InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Fed’s Vice Chair remarks on payments innovation, CBDCs, and financial inclusion
On October 27, Fed Vice Chair for Supervision, Michael Barr, delivered a speech at the Economics of Payments XII Conference discussing the Fed’s place in the payments system and highlighting its role as a bank supervisor and operator of key payment infrastructure. Emphasizing the Fed’s introduction of its FedNow instant payment service (covered by InfoBytes here), which was designed to enable secure instant payments in response to the increasing demand for secure and convenient payment options, Barr encouraged banks to build upon the new payment infrastructure. He also noted that ongoing experimentation with new payment technologies, such as stablecoins, creates a need for regulation, particularly where an asset is “pegged to government-issued currencies.”
Regarding central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), the Fed is engaged in research and in discussions with various stakeholders; however, it has not decided on whether to issue a CBDC. The Vice Chair stressed that any move in this direction would require “clear support” from the Executive Branch and authorization from Congress.
Barr emphasized the Fed’s commitment to working with the international community to improve cross-border payment systems as well as the need for research into both traditional and emerging payment methods, noting that innovation should “promote broad access and financial inclusion.” Finally, the remarks touched on the Fed’s proposed revisions to the interchange fee cap for debit card issuers, with a call for public input on the matter (covered by InfoBytes here).
FHA announces update and consolidation of the HECM program
On October 31, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) announced, after a multi-year effort, the inclusion of policies for its Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) program in the Single-Family Housing Policy Handbook 4000.1. The FHA indicated this is the first time that all HECM program requirements will be available in a single place. According to the FHA, consolidating these programs eliminates more than one hundred individual policy documents and assist with strengthening the understanding and implementation of the HECM by lenders. New sections include Section II.B covering FHA policy for the origination through post-closing and endorsement of HECMs; and Section III.B, covering FHA policy for the servicing of HECMs and loss mitigation options to assist HECM borrowers who are behind on their HECM obligations. Assistant Secretary for Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner Julia Gordon stated that the “completion of the HECM sections of our Single Family Handbook reinforces FHA’s commitment to the HECM program and is part of a larger effort to retool the program for long-term success.” The FHA also updated model documents, frequently asked questions, and training and expects the online version to be available soon.
President Biden issues Executive Order targeting AI safety
On October 30, President Biden issued an Executive Order (EO) outlining how the federal government can promote artifical intelligence (AI) safety and security to protect US citizens’ rights by: (i) directing AI developers to share critical information and test results with the U.S. government; (ii) developing standards for safe and secure AI systems; (iii) protecting citizens from AI-enabled fraud; (iv) establishing a cybersecurity program; and (v) creating a National Security Memorandum developed by the National Security Council to address AI security.
President Biden also called on Congress to act by passing “bipartisan data privacy legislation” that (i) prioritizes federal support for privacy preservation; (ii) strengthens privacy technologies; (iii) evaluates agencies’ information collection processes for AI risks; and (iv) develops guidelines for federal agencies to evaluate privacy-preserving techniques. The EO additionally encourages agencies to use existing authorities to protect consumers and promote equity. As previously covered by InfoBytes, the FCC recently proposed to use AI to block unwanted robocalls and texts). The order further outlines how the U.S. can continue acting as a leader in AI innovation by catalyzing AI research, promoting a fair and competitive AI ecosystem, and expanding the highly skilled workforce by streamlining visa review.
U.S.-UK partnership discuss fintech innovation
On October 30, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a joint statement on behalf of the U.S.-UK Financial Innovation Partnership (FIP) providing an overview of recent meetings where Regulatory and Commercial Pillar participants exchanged views on “topics of mutual interest and to deepen ties between U.S. and UK financial authorities on financial innovation.” As previously covered by InfoBytes, the FIP was created in 2019 as a way to expand bilateral financial services collaborative efforts, study emerging fintech innovation trends, and share information and expertise on regulatory practices. Discussions focused on four topic areas: (i) cryptoassets; (ii) payment system modernization; (iii) distributed ledger technology; and (iv) artificial intelligence. Participants recognized “the continued importance of their partnership on financial innovation as an integral component of U.S.-UK financial services cooperation.” Participants also noted a desire to continue discussing these topics ahead of the next meeting in 2024.
Fed seeks comment on lowering the interchange fee for debit card issuers
On October 25, the Fed announced a proposed rule that would lower the maximum interchange fee that a debit card issuer with at least $10 billion in total consolidated assets can receive for a debit card transaction and would also establish a regular process for updating the maximum fee amount every other year going forward. Moreover, the Board approved the release of its latest biennial report which sets forth data collected from larger debit card issuers on interchange fees, issuer costs, and fraud related to debit card transactions.
Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the Fed is required to establish standards for assessing whether the amount of any interchange fee received by a debit card issuer is reasonable and proportional to the costs incurred by the issuer for the applicable transaction, which results in the Fed setting an interchange fee cap. The FRB developed the fee cap in 2011 using data provided by large debit card issuers with $10 billion or more in assets. But since that time, the Fed has found that certain costs incurred by such debit card issuers have declined dramatically, yet the interchange fee cap has remained the same. As such, the Fed (i) proposes to update the interchange fee cap based on the latest data reported to the Board by large debit card issuers, and (ii) proposes to update the fee cap every other year by linking the fee cap to data from the Fed’s biennial report of large debit card issuers.
The comment period will close 90 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register.
Request for GAO examination of agencies’ role in Basel III endgame proposal
The Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Representative Andy Barr (R-KY), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy, sent a letter to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting the GAO to “examine the role U.S. federal banking agencies played in work at the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to develop the recent Basel III Endgame proposal, which calls for massive increases in capital requirements for already well-capitalized U.S. financial institutions.”
As previously covered by InfoBytes, the federal banking agencies issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would substantially revise the capital requirements of large U.S. banking organizations. According to the letter, Congress has very little insight into the basis of such policy changes that “would fundamentally change the policy of the U.S. banking system.”
The letter requests the GAO to evaluate each federal banking agency’s participation in the development of Basel III Endgame. GAO’s evaluation should include: (i) a summary of each material proposal submitted by a federal banking agency to the Basel Committee; and (ii) a summary of concerns raised by a federal banking agency with respect to a consultative document or other proposal considered by the Basel Committee.
Further, the letter requests the GAO prioritize each proposal or concern from the federal banking agencies related to:
- Any proposals or concerns from the federal banking agencies that did not receive a fulsome response by the Basel Committee.
- Any evidence or rationale supporting the requirement that a “corporate entity (or parent) must have securities outstanding on a recognized securities exchange for an exposure to that entity (or parent) to be eligible for the reduced risk weight for investment-grade corporate exposures;”
- The absence of a tailored approach to “high-fee revenue banks under the Basel III Endgame business-indicator approach to operational risk capital”;
- The calibration of the “scaling factor, multiplier, dampener, and other coefficients for that business-indicator approach”; and
- The calibration of the “correlation factors and the profit-and-loss attribution test thresholds for the models-based measure of market risk capital.”
CFPB report reveals high credit card costs, growing debt, digital shift in 2022
On October 25, the CFPB released its biennial report on the credit card market pursuant to the Credit Card Act. The report found that credit card companies charged consumers more than $105 billion in interest and $25 billion in fees, with the bulk of the fees being late fees. According to the 175-page report, consumers are rolling balances month to month, and more consumers are falling into debt over time, while credit card companies’ profit margins remain high. The CFPB highlighted additional trends, including how: (i) the profits of major credit card companies have increased, surpassing pre-pandemic levels, which the CFPB suggests could indicate a lack of competition in the industry; (ii) annual Percentage Rates (APRs) for credit cards continue to rise; (iii) many cardholders with subprime credit scores paid a significant percentage of their average balance in interest and fees; (iv) late fees charged to cardholders have risen to pre-pandemic levels, and more consumers are delinquent; (v) credit card debt reached a record $1 trillion by the end of 2022, and annual spending on credit cards increased, returning to pre-pandemic levels; (vi) consumers who roll debt from month to month are paying a significant portion of interest and fees but earning only a small percentage of rewards. The report also notes a rise in digital communication—around 80 percent of cardholders, especially those under 65, use mobile apps for card management, which exhibits a shift in how consumers and financial institutions interact in the credit card industry.
DFPI orders deceptive debt collectors to desist and refrain, pay penalties
On October 23, DFPI announced enforcement actions against four debt collectors for engaging in unlicensed debt collection activity, in violation of Debt Collection Licensing Act and unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, in violation of the California Consumer Financial Protection Law. In its order against two entities, the department alleged that the entities contacted at least one California consumer and made deceptive statements in an attempt to collect a payday loan-related debt, among other things. In its third order against another two entities, DFPI alleged that a consumer was not provided the proper disclosures in a proposed settlement agreement to pay off their debts in a one-time payments. Additionally, DFPI alleged that the entity representatives made a false representation by communicating empty threats of an impending lawsuit.
Under their orders (see here, here, and here), the entities must desist and refrain from engaging in illegal and deceptive practices, including (i) failing to identify as debt collectors; (ii) making false and misleading statements about payment requirements; (iii) threatening unlawful action, such as a lawsuit, because of nonpayment of a debt; (iv) contacting the consumer at a forbidden time of day; (iv) making false claims of pending lawsuits or legal process and the character, amount, or legal status of the debt; (v) failing to provide a “validation notice” ; and (vi) threatening to sue on time-barred debt.
The entities are ordered to pay a combined $87,500 in penalties for each of the illegal and deceptive practices.
7th Circuit: Court upholds dismissal of FDCPA lawsuit over debt information sharing
On October 23, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a consumer’s putative class action lawsuit alleging that a collection agency violated the FDCPA by sharing the consumer’s debt information with a third-party vendor. The court ruled that the consumer lacked standing because she did not sustain an injury from the sharing of her information.
To collect a defaulted credit-card debt, the defendant collection agency used a third-party vendor to print and mail a collection letter to the consumer. The consumer alleged that the collection agency violated the FDCPA by disclosing to the vendor the consumer’s personal information, and the disclosure was analogous to the tort of invasion of privacy. The appeals court disagreed, reasoning that the sharing of a debtor’s data with a third-party mail vendor to populate and send a form collection letter that caused no cognizable harm, legally speaking. The court also noted that the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Tenth and Eleventh Circuits have reached similar conclusions. “The transmission of information to a single ministerial intermediary does not remotely resemble the publicity element of the only possibly relevant variant of the privacy tort.”
District Court grants 1071 Rule nationwide stay
On October 26, the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Texas entered an order granting intervenors’ motions for preliminary injunction against the CFPB and its small business loan rule.
As previously covered by InfoBytes, the district court entered an order in August enjoining enforcement of the rule pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Fin. Serv. of Am. and extending the rule’s compliance date to account for the tine the stay remained in place. The court, however, limited that relief to the plaintiffs at that time—a bank and two bank trade associations—and their members. In the wake of this ruling, separate trade associations representing small business lenders asked the CFPB to take administrative action to ensure that the compliance date for other lenders would be adjusted commensurately. The CFPB declined their request.
In response, separate groups of intervenor plaintiffs, including trade associations representing other types of small business lenders, intervened in the action and filed motions seeking to expand the scope of the preliminary injunction to all affected lenders (or at least their members), claiming the court’s decision to spare some from the rule put them at a competitive disadvantage. The CFPB opposed those motions (covered by InfoBytes here).
In its most recent order, the court reasoned that the preliminary injunction should extend to intervenors because the CFPB lacked evidence supporting its argument that that greater harm would result from a stay on its 1071 rule and “its intended benefits for small businesses failed to tip the balance in their favor.” The court reasoned that the purpose of the statute underlying the Bureau’s final rule is the equal application of lending laws to all credit applications to avoid disparate outcomes, presuming uniform application to covered financial institutions. Therefore, to exempt plaintiffs and not all other covered financial institutions would undermine the statute, leaving “non-exempted lenders subject to the discretion of an agency whose very ability to act is a matter of constitutional concern pending resolution on a nationwide scale.” Under that reasoning, the district court granted plaintiffs’ motions for preliminary injunction, enjoining the CFPB from implementing its 1071 Rule for small business lending.