On December 3, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued version 1.1 of the “Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices and Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook, also known as the UDAAP booklet. The UDAAP booklet was last updated in June 2020.
On September 29, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1934 into law, marking a significant update to California’s Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL). In addition to extending the compliance deadline for digital financial asset businesses, providing them with additional time to meet regulatory requirements and implement necessary operational changes, this new legislation includes significant modifications to the DFAL.
On August 16, the U.S. Department of the Treasury published its semiannual regulatory agenda in the Federal Register, detailing the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and priorities. The agenda outlines the proposed, final, and long-term rulemaking activities across various divisions, including the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
Highlights from the agenda, include:
Proposed Rule Stage:
By: Ethan G. Ostroff
On August 19, the U.S. Treasury Department officially withdrew a contentious proposal from 2020 that aimed to impose know-your-customer requirements on non-custodial cryptocurrency wallets.
On September 24, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced a significant development in its efforts to implement open banking rules in the United States. The Bureau has initiated a public comment process for the first application from an organization seeking recognition as an open banking standard-setter.
In a recent ruling, the District of Colorado granted several motions to dismiss filed by the developers and owners of cryptocurrency application Atomic Wallet, citing a lack of personal jurisdiction. This decision effectively ends a class action litigation involving the alleged theft of cryptocurrency assets by North Korean hackers.
On August 27, U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD) introduced the “Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act” (S. 4951), a bill aimed at fostering artificial intelligence (AI) innovation within the financial services industry. According to his press release, this legislation is part of a broader set of five bipartisan AI bills that Senator Rounds has released for consideration by Congress this fall.
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.
On June 6, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) issued a request for information (RFI) seeking public input on the uses, opportunities, and risks presented by the use of artificial intelligence (AI) within the financial sector. Notably, the Treasury’s RFI comes three years after the issuance of a similar RFI by the federal banking agencies (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Reserve Board, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and National Credit Union Administration on financial institutions’ use of AI, discussed here.
On May 23, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski et al., unanimously affirming the Ninth Circuit’s decision holding that when parties have agreed to two contracts — one sending arbitrability disputes to arbitration, and the other sending arbitrability disputes to the courts — a court must decide which contract governs. The decision teaches a cautionary lesson that parties with multiple contracts between them must keep issues of arbitrability consistent between the contracts.