The opposition to RALs was based on the belief that they were loans with usurious interest rates. But as proponents had argued, think about them as fees, such as those charged for obtaining home mortgages, instead of as interest and there was not much difference. Or think about the interest rates on credit card balances, which are generally applied to much higher amounts, and which can be set to nearly 30 percent for late payers.

The argument against RALs has always seemed more a matter of middle class values interpreting the world for those who are not in the middle class than it has a matter of a noble campaign to help the poor. Those without middle class values are those without bank accounts, easy access to credit and who cannot afford tax preparation fees without some way of taking the cash from a refund. It's much the same argument that goes on about voter ID laws- those in the middle class who think that anyone should be able to have the time to get an ID - middle class values being applied to those not in that category.

And so, we are left with companies offering refund tranfers to taxpayers and with those who are looking for some way to provide loans, probably through lenders that are not federally regulated on a state-by-state basis.

I don't see that we are better off, unless perhaps, regulators can start applying that same enforcement fervor against the credit card companies.