What would be considered a "similar safeguard" to a photograph on a government issued ID for a non-US person? I'm contemplating just saying it has to have a photograph. Does anyone see any issues with that?

"Similar safeguard" was meant to include biometric identifiers, things like thumbprints, retinal scans etc.

I suppose they were trying to be broad enough that it could keep up with technology, but as a banker, I'm not going to compare thumbprints, and I certainly am not going to verify a retinal scan. At least with a picture you can compare it to the person in front of you.

And of course, if you don't have the equipment to interpret those biometrics and compare them with the body in front of you, you may have to insist on a mug-shot ID.

I understood it to refer to a government seal, hologram or something similar. This phrase is used in connection with government-issued documents and states that such documents should "bear a photograph or similar safeguard".

The preamble to the proposed regulations said: "The proposed regulation uses the term "similar safeguard" to permit the use of any biometric identifiers that may be used in addition to, or instead of, photographs." I think that they put it in the regulation primarily to cover future possibilities for such identifiers.

Ted is obviously correct about the intent of the draftsmen. However, many states now have magnetic stripes on the backs of their licenses that could be a "similar safeguard" if the bank wants to invest in the equipment necessary to read them.

A bit of drivers license trivia:
* the system used in Florida drivers license numbers indicates the sex of the driver - Oh no, do we violate Regulation B if we write those numbers down?!?

* when you reach a certain age in Tennessee, you are no longer required to have your photograph on your drivers license. (What do you suppose, you get too ugly when you get old and they don't want to remind you of it?)

Quote:

---

* when you reach a certain age in Tennessee, you are no longer required to have your photograph on your drivers license. (What do you suppose, you get too ugly when you get old and they don't want to remind you of it?)

---

Nah...probably more like, when you reach a certain age, no one's gonna "card" you when you order a drink or buy liquor in the store. So what's the point of wasting photographic resources if it won't really be needed?

**sigh**
First they started calling me "ma'am", then they stopped asking to see proof of my age. Just little sign posts on the road of life that, yes, I am indeed getting old.

In Vermont you don't have to have a picture on your license at all , my renewal came in the mail and you can decide to drop the picture and process the whole transaction without ever seeing a human . Luckily things are in the process to change this...

It will be interesting to see how long these "archived" pix on drivers' licenses -- or licenses without pix -- will stand up to market pressure.

Of course it's convenient to be able to renew without schlepping to the DMV or RMV for the photo shoot. But what will granny do when her age-30 photo won't pass muster at new account time at her new bank? Or what will happen when a bunch of the banks in Tennessee decide not to open new accounts for seniors who don't have pix on their licenses?