All Entries

Subscribe to All Entries via RSS

On August 7, the U.S. Department of Treasury hosted a virtual briefing to discuss the steps that the Biden-Harris administration is taking to address perceived unfair and deceptive practices in the consumer solar energy industry. Deputy Secretary of Treasury Wally Adeyemo, along with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra, announced a new interagency consumer solar industry initiative directed at both sales and financing of residential systems. Each made statements about the unique effort to root out anti-competitive and sometimes-fraudulent activity by a handful of “bad actors” who are taking advantage of the burgeoning industry. The presenters also noted that they will be coordinating with state attorneys general (AG) and state financial regulators.

On July 25, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released an Issue Spotlight focusing on the fees associated with electronic payment platforms used by school districts to process school lunch payments. In its report, the CFPB emphasized the costs of electronic payments in K-12 schools and the potential financial strain these fees could place on lower income families.

Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued Circular 2024-04 warning financial institutions about the potential illegality of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) that could deter whistleblowing. Specifically, the Bureau addressed whether requiring employees to sign broad confidentiality agreements violates § 1057 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). According to the CFPB, the answer is “yes” under circumstances that could lead an employee to reasonably believe that they would be sued or subject to other adverse actions if they disclosed suspected violations of federal consumer financial law to government investigators or a law enforcement agency.

Dear Mary,

Each of the 50 states has its own definition of what constitutes a reportable data breach. For some, it requires “unauthorized access” to personal information. For others, it requires “unauthorized acquisition.” And then, some states have further qualifications to their definition, such as whether that unauthorized access or acquisition “compromises” or “materially compromises” the integrity, security, or confidentiality of the data. No states (apart from New York) define access or acquisition, and no state defines compromise vs. material compromise. How would you suggest analyzing all these varying terms?

– Patchwork

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) recently released its semi-annual regulatory agenda, outlining its planned rulemaking initiatives. The CFPB releases regulatory agendas twice a year in voluntary conjunction with a broader initiative led by the Office of Budget and Management to publish a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory actions across the federal government. This agenda includes a mix of rules in the pre-rulemaking, proposed rule, and final rule stages, covering a wide range of topics from mortgage closing costs to financial data transparency. The CFPB has not yet posted a blog or issued a press release about the agenda.

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.