Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Subscribe to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) via RSS

In this crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Payments Pros, Jason Cover sits down with Brooke Conkle and Caleb Rosenberg to demystify the Federal Trade Commission’s Holder Rule and its day‑to‑day impact on point‑of‑sale (POS) finance programs. They explain why creditors and assignees inherit customers’ claims and defenses against merchants, what transactions are in scope and out of scope, how liability is generally capped at amounts paid (and why attorneys’ fees remain a live issue), and how merchant/vendor/dealer agreements can shift risk back to sellers. The conversation turns practical with a compliance toolkit: robust upfront diligence, continuous monitoring of merchant and consumer complaints (including requiring merchants to forward complaints), and a risk‑based response that separates meritless claims from those requiring redress. The panel also highlights enforcement and litigation trends and why, at 50 years old, the Holder Rule remains bedrock law that POS lenders cannot ignore, even as strong contracts and oversight materially mitigate exposure.

On October 6, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law the California Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act. This legislation aims to fortify consumer protections and enhance transparency in the car-buying process. The enactment of this law follows a series of discussions and amendments, as highlighted in our previous blog and podcast, which traced the bill’s evolution and its alignment with the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) vacated CARS Rule.

On July 14, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) secured a court order aimed at halting allegedly deceptive practices against seven companies and three individuals operating the “Accelerated Debt” program. The defendants allegedly contacted consumers through telemarketing calls or in response to calls resulting from their mail and online ads and made false claims about their ability to substantially reduce consumer debts and misleading consumers about fees. The FTC alleged these actions violated the FTC Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule, the Impersonation Rule, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and § 521 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act by making false statements to get consumers’ financial account numbers. The court’s order includes a temporary restraining order, asset freeze, and the appointment of a temporary receiver to oversee the defendants’ business operations.

On July 8, a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a significant decision in the case of Custom Communications, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The panel vacated the FTC’s amended Negative Option Rule aka the “click-to cancel” rule, citing procedural deficiencies in the rulemaking process. Specifically, the panel found that the FTC failed to conduct a required preliminary regulatory analysis, which deprived stakeholders of the opportunity to comment on alternatives and engage with the FTC’s cost-benefit analysis.

On May 2, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed Senate Bill 1212 (SB 1212) into law, introducing new requirements and prohibitions under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, SB 1212 targets the disclosure of mandatory fees and surcharges in consumer transactions.

Last year, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleging Global Circulation, Inc. (GCI) and its owner, Kenneth Redon III, violated the FTC Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and its associated Regulation F, § 521 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the FTC’s Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses. On May 1, the FTC announced the parties entered into a stipulated permanent injunction and money order, prohibiting GCI and Redon from any further debt collection activities.

As of April 27, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had not filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to appeal the Fifth Circuit’s decision vacating the Combating Auto Retail Scams Trade Regulation Rule (CARS Rule). The ruling, which was issued in response to a petition by the National Automobile Dealers Association and the Texas Automobile Dealers Association, challenged the procedural validity of the FTC’s rulemaking process. The court found that the FTC failed to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking as required leading to the vacating of the rule.

As technology advances, so do the tactics of scammers. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently released a data spotlight on the top text scams of 2024, revealing a significant increase in financial losses despite a decrease in the number of reports. Specifically, in 2024, reported losses to text scams reached $470 million, more than five times the amount reported in 2020. Due to a lack of reporting, this number reflects only a fraction of the actual losses.

On March 18, President Donald Trump dismissed the two Democratic commissioners from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The removal of Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter has sparked significant controversy and legal challenges.

On March 10, Christopher Mufarrige, the newly-appointed Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), published a blog explaining the significance of Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) for businesses and the ramifications for failing to respond. The Director warns that “[i]f your business receives such a demand for information, we expect you to respond in a reasonable and timely manner or face legal consequences.” The blog also provides the following primer about CIDs: