The Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (RUUPA) of 2016 was passed by the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) three years ago. According to the ULC website, only four states have adopted the RUUPA, although additional states have adopted RUUPA "inspired" legislation.
The below chart lists the jurisdictions that have passed RUUPA legislation in the past three years.
| Jurisdiction | Year Enacted |
| Utah | 2017 |
| Tennessee | 2017 |
| Delaware* | 2017 |
| Illinois* | 2017 |
| Kentucky | 2018 |
| Colorado | 2019 |
| Maine | 2019 |
*RUUPA inspired
While Utah, Tennessee, Kentucky, Colorado, and Maine are all considered RUUPA states, it is notable that none of the states passed the bill without making some adjustments.
The first half of 2019 did see a spike in the number of jurisdictions that introduced RUUPA bills (Colorado, Vermont, Washington, Minnesota, Maine, District of Columbia, and South Carolina); however most of those bills have not passed to date. For many of these states, such as Washington, Minnesota, and Vermont, this is their second attempt at introducing the legislation.
With the slow rate of states adopting RUUPA one might question the actual success rate. In comparison, its predecessor, The Unclaimed Property Act of 1995 (1995 Act), had a 35 percent (nineteen jurisdictions) adoption rate over a period of sixteen years. Within the first three years eight jurisdictions had adopted the 1995 Act; just one more than RUUPA. Additionally, as is usually the case, most states that adopted the 1995 Act did not adopt it in its entirety but only in large provisions.
The ULC website also has an Enactment Kit for states that are considering adopting RUUPA which includes information on "Why Your State Should Adopt the RUUPA (2016)". This document cites some of the benefits of RUUPA as:
- Clarifies which types of intangible property are covered in the Act
- Provides specific dormancy periods
- Expands remedies for holders
- Prioritizes information security
In addition to the tools provided online, the ULC also provides support to states considering adoption of RUUPA and advocates for the states to maintain the integrity of the RUUPA language. As seen with the Illinois "RUUPA inspired" version, many holders and holder advocates have pushed back on provisions of their bill that significantly deviate from RUUPA, such as the retroactive repeal of the business to business exemption, the securities presumption of abandonment, and the transitional provision.
While it appears that the RUUPA adoption process by the states has moved very slowly, this process is actually more of a marathon than a sprint. It could in fact, take many years for states to finally adopt RUUPA and even then we may see a very low adoption rate. It is unclear what would be considered a successful adoption rate over time but it is clear that the RUUPA is a vast improvement over the prior versions of the uniform acts.
For questions regarding this article, please contact Dana Terry at dterry@georgeson.com or 201-539-1998.