On July 12, 2022, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) issued an advisory opinion that states its strict interpretation of the permissible purposes for which a consumer reporting agency may provide a consumer report and for which consumer report users may obtain consumer reports. Section 604(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) identifies the “permissible purposes” for which a consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report.Read More
On 30 December 2020, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered an order invalidating two provisions of the “Prepaid Account Rule” (the Rule) promulgated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Specifically, the order invalidated the Rule’s mandatory short form disclosure requirement and the requirement for a thirty-day delay before linking prepaid products to credit, on the basis that the CFPB had exceeded its statutory authority.1Read More
On September 25, 2020, California Governor Newsom signed AB-1864 into law, which will significantly change the landscape of consumer financial service regulation in the state. The law renames the Department of Business Oversight as the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (“DFPI”). Along with a new name, the DFPI also gains important enforcement powers as the agency will now have the power to enforce all California laws related to “persons offering or providing consumer financial products or services in the state.” The law allows DFPI to establish a “Financial and Technology Innovation Office.” A key aim of the law is to improve the state’s consumer protection capacity by increasing the number of investigators and attorneys to oversee financial institutions.Read More
On December 3, the United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking to revise the Remittance Rule (“Proposed Rule”) and is accepting comments until January 21, 2020. The proposal follows the CFPB’s April 2019 request for information on the Remittance Rule (see here for our previous discussion). The key provisions of the Proposed Rule address two aspects of the Remittance Rule: (1) the Rule’s applicability to a company that executes 100 or more remittances per year in the normal course of business, and (2) the Rule’s allowance for insured banks and credit unions to disclose estimates, rather than exact figures, under certain circumstances. This latter allowance is set to expire on July 21, 2020.Read More
On April 25th, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or “Bureau”) issued a request for information (“RFI”) asking for input about the scope of its Remittance Rule (the “Rule”), whether the Bureau should exempt certain small financial institutions from the Rule, and how the expiration of the Rule’s “temporary exemption” for insured depository institutions and credit unions would adversely affect consumers. Comments are due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.Read More
By Eric A. Love
On July 18, 2018, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) Acting Director Mick Mulvaney announced that Paul Watkins, who previously led the FinTech initiatives in the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, will head the CFPB’s newly created Office of Innovation. According to a CFPB press release about the selection, the Office of Innovation will replace the CFPB’s Project Catalyst initiative (which the CFPB launched in 2012) and will “focus on creating policies to facilitate innovation, engaging with entrepreneurs and regulators, and reviewing outdated or unnecessary regulations.” Project Catalyst and the Office of Innovation share the stated overarching objective of promoting “consumer-friendly innovation” in consumer financial services.
By Eric A. Love and Dan S. Cohen
With Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney in place as Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and a legal challenge to his appointment to that position brought by CFPB Deputy Director Leandra English continuing to proceed through the courts, prepaid industry participants are rightly asking what this ongoing leadership dispute means for the CFPB’s sweeping Final Rule amending Regulation E and Regulation Z as applied to prepaid accounts.
Over the last several years, a number of U.S. state and federal government enforcement actions have challenged the viability of the bank partnership model that many marketplace lenders have used to fund consumer and small business loans. Specifically, regulators have argued that, in partnerships where the non-bank entity controls much of the funding process or the bank has little-to-no risk of loss, the non-bank entity is the “true lender.”
The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently issued its first no-action letter, pursuant to a policy designed to encourage innovation in the fintech marketplace by creating a testing ground for new technologies. If received, a no-action letter simply indicates that the CFPB “has no present intention to recommend initiation of an enforcement or supervisory action” against the applicant with respect to the specific product and regulatory concerns at issue.
On April 20, the CFPB issued a final rule to delay for six months the October 1, 2017 effective date of its comprehensive Final Rule amending Regulation E and Regulation Z as applied to prepaid accounts. The Final Rule will now become effective on April 1, 2018.
In announcing the delay, the CFPB indicated that it has decided to “revisit at least two substantive issues” in the Final Rule through a separate rulemaking process. Based on CFPB Director Richard Cordray’s recent testimony before the House Financial Services Committee, the two substantive issues most likely relate to: (1) the Final Rule’s applicability to “the linking of credit cards to digital wallets that are capable of storing funds,” and (2) error resolution for unregistered prepaid cards. The CFPB can be expected to issue a proposal on these issues “in the coming weeks.”
Notably, the CFPB’s action could help to address concerns raised by Congressional Republicans about the scope of the Final Rule and its potential impact on industry participants and consumers, thus complicating ongoing efforts in Congress to repeal the Final Rule using the Congressional Review Act (CRA). In order to repeal the Final Rule utilizing the CRA, Congress would be required to pass a repeal bill by May 9, 2017.