Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) motion for summary judgment on all Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenges brought by several trade associations to the CFPB’s Final Rule under § 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the “Small Business Lending Data Collection Rule” (Final Rule).
In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and the Payments Pros Podcast, Chris Willis and Josh McBeain are joined by colleagues Mark Furletti and Jason Cover to delve into the CFPB’s Payday Loan Rule, which is set to become effective again following a Supreme Court decision. The discussion unpacks the broad scope of the rule, extending beyond traditional payday loans to include various financial products. The episode highlights the complexities of compliance, the nuances of the rule’s definitions, and the critical steps lenders must take before the March 30, 2025, compliance deadline. Don’t miss this insightful conversation on navigating the revived regulatory landscape.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a proposed interpretive rule opining that earned wage access (EWA) products — whether provided through employer partnerships or marketed directly to borrowers — are subject to Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z requirements. The proposed rule’s broad definitions and aggressive stance on fees and tips as finance charges conflict with many state laws and could lead to litigation.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed a brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in support of its motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction that has stayed the implementation of its credit card late fee rule. Concurrently, the Bureau also filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss or transfer on the grounds that the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce does not have associational standing to bring the suit. Within hours, the court issued an order requiring further briefing on the issue of associational standing.
In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Payments Pros Podcast, Chris Willis and Josh McBeain interview two colleagues who delve into the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) recent interpretive rule that classifies buy now, pay later (BNPL) transactions as credit cards. Mark Furletti and Jason Cover explore the implications of this rule under Regulation Z, including the introduction of the term “digital user account” and its impact on BNPL providers. The discussion covers the regulatory requirements, potential challenges for compliance, and the broader legal context, including the possible effects of the Loper Bright case on administrative interpretations. With a July 30 compliance deadline looming, the episode provides critical insights for industry stakeholders navigating this significant regulatory shift.
In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Payments Pros Podcast, Chris Willis and Josh McBeain interview two colleagues who delve into the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) recent interpretive rule that classifies buy now, pay later (BNPL) transactions as credit cards. Mark Furletti and Jason Cover explore the implications of this rule under Regulation Z, including the introduction of the term “digital user account” and its impact on BNPL providers. The discussion covers the regulatory requirements, potential challenges for compliance, and the broader legal context, including the possible effects of the Loper Bright case on administrative interpretations. With a July 30 compliance deadline looming, the episode provides critical insights for industry stakeholders navigating this significant regulatory shift.
On June 18, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the plaintiffs’ petition for a writ of mandamus, effectively halting the transfer of the lawsuit challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) credit card late fee rule from a Texas federal district court to the District of Columbia. This decision marks another pivotal moment in the ongoing legal battle over the CFPB’s Final Rule, which has seen a complex procedural history unfold over the past few months.
Yesterday, the lawsuit challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) credit card late fee rule (Final Rule) was ordered to be transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to the District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.) for the second time in as many months. The court’s decision was largely based on the same analysis as the first transfer order.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued an “interpretive rule,” subjecting “Buy Now, Pay Later” (BNPL) transactions to provisions of Regulation Z applicable to “credit cards.” Among other things, this classification would require BNPL and other lenders to extend many of the same legal protections and rights to consumers that apply to traditional credit cards, including the rights to dispute charges and demand refunds for returned products, and, potentially, receive periodic statements. The Bureau claims its authority to issue this interpretive rule — in lieu of a formal rulemaking — stems from the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z, and its general authority to issue guidance as set forth in § 1022(b)(1) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.
In this episode of Payments Pros, Josh McBeain and Chris Willis discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) proposed rule on overdraft fees. The rule, which only applies to large financial institutions with assets over $10 billion, aims to regulate overdraft services by altering the definition of ‘finance charge,’ effectively subjecting these institutions to Regulation Z’s disclosure and substantive provisions. Chris and Josh delve into the complexities of the proposed rule, considering its potential implications and the likelihood of litigation challenges from the industry. They also discuss the role of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and the concept of Chevron deference in this context.