On August 14, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced that it is ceasing the discretionary publication of unverified consumer complaint narratives and related data visualizations in its Consumer Complaint Database. The move represents a significant change to one of the Bureau’s most publicly visible data tools that will meaningfully reduce reputational risk for financial institutions and financial services companies.
On August 7, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a policy statement announcing that it will no longer pursue claims based on disparate impact or “unfair discrimination” theories under any statute it enforces. The FTC’s action is the latest in a series of coordinated federal agency moves away from disparate impact enforcement. As we previously reported here, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) proposed to repeal its Fair Housing Act disparate impact regulations in January 2026, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) finalized its rewrite of Subpart A of Regulation B under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) in April 2026, eliminating the disparate impact “effects test” from ECOA enforcement and reframing ECOA as an intent-only statute (see here). Together with the FTC’s action, these developments signal a sweeping realignment of federal fair lending and consumer protection enforcement away from outcome-based theories and toward intentional discrimination as the operative standard.
On July 31, the OCC and FDIC jointly issued a proposed rule to significantly amend their existing Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations that have been in place since 1995. While the proposal would retain key elements of the regulatory framework, it seeks to better align the regulations with CRA’s statutory mandate of encouraging banks to meet the credit needs of their communities by making “targeted” substantive, technical, and process-oriented changes and narrowing the scope of the rules. Toward that end, the proposal focuses on the lending test, ensures that community development grants reach the communities they are intended to benefit, and narrows the range of retail banking services the agencies consider for CRA credit by excluding deposit services. The proposed rule also seeks to provide greater clarity on how a bank receives CRA consideration and to reduce burden on banks (particularly community banks). Notably, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) did not join the proposal.
Yesterday, the federal banking regulators issued new interagency guidance directing supervised financial institutions to take a closer look at credit risk when lending to individuals who are not legally authorized to work in the U.S. The guidance, issued jointly by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), follows a May 2026 Executive Order (discussed here) aimed at addressing perceived risks to the financial system arising from the extension of credit to the non-work authorized population.
On July 6, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released its 2026 regulatory agenda, outlining its planned rulemaking initiatives across the pre-rule, proposed rule, and final rule stages. The agenda reflects the Bureau’s continued shift under the current administration toward deregulation, regulatory streamlining, and reconsideration of rules issued under prior leadership.
On June 25, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would significantly update and clarify its regulations governing the disclosure of confidential information, including confidential supervisory information. This is the first substantial revision to these rules in approximately 30 years. The proposal would amend 12 CFR Part 309 and add a new Part 306, with changes designed to reduce administrative burden, expand the ability of insured depository institutions (IDIs) to share confidential supervisory information without prior FDIC approval, and modernize and clarify the FDIC’s information disclosure framework. Comments on the proposed rule are due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
On June 17, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) officially rescinded its December 2020 advisory opinion on special purpose credit programs (SPCPs) under Regulation B, which implements the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). The rescission aligns with the Bureau’s recent views on SPCPs, including those expressed in the Bureau’s April 2026 final rule amending the SPCP provisions of Regulation B (the Final Rule) (discussed here).
As we have previously reported, the litigation over the attempted shutdown of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) has continued to move quickly through the courts. By way of background, the D.C. district court had granted a preliminary injunction requiring the CFPB to reverse its shutdown efforts, reinstate its workforce, and continue performing its statutory duties, finding that Acting Director Russell Vought’s actions were inconsistent with the Bureau’s statutory obligations under Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act. In our August 2025 post, we covered the D.C. Circuit panel’s decision vacating that preliminary injunction, holding that most of the National Treasury Employees Union’s (NTEU) claims belonged in the Civil Service Reform Act regime and that the remaining claims did not target reviewable final agency action. In our December 2025 post, we reported on the full court’s decision to grant rehearing en banc, vacate the panel’s judgment, and set an expedited briefing schedule. With the panel decision vacated, the en banc court took up the case with the partial stay continuing to govern the parties’ conduct in the interim.
On June 10, President Trump sent to the Senate his nomination of Brian Johnson to serve as Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) for a five-year term. The CFPB has been without a confirmed, full-time director since former Director Rohit Chopra was fired on February 1, 2025 (discussed here).
Federal regulators recently took two coordinated steps that significantly shift expectations for how lenders and banks treat non‑work authorized individuals and their employers. On June 5, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a formal statement on how immigration status should factor into ability‑to‑repay determinations under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z. On the same day, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), jointly with the federal banking agencies and in coordination with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), released a detailed advisory on fraud, payroll schemes, and money laundering risks associated with the unlawful employment of non-work authorized persons, including specific guidance regarding the use of Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) and Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs).