Which place’s debt rules apply—and who can help?

S_NV PASS-01 — Nevada Provider Market Access and Consumer Fees

SettleADebt.com | Nevada individual-state investigation | Research date: October 24, 2026 | Baseline: October 22, 2026 | Regular Chat, public-source research

Scope: Nevada debt-management and debt-settlement provider classification, lawful market entry, consumer charges, fee timing, exemptions, regulator procedures, and bounded calculations.

Research status: PARTIAL — material primary-law findings established; exact adjusted consumer-fee ceilings and several authorization conditions remain unresolved.

A. Substantive findings

1. Nevada has a statutory registration framework that expressly encompasses debt settlement

Nevada's Uniform Debt-Management Services Act, NRS Chapter 676A, provides a regulatory framework for debt-management providers. The chapter expressly addresses both debt-management plans and debt-settlement services.

This is an important distinction for SettleADebt.com: Nevada cannot be classified as either an unrestricted debt-settlement market or a state where every form of settlement activity is categorically prohibited.

The statutory framework recognizes debt-settlement services, but recognition does not establish that any particular provider is authorized to furnish them. Registration, exemptions, operational restrictions, and federal requirements must be evaluated separately.

Primary authority:

• S_NV-P1-S001: Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 676A
• S_NV-P1-S002: Nevada Administrative Code, Chapter 676A

The chapter includes specific consumer protections for settlement arrangements. For example, NRS 676A.700(1)(b) restricts a provider from settling a debt for more than 50% of its outstanding amount without the individual's assent after the creditor has assented. This is a settlement-consent restriction, not a requirement that every creditor accept a 50% settlement. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

2. Nevada requires a state authorization analysis before market entry

The Nevada Financial Institutions Division (FID) maintains an operational licensing page specifically for Uniform Debt Management Services.

The regulator identifies the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System and Registry (NMLS) as its current initial-application and renewal submission channel, using the company MU1 form.

The published process includes Nevada-specific requirements, forms for counselors and debt specialists, and trust-account documentation.

Critical distinction: NMLS availability is evidence of an application process, not evidence that an applicant has obtained a registration or that every proposed business model qualifies.

Source:

• S_NV-P1-S003: Nevada FID — Uniform Debt Management Services

The regulator's operational page states that registrations expire December 31 and identifies November 1–December 31 as the renewal period. Fid NV

3. The administrative code adds independent operating conditions

NAC 676A.170 imposes restrictions beyond the existence of a state registration.

A registered provider must possess other required state or local licenses and permits, comply with applicable planning and zoning ordinances, and avoid furnishing covered services in Nevada from locations omitted from its registration application.

Consequently, Nevada registration alone does not necessarily establish complete operational permission for every office, location, or activity.

NAC 676A.140 also addresses limited circumstances under which an expired registration can be extended or reinstated. Its conditions must be satisfied; an expired registration does not automatically remain effective. DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES

4. Consumer-fee categories differ by service model

Nevada's statute distinguishes plans involving creditor concessions on finance charges or delinquency fees from debt-settlement arrangements.

For the concession-oriented debt-management-plan category, NRS 676A.580(4)(a) specifies, subject to statutory dollar adjustments:

• A consultation, credit-report, account-setup, or similar fee with a statutory base ceiling of $50.
• A monthly fee with a statutory base ceiling of $10 per remaining account, subject to a $50 monthly aggregate ceiling.

These are unadjusted statutory figures, not verified October 2026 operative ceilings.

The statute expressly makes these amounts subject to adjustment under NRS 676A.730(6). The applicable adjustment history must therefore be reconciled before publishing a current maximum.

The complete operative settlement-specific fee provisions, any applicable exceptions, and the current adjustment notices are not yet sufficiently verified to state a reliable maximum settlement fee. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

5. An executed agreement is a necessary fee condition, not blanket permission to collect immediately

NRS 676A.580 provides that a provider cannot impose charges or receive payment for debt-management services before the provider and individual sign a compliant agreement.

That rule establishes a minimum contractual prerequisite.

It does not independently authorize advance fees, override additional Nevada fee conditions, or displace federal Telemarketing Sales Rule restrictions.

The statute also contains a distinct rule for educational or counseling charges where the individual assents to an agreement, including a possible Commissioner authorization based on the nature and extent of the counseling. The exact exception must be considered before describing counseling as categorically free or categorically chargeable. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

6. Government registration charges are not consumer service-fee ceilings

Nevada FID's published fee schedule identifies the following amounts for Uniform Debt-Management Services:

These amounts concern the provider's regulatory expenses. They do not establish permission to bill equivalent amounts to a consumer.

The schedule is identified as a July 19, 2024 document; its continued applicability must be compared with current NAC 676A.120, .130, and .260. Fid NV+1

7. Material discrepancy: registration expiration date

The sources reveal a concrete current-law reconciliation issue.

The difference is not cosmetic. It affects registration continuity and whether an apparently expired provider can continue operating.

NAC 676A.130 appears in a regulatory chapter marked revised September 2018, although the online compilation was refreshed April 13, 2026. The agency webpage has a later update date, but a webpage update alone does not amend a regulation.

Disposition: HOLD the operative expiration date pending review of statutory amendments, subsequent rulemaking, and the NMLS transition notice. Do not select December 31 solely because it appears on the newer webpage. DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES+1

8. Additional controlling statutory findings from the opened text

The full NRS Chapter 676A page was subsequently opened. Its header identifies the compilation as revised October 6, 2026, incorporating legislation through 2025. This establishes a stronger primary-text basis than the initial search excerpts, although it does not independently establish that every potentially relevant 2026 agency action has been identified.

Classification and account custody. NRS 676A.130 distinguishes concession-based debt-management plans from principal-reduction settlement plans. NRS 676A.140 defines debt-management services broadly enough to include intermediary services, credit counseling, debt-management plans, and settlement services. NRS 676A.150 specifically describes a settlement arrangement involving periodic deposits into an FDIC-insured account owned by the individual and not controlled by the provider. The presence or absence of custody therefore matters, but a provider cannot assume that avoiding custody removes it from the law. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

Exemptions and territorial reach. NRS 676A.270 contains an express resident-knowledge limitation, an exemption for services receiving no compensation from either individuals or creditors, and specified institutional or professional-course exclusions. NRS 676A.140 excludes qualifying attorney-client legal services, CPA-client accounting services, and certain regulated financial-planning services from the service definition. Neither ordinary nonprofit status nor merely retaining an attorney establishes a universal exemption. A provider serving Nevada residents remotely remains subject to the resident-based registration test in NRS 676A.300. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT+1

Settlement-fee timing and calculation. NRS 676A.580(6) expressly establishes three cumulative conditions before requesting or receiving settlement fees: an executed settlement or other valid contractual agreement for at least one debt, at least one payment by the individual under that agreement, and a qualifying proportional or savings-based fee calculation.

The two statutory calculation methods are:

Fi=FtotalDiDtotalF_i=F_{\text{total}}\frac{D_i}{D_{\text{total}}}Fi​=Ftotal​Dtotal​Di​​where enrolled balances are measured when enrolled; or

Fi=r(Di−Pi)F_i=r(D_i-P_i)Fi​=r(Di​−Pi​)where rrr is a uniform savings-fee percentage across debts and PiP_iPi​ is the amount actually paid to satisfy the debt.

The statute does not supply a universal numerical percentage ceiling for these methods in the inspected subsection. This does not establish that any arbitrarily high contracted fee is lawful. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

Other fees and refunds. NRS 676A.580(4)(b) identifies a statutory base $100 limit for qualifying counseling where no agreement is accepted, subject to adjustment or Commissioner approval for a larger amount. Subsection (5) requires a refund of that counseling fee if an agreement is accepted within 90 days after completion or termination of counseling. Subsection (7) sets a statutory base ceiling for dishonored-payment charges at the lesser of $25 or the amount otherwise permitted by law, again subject to adjustment. NRS 676A.570(8) separately addresses prompt return of undistributed funds after termination or plan failure, less fees actually payable under NRS 676A.580. UNIFORM DEBT-MANAGEMENT SERVICES ACT

The federal TSR debt-relief and credit-repair provisions were not separately opened in this pass. Nevada's statutory fee timing is therefore established here, but independent federal applicability and exact federal conditions remain held.

B. Source register

All access checks below occurred October 24, 2026. The dates describing source versions are not access dates.

The federal TSR, CROA, later adjustment schedules, current NMLS state checklist, provider register, and controlling judicial decisions are not assigned falsely verified source IDs. They remain explicit retrieval gaps.

C. Claim register

Confidence describes support for the precise assertion, not authorization to launch a business.

D. Worked examples and coverage

The examples below illustrate statutory classification and arithmetic. They do not assert that the hypothetical provider is registered or that a particular fee contract is lawful.

Example 1 — Concession-oriented DMP

Assume a compliant concession plan with four participating accounts.

Statutory base monthly calculation:

• Number of remaining accounts: 4
• Base per-account amount: $10
• Product: 4 × $10 = $40
• Base aggregate ceiling: $50
• Illustrative result: min($40, $50) = $40 per month

If six accounts remain, the base calculation becomes min($60, $50) = $50.

Both figures are unadjusted statutory illustrations. Actual October 2026 permissible charges remain held pending the Commissioner's adjustment schedule, the signed agreement, and any applicable federal restrictions.

Example 2 — Settlement proportional-fee arithmetic

Assume an illustrative contract for $20,000 in enrolled debt with a $3,000 total contracted fee. This is not an assertion that $3,000 is a lawful Nevada fee.

Assume Debt A has an executed settlement agreement and the consumer has made the first payment required under it. Under the proportional formula, $600 is the calculated allocation to Debt A.

If Debt B has not yet satisfied both performance triggers, its $900 allocation is not earned merely because Debt A qualified. The same applies to Debt C.

After A qualifies:

• Potentially earned under the illustrated allocation: $600
• Not yet earned: $2,400
• Maximum total illustrative contract fee: $3,000

If Debt B later independently satisfies the triggers, cumulative calculated earnings become $1,500, leaving $1,500 unearned.

This is arithmetic and performance-trigger consistency only. The example does not establish the underlying $3,000 contract's legality, the finality of a partial settlement, or permission to collect under independently applicable federal law.

Example 3 — Savings-based settlement

Assume a uniform 20% savings-fee rate for all debts in the program.

Debt A:

• Enrolled amount: $4,000
• Amount actually paid to satisfy it: $2,400
• Savings: $1,600
• Illustrative fee: $1,600 × 20% = $320

Debt B:

• Enrolled amount: $6,000
• Amount actually paid to satisfy it: $3,000
• Savings: $3,000
• Illustrative fee: $3,000 × 20% = $600

If both debts independently satisfy the statutory triggers, the calculated cumulative fee is $920.

A different percentage cannot be substituted for Debt B merely because it produces more revenue. This example uses the savings method throughout and does not combine it with the $3,000 fixed-fee contract in Example 2.

Example 4 — Lower-debt and cancellation boundary

Assume an individual has a single $2,000 debt and has accumulated $500 toward a possible settlement. No creditor has entered into an executed settlement agreement.

Under NRS 676A.580(6), the provider cannot claim a settlement fee merely because the individual accumulated $500 or because negotiations began.

If the agreement is terminated, the statutory refund analysis must identify funds actually held, amounts already paid to creditors, and any fees legally payable. On these assumptions, no settlement performance fee has been established as earned.

The precise refund route depends on account structure and the applicable agreement; it cannot be calculated solely from the $500 balance.

Component coverage and gap table

No fresh browsing was performed for this continuation. It completes the truncated October 24, 2026 record without upgrading any unread or unresolved source.

Remaining explicit holds

The following holds remain unchanged from the preserved first segment:

• The exact October 2026 adjusted consumer-fee amounts were not located or verified.
• The June 30 versus December 31 registration-expiration conflict was not resolved.
• The current NMLS Nevada checklist, transition materials and named-provider status were not opened or verified.
• The federal TSR debt-relief provisions, TSR credit-repair provisions and CROA were not opened or assigned verified source IDs or pinpoints.
• The R050-10 and R054-16 adoption orders were not opened.
• Controlling court decisions and formal agency interpretations were not researched.
• The July 19, 2024 FID fee-schedule PDF was not visually opened and verified; only search-rendered text was inspected.
• No actual contract, fee percentage, account structure or provider was approved.
• Agreement, funds, bond, remedies, collection, litigation, limitations, complete exemptions, secured debt, sector-specific, local and tribal issues remain required later passes.

These holds are neither negative findings nor implied permission.

E. Researcher self-check

This continuation was reconstructed solely from the preserved P1 record. No fresh web access or additional source review occurred for this continuation. The research-access date remains October 24, 2026, Pacific time.

Actually opened and read: S_NV-P1-S003, the Nevada FID Uniform Debt Management Services page, was opened and read as rendered for the operational statements recorded in P1.

Opened with selected operative passages read: S_NV-P1-S001, the NRS Chapter 676A compilation, and S_NV-P1-S002, the NAC Chapter 676A compilation, were opened. Only the identified provisions and compilation information were read for this component; neither entire chapter received a section-by-section audit.

Discovery or search-rendered material only: S_NV-P1-S004, the July 19, 2024 FID fee-schedule PDF, was inspected through search-rendered text but was not opened and visually checked page by page. S_NV-P1-S005, the historical application checklist, remained discovery/search-rendered material and was not treated as a verified current checklist.

Locator only and not substantively read: S_NV-P1-S006, rulemaking R050-10, and S_NV-P1-S007, rulemaking R054-16, were identified from the NAC references but the complete adoption orders were not opened.

Not read or not performed: No current federal TSR or CROA provision was opened; no current annual Nevada fee-adjustment notice was obtained; no current NMLS Nevada checklist or transition notice was read; no named-provider registry lookup was performed; no controlling judicial decision or formal agency interpretation was read; and no complete agreement, funds, bond, remedies, local, tribal, secured-debt, sector-specific, collection, litigation or limitations review was completed.

This was not an independent review. It was a focused provider-access and consumer-fees component, followed by a missing-output continuation. It did not create local files, submit an application, contact a regulator, verify a provider, authorize publication or establish launch readiness. Every broader Nevada category identified above remains required.

END S_NV PASS-01

END S_NV PASS-01-CONTINUATION-01