Payment Processing + Cards

Subscribe to Payment Processing + Cards via RSS

Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced a significant shift in its enforcement priorities, choosing not to prioritize actions related to Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) loans under the Truth in Lending (Regulation Z). This decision aligns with the CFPB’s broader strategic adjustments outlined last month, and discussed here, which emphasize focusing resources on more pressing consumer threats, particularly those affecting servicemen, veterans, and small businesses.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) agreed to vacate its controversial credit card late fee rule in a joint motion for entry of consent judgment filed in Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. CFPB yesterday. This significant move comes after the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas found that the rule likely violated the Credit Card Accountability and Disclosure Act (CARD Act). The consent judgment marks a pivotal resolution in the case, with the CFPB acknowledging that the rule failed to allow card issuers to impose penalty fees that are “reasonable and proportional” to violations, as required by the CARD Act.

On April 9, the House of Representatives passed two Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolutions aimed at nullifying certain Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rules finalized in the final days of the Biden-Harris Administration. These resolutions, S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28, target rules related to limiting the overdraft fees that may be charged by large financial institutions, and extending supervisory authority over certain providers of digital payments services, respectively. The CRA resolutions are now before President Trump for signature.

On March 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration in two class-action lawsuits. The decision potentially has far-reaching implications for the enforceability of arbitration clauses in consumer contracts, particularly those involving unilateral modification provisions.

In a significant development in the credit card late fee rule litigation, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has filed a status report indicating that it is actively working towards a resolution. This update follows last month’s court’s order, which required the CFPB to explain its plans for proceeding with the case.

Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order in Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) in light of recent changes within the Bureau’s leadership.

On February 4, Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced bipartisan legislation aimed at immediately capping credit card interest rates at 10% for a period of five years. This initiative follows a recent Forbes report indicating that the average credit card interest rate stands at 28.6%.

On January 15, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a Compliance Aid to clarify the requirements under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E. Electronic Fund Transfers (EFTs) are defined as “any transfer of funds that is initiated through an electronic terminal, telephone, computer, or magnetic tape for the purpose of ordering, instructing, or authorizing a financial institution to debit or credit a consumer’s account.” The Compliance Aid, presented in a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) format, addresses various aspects of EFTs, including coverage, financial institutions’ obligations, and error resolution processes.

Last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released its latest Supervisory Highlights report, focusing on the use of advanced technologies in credit scoring models. This edition of Supervisory Highlights concerns select examinations of institutions that use credit scoring models, including models built with advanced technology commonly marketed as AI/ML technology, when making credit decisions. The report repeated the CFPB’s previous statements that there is “no ‘advanced technology’ exception” to federal consumer protection laws (which, to our knowledge, no industry participant has suggested to exist) and asserted that financial institutions will need to improve their practices to ensure compliance with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B. This includes actively searching for less discriminatory alternatives, critically evaluating the use of alternative data, and rigorously testing and validating adverse action reasons.

This article was republished on insideARM on January 2, 2025.

This week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released its semiannual regulatory agenda, outlining its planned rulemaking initiatives. This agenda includes a mix of rules in the pre-rulemaking, proposed rule, and final rule stages, covering a wide range of topics from medical debt reporting to financial data transparency. 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.