlement holder has a security entitlement, or by the location of facilities for data processing or other recordkeeping concerning the account.
7.
The local law of the issuer's jurisdiction or the securities intermediary's jurisdiction governs a matter or transaction specified in subsection 1 or 2 even if the matter or transaction does not bear any relation to the jurisdiction.
SECTION 2.
AMENDMENT.
Subsection 1 of section 41-08-43 of the North Dakota Century Code is amended and reenacted as follows:
1.
To the extent necessary for a securities intermediary to satisfy all security entitlements with respect to a particular financial asset, all interests in that financial asset held by the securities intermediary are held by the securities intermediary for the entitlement holders, are not property of the securities intermediary, and are not subject to claims of creditors of the securities intermediary, except as otherwise provided in section 41-08-51.
SECTION 3.
AMENDMENT.
Section 41-08-51 of the North Dakota Century Code is amended and reenacted as follows:
41-08-51.
(8-511) Priority among security interests and entitlement holders.
1.
Except as otherwise provided in subsections 2 and 3, ifIf a securities intermediary does not have sufficient interests in a particular financial asset to satisfy both its obligations to entitlement holders who have security entitlements to that financial asset and its obligation to a Page No.
3 25.0840.02001 Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly creditor of the securities intermediary who has a security interest in that financial asset, the claims of entitlement holders, other than the creditor, have priority over the claim of the creditor.
2.
A claim of a creditor of a securities intermediary who has a security interest in a financial asset held by a securities intermediary has priority over claims of the securities intermediary's entitlement holders who have security entitlements with respect to that financial asset if the creditor has control over the financial asset.
3.
If a clearing corporation does not have sufficient financial assets to satisfy both its obligations to entitlement holders who have security entitlements with respect to a financial asset and its obligation to a creditor of the clearing corporation who has a security interest in that financial asset, the claim of the creditor has priority over the claims of entitlement holders.
SECTION 4.
AMENDMENT.
Subsection 1 of section 41-09-25 of the North Dakota Century Code is amended and reenacted as follows:
1.
Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, the following rules apply:
a.
While a security certificate is located in a jurisdiction, the local law of that jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in the certificated security represented thereby.
b.
The local law of the issuer's jurisdiction as specified in subsection 4 of section 41-08-10 governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in an uncertificated security.
c.
The local law of the securities intermediary's jurisdiction as specified in subsection 5 of section 41-08-10this state governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in a security entitlement or securities account.
d.
The local law of the commodity intermediary's jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in a commodity contract or commodity account.
e.
Subdivisions b, c, and d apply even if the transaction does not bear any relation to the jurisdiction.
SECTION 1.
During the 2025-26 interim, the legislative management shall consider Pagestudying No.the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions, along with the jurisdiction for disputes between entitlement holders and securities intermediaries.
4 25.0840.02001 Sixty-ninth Legislative Assembly studying the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions, along with the jurisdiction for disputes between entitlement holders and securities intermediaries.
51 25.0840.0200125.0840.03000
Show all 87 changed rows (47 more)
View plain text versions (3)
- Engrossed FIRST ENGROSSMENT Current pdf
- Prepared by the Legislative Council staff for Representative Paulson View text pdf
- Introduced View text pdf
Action History
-
Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 20 nays 27
-
Amendment adopted, placed on calendar
-
Reported back amended, do pass, amendment placed on calendar 7 0 0
-
Committee Hearing 09:00
-
Introduced, first reading, referred Judiciary Committee
Sponsors
- SuAnn Rep. Olson · Cosponsor
- Mark Enget · Primary
- David A. Clemens · Cosponsor
- Bob Paulson · Cosponsor
- Keith Boehm · Cosponsor
- Jared Rep. Hendrix · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 5 co-sponsors · 142 not signed on · 27 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Enget, Mark Republican
Co-sponsors (5)
- Rep. Olson, SuAnn
- Clemens, David A. Republican
- Paulson, Bob Republican
- Boehm, Keith Republican
- Rep. Hendrix, Jared
Not signed on (142)
142 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 142 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 16 | 25 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 20 | 27 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 43% | 57% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (47)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| van Oosting | — | Yea |
| Boschee, Josh | Democratic | Nay |
| Braunberger, Ryan | Democratic | Yea |
| Hogan, Kathy | Democratic | Nay |
| Marcellais, Richard | Democratic | Yea |
| Mathern, Tim | Democratic | Yea |
| Axtman, Michelle | Republican | Nay |
| Barta, Jeff | Republican | Nay |
| Beard, Todd | Republican | Yea |
| Bekkedahl, Brad | Republican | Nay |
| Boehm, Keith | Republican | Yea |
| Burckhard, Randy A. | Republican | Nay |
| Castaneda, Jose L. | Republican | Yea |
| Cleary, Sean | Republican | Nay |
| Clemens, David A. | Republican | Yea |
| Conley, Cole | Republican | Nay |
| Cory, Claire | Republican | Yea |
| Davison, Kyle | Republican | Nay |
| Dever, Dick | Republican | Nay |
| Dwyer, Michael | Republican | Nay |
| Enget, Mark | Republican | Yea |
| Erbele, Robert | Republican | Nay |
| Gerhardt, Justin | Republican | Nay |
| Hogue, David | Republican | Yea |
| Kessel, Greg | Republican | Nay |
| Klein, Jerry | Republican | Nay |
| Larson, Diane | Republican | Yea |
| Lee, Judy | Republican | Nay |
| Lemm, Randy D. | Republican | Yea |
| Luick, Larry | Republican | Yea |
| Magrum, Jeffery J. | Republican | Yea |
| Meyer, Scott | Republican | Nay |
| Myrdal, Janne | Republican | Nay |
| Patten, Dale | Republican | Nay |
| Paulson, Bob | Republican | Yea |
| Powers, Michelle | Republican | Yea |
| Roers, Kristin | Republican | Nay |
| Rummel, Dean | Republican | Nay |
| Schaible, Donald | Republican | Nay |
| Sickler, Jonathan | Republican | Nay |
| Sorvaag, Ronald | Republican | Nay |
| Thomas, Paul J. | Republican | Nay |
| Walen, Chuck | Republican | Yea |
| Wanzek, Terry M. | Republican | Nay |
| Weber, Mark F. | Republican | Nay |
| Weston, Kent | Republican | Yea |
| Wobbema, Mike | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 2364 do?
- A BILL for an Act to provide for a legislative management study relating to the property rights of entitlement holders in Uniform Commercial Code transactions.
- Who sponsors SB 2364?
- SB 2364 is sponsored by Rep. Olson, SuAnn, Enget, Mark (Republican), Clemens, David A. (Republican), Paulson, Bob (Republican), Boehm, Keith (Republican), and Rep. Hendrix, Jared.
- What is the current status of SB 2364?
- This bill is in committee in the Senate. Introduced January 27, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
- Where can I track SB 2364?
- Track SB 2364 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 2364
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 2364
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →