InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
CFPB wins approval to move credit card late fee case to Washington, D.C.
On March 28, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted the CFPB’s motion to transfer a case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after identifying several concerns regarding litigating the case in the Texas venue. This case has been brought by multiple trade organizations to challenge the CFPB’s attempt to alter the structure and amount of credit card late fees under its alleged authority under the CARD Act, covered by InfoBytes here. The court agreed to transfer the case after finding that both defendants, along with three of the six plaintiffs, resided in Washington where the rule at issue was promulgated; comparatively, only one of the six plaintiffs resided in Fort Worth.
The court analyzed both private- and public-interest factors. On private-interest factors, the court agreed that Washington was a more practical venue, noting that eight of the ten attorneys representing the parties list offices in Washington, while only one plaintiff was headquartered in Texas. The court concluded that plaintiffs also have not identified any substantial or practical issues with this case being held in Washington. On public interest factors, the court weighed the comparative dockets and noted that, on average, a case in Washington would be resolved faster than in Texas. The court also reasoned that there was a strong interest in having the case decided in Washington. “The Rule at issue in this case was promulgated in Washington D.C., by government agencies stationed in Washington D.C., and by employees who work in Washington D.C. Most of the Plaintiffs in this case are also based in Washington D.C. and eighty percent of the attorneys in this matter work in Washington D.C. Thus, the [U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia] has a stronger interest in resolving this dispute, as it is the epicenter for these types of rules and challenges thereto.”
CFPB, federal and state agencies to enhance tech capabilities
On March 26, the CFPB announced as a part of a coordinated statement with other federal and state agencies, the intent to enhance its technological capabilities. As part of this initiative, the CFPB will be hiring more technologists to help enforce laws and find remedies for consumers, workers, small businesses, etc. These technologists will join interdisciplinary teams within the CFPB to monitor and address potential violations of consumer rights within the evolving tech landscape, particularly considering the growing attention to generative artificial intelligence (AI). The CFPB's technologists will be tasked with identifying new technological developments, recognizing potential risks, enforcing laws, and developing effective remedies. CFPB Director Rohit Chopra emphasized the essential role of technology in the Bureau’s efforts to regulate data misuse, AI issues, and big tech involvement in financial services. Chopra and Chief Technologist Erie Meyer remarked that the CFPB has integrated technologists into its core functions, with these experts now actively involved in supervisory examinations, enforcement actions, and other regulatory proceedings. They also note that the CFPB has researched how emerging technologies, such as generative AI and near-field communication, are used in consumer finance. To foster a competitive and “law-abiding” marketplace, Chopra and Meyer also note that the CFPB will continue to issue policy guidance to assist firms with understanding legal obligations.
Senator Romney et al. pen letter confirming nonbank lending regulations, specifically on the ILC charter
On March 13, Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT) with 11 other senators penned a brief letter to the heads of the FDIC, OCC, and CFPB that supported the FDIC’s regulation of the industrial loan company (ILC) charter but expressed concerns about delay in processing ILC charter applications. According to the letter, ILCs provide “critical access to credit opportunities within the regulated banking sector.” The letter stated the senators “strongly oppose” regulatory actions against lawful ILC charter applications that may further delay FDIC review and decision-making.
White House targets “junk fees” in higher education with several new initiatives
On March 15, the White House issued a fact sheet on proposed measures aimed at curbing or eliminating alleged “junk fees” in higher education, citing that it found college students incurred “billions in fees” when having to pay for services they may not want. The first action the Biden Administration highlighted was a FY 2025 budget proposal that would eliminate student loan origination fees. The White House found that seven million student loan borrowers pay origination fees somewhere between one and four percent of their student loans. The second item the Biden Administration sought to end was college banking “junk fees,” citing a recent report by the CFPB on this issue (covered by InfoBytes here). To address this issue, the Dept. of Education has proposed a rule on college banking products that cannot include harmful fees. Third, the White House supports another proposed rulemaking from the Dept. of Education that would end automatic billing on tuition for textbooks, allowing students to shop around for better prices. Last, the Dept. of Education is considering a rulemaking that would stop colleges from pocketing leftover meal plan “dollars,” and instead will return the balance to students. The Biden Administration noted these were just a few items meant to help student initiatives, including increasing the transparency of college costs and preventing schools from withholding transcripts. These rules will go into effect on July 1.
Senator Warren invites student loan servicer to testify before Congress
On March 18, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) sent a letter to a large student loan servicer, inviting its executives to testify at an upcoming hearing hosted by the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Policy on April 10. The hearing will focus on the servicer’s performance, student loan borrowers’ experience with return to repayment, and the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. The letter alleged the servicer “mishandl[ed]” borrowers return to repayment after the pandemic by impeding public servants’ access to PSLF relief, among other things. Senator Warren also alleged the servicer failed to perform “basic servicing functions” for PSLF borrowers which led to a backlog of public service workers’ forms eligible towards receiving credit on their student debts. The letter further alleged the servicer implemented a “call deflection scheme” to redirect borrowers' calls from customer service representatives. Testifying would give the servicer the chance to provide context to the allegations, Warren said.
FTC fines two fintech firms $59 million for PPP loan practices
On March 18, the FTC announced enforcement actions against two companies that allegedly made “false promises” to small businesses seeking Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans. Both companies have agreed to settle with the FTC to resolve alleged violations of the Covid-19 Consumer Protection Act and the FTC Act.
According to the FTC’s complaint on the first company—a company that offers online financing products to small businesses—and its subsidiary allegedly engaged in a pattern of deceptive and unfair conduct by quoting shorter processing times for consumers’ applications, despite being aware of the significant delays. The companies also allegedly ignored consumers’ requests to withdraw their pending applications frequently. The FTC further alleged that roughly 40 percent of the companies’ consumers had their applications canceled or rejected. The proposed stipulated order included a prohibition against misrepresentations, an injunction concerning the companies’ application practices (which had prohibited them from failing to allow consumers to promptly withdraw their applications), and a $33 million judgment for monetary relief. The companies must also comply with reporting requirements detailed in the settlement.
The FTC’s complaint against the second company—an online platform offering PPP financing services to small businesses—and its CEO, alleged that respondents made deceptive claims to consumers, many of whom were eligible but never received funding because the respondents failed to fix known technical issues with their system or provide consumers with assistance. According to the complaint, the company claimed that processing a loan would only take 24 hours through the “fast lane” service, but the company’s chat support was slow, as were its review and processing times. The FTC noted that the time-sensitive nature of PPP funding meant any delays had significant impacts on consumers. In addition to the $26 million monetary judgment, the settlement with the company and its CEO prohibited them from making any deceptive, false, or unsubstantiated claims about financial services or products.
CBO report outlines strengths and risks of the FHLBank system
Recently, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report on the Federal Home Loan Banks’ (FHLBanks) role in the financial system, outlining their strengths and risks in the larger financial system. The CBO noted that FHLBanks are insulated from failure because their main activity, granting advances to members, was “overcollateralized and benefits from the banks’ super-lien position.” On accounting this year, the CBO estimated that in FY 2024, FHLBanks will receive $7.3 billion in subsidies, driven by new debts and reductions in debt-service costs. The CBO also estimated that in FY 2024, FHLBanks will issue $800 billion of debt and make advances of $560 billion. The CBO listed three potential risks FHLBanks could pose to the broader financial system: first was a risk to taxpayers in the event the FHLBank system failed and required government support; second was the risk that any FHLBank stress could spill over into other financial areas; and third was the risk of losses to the FDIC Deposit Insurance Fund from FHLBanks’ collateralized lending and their “super-lien positions.” However, the CBO’s report noted that FHLBanks pose less of a risk than Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or other commercial banks. Further, there have never been any credit losses on an FHLBank advance. Despite these strengths, CBO noted that FHLBanks could still fail in an economic crisis.
Chopra pens comment letter on appraisal issues, including bias, related to not-for-profit player’s oversight
On March 18, the Director of the CFPB, Rohit Chopra, in his capacity as a voting member of the FFIEC, released a comment letter regarding the recent Appraisal Subcommittee hearings. He opened on how the appraisal process was governed not by a governmental agency, but instead by a not-for-profit corporation leading to “key issues” related to appraisal bias. Despite its private status, this organization was governed by the Appraisal Subcommittee which monitors and reviews the organizational structure of the not-for-profit appraisal corporation. Chopra outlined several issues gleaned from the four hearings: First, Chopra noted “severe deficiencies” with the not-for-profit’s conflict of interest policies, noting that the Executive Branch’s conflict of interest policies for employees spanned 77 pages, while the not-for-profit’s policy was less than 10. Second, the not-for-profit has an “insular and contorted governance structure” that favors private over public interests. And third, the Appraisal Foundation’s governance processes, such as electing its President, lack transparency. Chopra highlighted these three examples and described the overall lack of accountability as “deeply troubling” because the not-for-profit was one of the most powerful players when it comes to appraisals.
Chopra discusses open banking and standard-setting
On March 13, the Director of the CFPB, Rohit Chopra, delivered prepared remarks at the Financial Data Exchange Global Summit and discussed advancing the U.S. towards open banking. Chopra outlined the current efforts and considerations surrounding the development of industry standards that would help transition consumers with switching financial products. The CFPB had been finalizing rules on Section 1033 of the CFPA which would grant consumers the right to access their financial data and would aim to protect sensitive personal financial information while promoting open banking (covered by InfoBytes here).
Chopra highlighted the importance of creating industry standards for data sharing and communication protocols, drawing parallels with existing standards in electronics and financial services. While the CFPB's proposal acknowledged the role of standards, Chopra noted that it intentionally avoided being overly “prescriptive” to avoid stifling innovation, among other things.
The speech also addressed the potential for anticompetitive behavior in the standard-setting process. Chopra noted historical instances of anticompetitive behavior, a concern that the CFPB had been monitoring closely. The Bureau will be working with the DOJ to prevent such practices.
The Bureau sought to codify what standard-setting organizations must demonstrate to be recognized under the proposed rule, then invite those organizations to begin the process of receiving formal recognition from the CFPB. Based on the comments received on the proposed rule, Chopra expects that by this fall, the final rule will “identify the areas where standards are relevant to the requirements of the final rule.” Chopra also noted the CFPB considered whether standard-setting organizations should be balanced so no entity or group of entities can “dominate[] decision making.” He noted that the Bureau will investigate the makeup of entities’ standard-setting/modification groups and funding structure, warning if an entity’s composition or funding suggests favoritism, then “that will be a problem.” Chopra noted that if the CFPB cannot identify standard-setting organizations, it is prepared to implement more detailed guidance.
FDIC Vice Chair delivers remarks on tokenization
On March 11, FDIC Vice Chairman Travis Hill delivered prepared remarks on “Banking’s Next Chapter? Remarks on Tokenization and Other Issues.” The speech addressed the evolution of money and payment systems, focusing on the recent innovation of tokenizing commercial bank deposits and other assets and liabilities. Hill distinguished tokenization from assets like Bitcoin and Ether: “tokenization involves a representation of ‘real-world assets’ on a distributed ledger, including… commercial bank deposits, government and corporate bonds, money market fund shares, gold and other commodities, and real estate.” Hill highlighted the potential benefits of tokenization, such as improved efficiency in payments and settlements, 24/7/365 operations, programmability, atomic settlement (the settlement, or the act of transferring ownership of an asset from seller to buyer, combining instant and simultaneous settlements) and the creation of an immutable audit trail. He also mentioned that these innovations could streamline complex processes like cross-border transactions and bond issuances, offering notable advantages over traditional banking systems.
The speech also acknowledged challenges and risks associated with tokenization, including technical, operational, and legal uncertainties. Questions remain about the structure of the future financial system, interoperability between different blockchains, and the legal implications of transferring ownership via tokens, Hill added.
Regarding the regulatory approach to digital assets and tokenization, Hill expressed the need for as much clarity as possible, even in areas whether the technology is evolving quickly. For example, Hill noted that “it would be helpful to provide certainty that deposits are deposits, regardless of the technology or recordkeeping deployed, and if there are reasons to distinguish some or all tokenized deposits from traditional deposits for any regulatory, reporting, or other purpose, the FDIC should… explain how and why.”