Unclaimed Property Auction
Search Unclaimed Property

Administrative Rules

Proposed Unclaimed Property Administrative Rules

(July 2025)

The Arkansas Auditor of State (the Auditor), follows the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to adopt, amend, or repeal an administrative rule.  The Auditor values public comments on proposed rules.  Comments may be submitted to [email protected].  The public comment period for the proposed rule is from August 3, 2025, through September 2, 2025.  A public comment meeting will be held on September 2, 2025, at 9 a.m. in Room 130 of the Arkansas State Capitol, 500 Woodlane, Little Rock, AR, 72201, for any person desiring to present a comment in person.

If the Auditor of State receives comments on this proposed rule, a Public Comment Summary with all comments and responses will be published on the Auditor’s web page after the comment period ends.  The Auditor is establishing the “Arkansas Unclaimed Property Administrative Rules” to provide clear and consistent rules for all participants in the Arkansas Unclaimed Property Program, in accordance with Arkansas Code 18-28-228.  A full copy of the proposed rule may be accessed at the link below.  The proposed effective date of the rule is September 15, 2025.

LINK TO PROPOSED RULES

Public Comment Summary

Tameron C. Bishop, Partner, Kutak Rock LLP – RECEIVED August 29, 2025 3:00 PM

Public Comments Submitted:  As currently written, 18 CAR § 1-307(b):

  • Suggests a holder of safe deposit boxes or similar safekeeping depositories must comply with the requirements listed, including that holders must sell contents at public auction under Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3).  However, holders have the option, and not the obligation, to sell the contents of safe deposit boxes under Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3).  Arkansas Code § 18-28-210 also permits delivery of property to the state to assume custody and responsibility for the safekeeping of the property.  We have suggested revised language below to clarify the holder has the option but not obligation to sell the contents.
  • 18 CAR § 1-307(b)(2)(A) states holders must only remit remaining property “of value” to the Auditor of the State; however, Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3)(C) requires “any unauctioned contents” must be remitted to the Auditor of the State under Arkansas Code § 18-28-201 et seq.  We have suggested revised language consistent with Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3)(C) noting any unauctioned contents must be remitted to the Auditor of the State.
  • 18 CAR § 1-307(b)(2)(B) states holders should dispose of items having no commercial value.  Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3)(C) does not give holders the direction or discretion to dispose of any contents of boxes or determine whether contents have value.  We have suggested deletion of the instruction in 18 CAR § 1-307(b)(2)(B).

We recommend 18 CAR § 1-307(b) be restated to read as follows:

“(b)  Safe deposit boxes.  A holder of safe deposit boxes or similar safekeeping depositories who elects to sell the contents in accordance with Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3) must comply with the requirements for sale thereunder, including:

                (1)  Any sale of safe deposit box contents by a Holder must be at a public action pursuant to the requirements of Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3)(B); and

                (2)  After any sale, holder must remit any unauctioned contents of boxes and any excess proceeds from the sale to the Auditor of the State pursuant to Arkansas Code § 18-27-102(c)(3)(C). 

Shannon Wild, CAE – UPPO Executive Director – RECEIVED August 26, 2025 3:15pm

 Section 1-304: Prior to Reporting (Due Diligence) 

  • Concern about Telephone Contact: Requiring holders to contact owners by phone is seen as burdensome and costly. The rule lacks clarity on what qualifies as “contacting by telephone,” leading to ambiguity (e.g., voicemail vs. live contact). 
  • Employee Verification Burden: Verifying that an owner is not a current employee requires manual cross-checking between property and employee databases, which are typically disconnected—especially challenging for third-party administrators (TPAs). 
  • “Well-Known” Entity Identification: Manually identifying “well-known individuals or organizations” is impractical due to data volume and lack of a clear definition. Recognition may vary by person or region (e.g., overseas staff may not recognize U.S.-based entities like Merrill Lynch). 

Section 1-306: Reporting and Delivery of Property 

  • Clarification Needed: The section’s intent is unclear and requires further explanation to ensure proper compliance. 

Section 1-306 (g)(1),(2), and (3) Form of Property for Reporting 

Discussion and Clarification Needed: The proposed rules indicate that property must be reported based on its original nature. This requirement may be confusing and could be overly 

broad. For example, if an owner requests that a certain number of securities in their account be 

liquidated and the proceeds be sent to them as a check, but they never cash the check, would this 

be reported as securities, or a check? There are other examples like this as well. 

Section 1-307 (c): Securities Pre-Approval Requirement 

Discussion and Clarification Needed: Before remitting securities (except those held in IRAs), holders are required by the rule to obtain prior approval from the Auditor of State (AOS). The report must be submitted before the transfer is initiated. The timing of submission of report and submission of information for approval to transfer could cause holders to report and transfer securities late. 

Section 1-307 (h) Oil and Gas 

Discussion and Clarification Needed: The proposed rules provide that production activity can be determined by “continuity of payments”. For unclaimed property purposes, wells with no payments for three years may be deemed inactive without a division order. In reality lack of production activity or payments may still have active mineral owner accounts. A discussion of these issues would be helpful. 

Section 1-402: Burden of Proof 

  • No Major Issues Noted: Generally acceptable, but clearer guidance is recommended on what constitutes sufficient evidentiary support for claims—especially to avoid requiring sensitive documents like driver’s licenses or bank statements. 

Auditor of State Unclaimed Property Administration Rule Change Meeting

September 2, 2025 – 9am – Arkansas State Capitol Room 130