InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
House questions CFPB's rules on NSF fees and impact on small businesses
On May 9, the House Committee on Small Business expressed concerns in a letter addressed to CFPB Director, Rohit Chopra, on a proposed rule that would ban charging insufficient fund fees (NSF fees) on declined transactions (covered by InfoBytes here). The Committee argued this proposed rule could unduly complicate existing UDAAP regulations and impose additional burdens on small financial institutions.
The letter stated the CFPB did not convene a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel and questioned the CFPB’s claims that the rule would not significantly affect a substantial number of small businesses. The Committee suggested that the CFPB’s analysis, which minimizes the impact of NSF fees on small institutions’ revenue, might be flawed and that the rule could have a significant economic impact in terms of reporting requirements and compliance, warranting a review by an SBAR panel. The Committee also challenges the CFPB’s assertion that NSF fees for certain transactions are inherently “abusive,” arguing that the CFPB is overstepping its authority by attempting to ban “business practices” altogether rather than limiting abusive practices. Finally, the Committee requests information from the CFPB on several fronts, including the number of small financial institutions affected by the rule, the compliance burden, the CFPB’s methodology for identifying UDAAP, and the CFPB's stance on disclosures compared to other financial regulations and the FTC's approach.
New York Fed reports on community development financial institutions
On May 8, the New York Fed released a report examining both the origination and sale of loans by community development financial institutions (CDFIs) and found that loans of both types more than doubled from 2018 to 2022. According to the report, in 2022, CDFIs originated $67 billion and sold $14 billion of loans, which was a major increase since 2018, where CDFIs originated $29 billion and sold $6 billion of loans. This doubling also contributed to some market concentration: The 10 most active CDFIs in 2022 originated over 25 percent of the total origination volume and 75 percent of the total sold loan volume. The report stressed “nearly all loan sales to Ginnie Mae and life insurance companies” were sold from the most active sellers.
On breakdown, the New York Fed found residential (single family) loans as the highest volume collateral data type, far outpacing lines of credit, multifamily, commercial real estate, and business. There were also a high number of CDFI originations in California and Florida, and credit unions were the most active originators over banks, thrifts, or loan funds.
On May 14, a member of the Fed Board of Governors Lisa Cook spoke on how CDFIs impact communities positively and some of the challenges CDFIs face. Cook noted specifically that CDFIs often “continue their work with borrowers even after loans are made… helping them through rough spots, should borrowers experience difficulty repaying loans,” which were unique among the CDFI borrower-banking relationship. On challenges, Cook noted how demand for capital was outpacing the current supply: Federal funding tied to past pandemic relief programs have dried up, leading to the challenge of building out long-term capital sources for future CDFI demand. She closed by emphasizing the importance of the CDFI industry and her continued support of CDFIs.
CFPB reports consumer complaints on credit card rewards programs
On May 9, the CFPB issued a report on credit card rewards programs which highlighted the CFPB’s views on issues affecting millions of consumers. The report opened with a note that the CFPB received over 1,200 complaints regarding credit card rewards in 2023, reportedly a 70 percent increase since before the pandemic, and according to the CFPB, the research found that the benefits of rewards programs “fail to exceed” the costs of credit cards for many borrowers. The report identified four themes: consumers felt misled by vague or hidden conditions that do not match marketing materials from issuers; consumers lost out when card issuers devalue rewards; consumers faced obstacles when card issuers do not resolve redemption issues; and consumers lost rewards when accounts are closed.
In a live panel between the Director of the CFPB, Rohit Chopra, Secretary of the DOT, Pete Buttigieg, and airline trade leaders on credit card reward programs, Chopra noted that there were 550 million credit cards in the U.S. which collectively account for over $1 trillion in consumer debt. Chopra also stated the CFPB will review how it can protect consumers against the devaluation of credit card points. In the panel, Chopra asked the trade groups what they would like the CFPB to do regarding credit card terms and conditions: some organizations asked for greater transparency in points systems, with one suggesting that credit card issuers’ ability to change terms mid-contract should be prohibited.
Agencies issue NPRM on incentive-based compensation
On May 6, the FDIC, OCC, NCUA and the FHFA issued a NPRM (proposed rule) on incentive-based compensation, pursuant to Dodd-Frank’s Section 956 (Section 956), which required federal regulators to prescribe regulations or guidelines regarding incentive-based compensation at covered financial institutions. Regulators first proposed a rule to implement Section 956 in 2011, and again in 2016. Now, regulators are reproposing the 2016 version without change, albeit with certain alternatives. The current proposal, however, will be published without involvement from the Fed or SEC.
Section 956 defined “covered financial institutions” as institutions with at least $1 billion in assets and include the following: depository institutions or depository institution holding companies, registered broker-dealers, credit unions, investment advisers, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac (or any other financial institution that federal regulators determined should be treated as a covered financial institution). Dodd-Frank required regulators to prohibit incentive-based compensation arrangements that encouraged “inappropriate risks.” The proposed rule included prohibitions intended to make these compensation arrangements more sensitive to risk, such as a ban on incentive-based compensation arrangements that do not include risk adjustment of awards, deferral of payments, or forfeiture and clawback provisions. In addition, the proposed rule set forth recordkeeping and disclosure requirements to help federal regulators monitor potential issues.
The agencies will review both new comments and those received in 2016 for the prior proposed rule. The agencies invited those who previously submitted comments and resubmit their comments to explain how their viewpoint may have changed from their prior comments. The agencies also requested comments on the compliance date and disclosures, like the recordkeeping and clawback requirements. Comments will be due no later than 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.
House passes resolution to nullify SEC’s rule on crypto accounting guidance
On May 8, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H. J. Res. 109, the first step in an attempt to nullify the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 (SAB 121) under the Congressional Review Act. SAB 121 describes how the SEC expects entities to account for and disclose their custodial obligations to “safeguard crypto-assets held for their platform users,” and has been in effect since April 11, 2022. As previously covered by InfoBytes, in October 2023, the GAO found SAB 121 was a rule, not guidance, making SAB 121 subject to the Congressional Review Act.
CFTC subcommittee issues report on responsible AI use
On May 2, a CFTC subcommittee on Emerging and Evolving Technologies issued a report on the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) by exchanges, clearinghouses, futures commission merchants, brokers, and data repositories, among others, interested in using AI in financial markets. The report examined AI use cases in financial services, reviewed the risks of AI for CFTC-registered entities, and set out five recommendations for the CFTC: (1) the CFTC should host a public roundtable discussion with industry leaders; (2) the CFTC should define and adopt an AI risk management framework to assess consumer harms and benefits of AI use by CFTC-registered entities; (3) the CFTC should create an inventory of existing AI regulations and identify gaps where staff guidance or rulemaking would be needed; (4) the CFTC should establish a process to align its policies with other federal agencies; and (5) the CFTC should increase staff participation in domestic and international dialogues around AI.
State attorneys general push Congress on federal consumer privacy legislation
On May 8, the Attorney General of California, Rob Bonta, and 15 other state attorneys general wrote a letter to Congressional leaders following the introduction of the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) in Congress. The attorneys general encouraged Congress to set a “federal floor, not a ceiling” for consumer privacy rights, as APRA preempts state law under its current draft. The letter highlighted how states have “played a critical role” in setting new data privacy standards without curbing business practices or developments in technology. In addition, the attorneys general expressed concern that the APRA would limit some attorneys general to issue civil investigative demands (CIDs) because their CID authority would require a violation of state or federal law before issuance. The APRA, however, provided that “a violation of [the APRA] or a regulation promulgated under [the APRA] may not be pleaded as an element of any violation of [a state] law.” Despite these concerns, the attorneys general did express their support for other provisions of APRA, such as data minimization by default, stronger consent requirements, and protections for minors.
Fed, OCC, and FDIC release third-party risk management report for community banks
On May 3, the Fed, OCC, and FDIC (the regulators) released a report to help community banks assess their third-party relationship risk exposure. The report discusses key considerations in three areas: risk management, third-party relationship life cycle, and governance. In addition, the regulators’ report contained an appendix with additional resources, such as FFIEC interagency guidance and CISA cybersecurity protocols. With respect to risk management, the report suggested community banks apply more rigorous risk-management practices for third parties that support critical bank activities, such as those that could have a significant customer impact or have a significant impact on the bank’s financial condition. In describing the third-party relationship life cycle, the report identified five key stages of the life cycle – planning, due diligence, contract negotiation, ongoing monitoring, and termination. With respect to governance, the report described three key pillars: oversight and accountability, independent review, and documentation and reporting.
Tennessee amends consumer debt proceeding requirements and garnishment exemptions
On May 3, the Governor of Tennessee signed into law HB 2320 (the “Act”), which will amend pleading requirements for consumer debt suits and garnishment exemptions. The Act would require that, in a civil suit or arbitration requesting judgment on a consumer debt, the plaintiff creditor would provide the following in the initial pleading: (i) if the debtor’s agreement does not exist, then provide written evidence of the debtor’s agreement or a document provided to the debtor while the account was active; (ii) a statement that the debt has been transferred or assigned; (iii) the date of the transfer or assignment; (iv) the name of any prior holders of the debt; and (v) the name or a description of the original creditor. Additionally, the Act will amend Tennessee’s garnishment provisions to automatically exempt them from execution, seizure, or attachment funds up to $2,500 in a debtor’s deposit account with a bank or financial institution. The Act will go into effect on July 1.
Georgia amends provisions for telemarketing provisions for defendants
On May 6, Georgia enacted SB 73 (the “Act”), which amends, among other things, Georgia’s telemarketing laws. The Act clarifies that no person or entity can make or cause any telephone solicitation violations, now on behalf of another person or entity, and sets forth that there is a private right of action against violators. The Act also amends the damages to be the actual monetary loss for each violation or a violation up to $1,000 in damages, whichever is greater. However, if a class action lawsuit is brought under the Act, the $1,000 in statutory damages would not apply. The Act further provides that ignorance would not be a valid defense if a defendant did not make or was not aware how a telephone solicitation violated applicable laws. However, it is defensible if the defendant had established policies and procedures to prevent violations, and enforced such procedures, or if a phone number was provided in error so long as the defendant did not have any knowledge of the mistake.