Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) notified the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the D.C. Circuit in the matter of National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) anticipates exhausting its currently available funds in early 2026. The filing attaches a November 7 opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to Acting Director Vought concluding that the CFPB’s statutory funding stream — quarterly transfers from the “combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System” under 12 U.S.C. § 5497(a)(1) — is unavailable while the Federal Reserve operates at a loss. The Bureau expects to continue operating, including in compliance with an existing district court injunction, through at least December 31, 2025, but absent congressional action may face a funding lapse thereafter, which would trigger Antideficiency Act constraints.

On October 29, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) officially rescinded its rule requiring nonbank entities to register certain agency and court orders with the Bureau. This decision follows a proposal made earlier this year (discussed here), which highlighted concerns about the regulatory burden and costs imposed on nonbank entities, which could ultimately affect consumers.

On October 28, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a new interpretive rule replacing its 2022 interpretive rule (withdrawn in May 2025) concerning the scope of preemption under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This new interpretive rule clarifies that the FCRA broadly preempts state laws related to consumer reporting, reinforcing Congress’s intent to establish national standards when information is used to determine a consumer’s eligibility for credit, insurance, employment and the like. This move replaces the previous rule, which was criticized for its potential to create regulatory confusion.

On October 15, the California Hospital Association (CHA) filed a petition against the California Office of Health Care Affordability (OHCA) and related entities. The petition challenges the imposition of stringent cost targets on hospitals across California, arguing that these targets are arbitrary, capricious, and not based on comprehensive data analysis. CHA contends that the cost targets violate both state and federal laws, including the Takings and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, by being confiscatory and lacking a clear methodology for compliance. Furthermore, the petition asserts that OHCA’s actions were prematurely implemented without adequate stakeholder engagement, potentially leading to significant operational disruptions and threatening the quality and accessibility of health care services.

On October 10, California Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 483 (AB 483) into law, introducing new regulations on early termination fees in fixed term installment contracts. This legislation applies to contracts entered into or modified on or after August 1, 2026, and prohibits the use of termination fees unless specific conditions are met.

Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied Empower Finance’s motion to compel arbitration in a class action lawsuit concerning its earned wage access (EWA) product, Cash Advance. In Vickery v. Empower Finance, Inc., the court found that Empower’s Cash Advance product was “credit” under the Military Lending Act (MLA) making Empower’s arbitration agreement unenforceable under the MLA, which prohibits arbitration agreements for consumer credit extended to active-duty service members and their dependents.

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 October 2, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) published a final rule in the Federal Register, officially extending compliance dates for its 2023 small business lending data collection and reporting rule under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Regulation B, which implements Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The final rule replaces an interim rule released in June 2025 that pushed back compliance deadlines. This extension was issued by the CFPB in response to ongoing litigation by both industry and consumer advocacy groups, as well as court orders, to create a uniform timeline for financial institutions to comply with data collection and reporting requirements for women-owned, minority-owned, and small businesses.

On September 29, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) announced significant modifications to the proposed regulations under the Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL) and the Money Transmission Act (MTA). These changes are part of an ongoing effort to refine the regulatory framework governing digital financial assets and ensure clarity in the application of these laws.

Recently, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) issued two memoranda that clarify HUD’s role in enforcing the Fair Housing Act (FHA), explain how future enforcement efforts will proceed, and officially rescind several guidance documents related to disparate impact and redlining, among other topics.