Tag: CFPB

1
CFPB Seeking Comments On Possible Remittance Rule Revisions
2
CFPB’s New Office of Innovation to be led by Arizona FinTech Regulatory Sandbox Official; Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain will likely be on the Agenda
3
What the CFPB Leadership Dispute Means for the Prepaid Account Rule
4
“True Lender” litigation heats up: small business sues marketplace lender and partner bank, alleging conspiracy to evade usury laws
5
Marketplace lender seeking fair lending guidance receives CFPB’s first no-action letter
6
CFPB Finalizes Extension of Prepaid Account Rule Effective Date
7
CFPB Delays Prepaid Account Rule Effective Date
8
The post-election fintech world: are happy days (for bankers) here again?
9
Comprehensive Analysis of the CFPB’s Final Prepaid Account Rule
10
Who bears the risk? Federal Court holds that a purchaser of unsecured consumer loans is the “true lender”

CFPB Seeking Comments On Possible Remittance Rule Revisions

By Daniel S. Cohen and Jeremy M. McLaughlin

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

CFPB’s New Office of Innovation to be led by Arizona FinTech Regulatory Sandbox Official; Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain will likely be on the Agenda

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will “focus on creating policies to facilitate innovation, engaging with entrepreneurs and regulators, and reviewing outdated or unnecessary regulations.”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.

Read More

What the CFPB Leadership Dispute Means for the Prepaid Account Rule

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.

Read More

“True Lender” litigation heats up: small business sues marketplace lender and partner bank, alleging conspiracy to evade usury laws

By David D. Christensen and Jennifer Janeira Nagle

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.”

Read More

Marketplace lender seeking fair lending guidance receives CFPB’s first no-action letter

By David D. Christensen, Jennifer Janeira Nagle and Brandon R. Dillman

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.

Read More

CFPB Finalizes Extension of Prepaid Account Rule Effective Date

By Judith Rinearson and Eric A. Love

 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.

CFPB Delays Prepaid Account Rule Effective Date

By Eric A. Love and John ReVeal

On March 9th, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) issued a proposed rule to delay for six months the October 1, 2017 effective date of its sweeping Final Rule amending Regulation E and Regulation Z as applied to prepaid accounts.  Under the proposed rule, the Final Rule would become effective on April 1, 2018.

The proposed rule would not revise any other aspect of the Final Rule, and comes as numerous prepaid account industry participants have expressed concerns about its scope and their ability to comply with key provisions by the current October 1 effective date.  Additionally, the proposed delay follows the recent introduction of legislation in Congress that would use the Congressional Review Act to repeal the Final Rule.  According to the CFPB, the proposed delay would “be sufficient for industry participants to ensure they can comply” with the Final Rule and would provide the CFPB the opportunity to receive public comments about any implementation challenges that might impact consumers, the prepaid account industry and other stakeholders.

After publication in the Federal Register, the public will have 21 days to comment on the proposed rule.

The post-election fintech world: are happy days (for bankers) here again?

By Judith Rinearson and Eric Love

In the days following the U.S. federal elections that resulted in the election of Donald Trump as President and Republican control of the 115th Congress, FinTech companies, banks, and other financial institutions are increasingly asking whether they still need to worry about compliance with the landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) regulatory actions, and other financial services regulations.

It is true that there will likely be some significant regulatory changes, but it is a little too early for industry participants to pop the champagne corks.

To see are our thoughts about some of the top issues impacting FinTech companies, banks and other financial institutions, click here.

Who bears the risk? Federal Court holds that a purchaser of unsecured consumer loans is the “true lender”

By Irene C. Freidel and David D. Christensen

A California federal court has held that the purchaser of consumer loans is the “true lender” and thus subject to state usury laws, even though a separate entity funded and closed the loans in its own name. The recent decision, however, is another reminder that US state and federal regulators, as well as plaintiffs’ attorneys, may be able to pierce these partnerships where the financial institution funding and closing the loan does not bear substantial risk on those loans.

Read More

Copyright © 2019, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.