SettleADebt.

Cross out only what actually changed

What does a change in provider requirements actually change?

Removing one requirement does not remove all the others. This Minnesota example separates accreditation from the application, disclosures and other conditions that remain.

  1. Changed requirement

    Identify the exact accreditation provision removed.

  2. Remaining requirements

    Check the application, disclosures and agreement conditions separately.

  3. Date

    Confirm when the change took effect for the relevant activity.

Cross out only what actually changed

Removing an accreditation requirement does not erase a provider’s other obligations. Applications, disclosures, agreements and customer protections can remain relevant under separate provisions.

The saved Minnesota comparison separates the amended requirement from the conditions that remain. Check the effective version and actual service before concluding that a provider no longer needs authorization.

This is a saved illustration with stated assumptions, not an offer or prediction for your circumstances. The full calculation and original limitations are in the optional archive.

Explore the complete state local territorial and tribal rules guide →
Open the complete calculation, tables and source notesOriginal working documents, complete tables and revision history
About this archive

The explanation above is written for readers. These original working documents preserve the evidence trail, including technical language, dated passages and known corrections. They have not all received independent professional review. Use the marked limits before relying on a particular rule or figure.

DATA & WORKED EXAMPLE

Minnesota: four accreditation changes and the application conditions that remain

The saved before/after and DMP-versus-settlement tables show accreditation proof deleted while sworn applications, background disclosures, standard agreements and residual information authority remain. The specified changes took effect August 1, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. in the bounded existing review.

Saved research, explicit assumptions and source limits. Full investigation → · All original tables →

2. Four-provision before/after/version/effectiveness matrix

Affected provisionBefore the 2026 amendmentEnacted wording/changeWhat remains after the changeVersion, effective date, and application
Minn. Stat. §332A.04, subd. 1 — DMP applicationThe displayed 2025 text required: “(8) proof of accreditation,” except for an applicant licensed in Minnesota as a debt prorater immediately before August 1, 2007; former clause (9) authorized other commissioner-required information.Chapter 124, article 1, §59 deletes former clause (8) in full and renumbers former clause (9) as clause (8). Revisor's Office +1Written and sworn commissioner-form application; principals; physical address/contact information; trust-account identification; Minnesota-jurisdiction consent; registered agent or commissioner appointment; extensive background/fitness disclosures; standard DMP agreement; other commissioner-required information; and temporary waiver for good cause. Revisor's OfficeEnacted against Minnesota Statutes 2024; signed May 27, 2026; effective August 1, 2026, 12:01 a.m. No express transition clause. Current Revisor page still displays old clause (8) with a 2026 warning.
Minn. Stat. §332B.04, subd. 1 — settlement applicationThe displayed 2025 text required accreditation unless the applicant submitted an affidavit that it did not provide credit counseling; former clause (8) authorized other information.Chapter 124, article 1, §60 deletes former clause (7), including both accreditation proof and the alternative affidavit, and renumbers former clause (8) as clause (7). Revisor's Office +1Written and sworn commissioner-form application; principals; physical address/contact information; Minnesota-jurisdiction consent; registered agent or commissioner appointment; background/fitness disclosures; standard settlement agreement; other commissioner-required information; and temporary waiver for good cause. Revisor's Office +1Enacted against Minnesota Statutes 2024; signed May 27, 2026; effective August 1, 2026, 12:01 a.m. No express transition clause. Current Revisor page still displays old clause (7) with a 2026 warning.
Minn. Stat. §332A.02, subd. 2 — DMP accreditation definitionDefined “accreditation” by reference to certification from the Council on Accreditation, Bureau Veritas Certification North America, Inc., or BSI Management Systems America, Inc.Chapter 124, article 1, §63 repeals subdivision 2. Revisor's Office +1The remaining Chapter 332A definitions and substantive registration provisions are untouched by this repealer. The repeal does not itself repeal registration, bond, fee, agreement, conduct, or fitness provisions.Effective August 1, 2026, 12:01 a.m. No separate grandfathering or pending-application language appears in §63. The 2025 page still prints the repealed definition but identifies the repeal in its warning/history.
Minn. Stat. §332B.02, subd. 2 — settlement accreditation definitionContained the parallel accreditation definition.Chapter 124, article 1, §63 repeals subdivision 2. Revisor's Office +1The remaining Chapter 332B definitions—including settlement services, provider, exempt attorney, and lead generator—remain. Registration and substantive duties were not repealed by §63.Effective August 1, 2026, 12:01 a.m. No separate transition clause. The 2025 page still prints the repealed definition with an explicit 2026 warning.

Retained application-condition matrix

ConditionDMP — §332A.04(1) after §59Settlement — §332B.04(1) after §60
Written commissioner-form application under oathRetainedRetained
Each principal’s full nameRetainedRetained
Physical address, not a P.O. box; telephone; applicable emailRetainedRetained
Identification of statutory trust accountRetainedNot an item in this subdivision
Consent to Minnesota court jurisdictionRetainedRetained
Registered agent or appointment of commissioner for serviceRetainedRetained
Criminal/civil consumer-protection and moral-turpitude historyRetainedRetained
Judgments, litigation, liens, complaints, agency actions/investigations within stated ten-year periodRetainedRetained
Defaults in handling money collected for othersRetainedRetained
Other-state revocation or suspension historyRetainedRetained
Standard form of consumer agreementRetained as clause (7)Retained as clause (6)
Proof of accreditationDeletedDeleted
No-credit-counseling affidavit alternativeNot applicableDeleted with former clause (7)
Other commissioner-required information/materialRetained and renumbered to clause (8)Retained and renumbered to clause (7)
Temporary waiver for good causeRetainedRetained

What to keep attached

  • P3 corrects only P2’s overall research-session dates to October 25 Pacific/October 26 UTC; no legal/effective date or individual fetch timestamp changes.
  • Existing review supports the named Chapter 124 provisions, not a full current-code/later-act audit, formal Commerce ruling, application-specific consequence or provider exemption.
  • Pending-file treatment, post-effective-date forms/checklists, actual status and broader state/contract/local/tribal categories remain held.

Source trail

Get debt settlement help