Regulation

US Chamber of Commerce Hints it is Prepared for Litigation Against the CFPB

The US Chamber of Commerce is not thrilled with the CFPB’s attempt to allegedly expand its power. A June 28 letter fired off by the Chamber to CFPB Director Rohit Chopra asks that the agency rescind amendments added to its Supervision and Examination Manual. Specifically, it wants the CFPB to limit its enforcement of anti-discrimination laws to the statutory boundaries established by congress. The CFPB recently announced, however, that it would start to enforce its own self-created anti-discrimination rules and policies above and beyond what is permitted by existing law.

“The Bureau’s self-expansion of its authority will impose significant burdens on banks, financial markets, and the consumers they serve,” the Chamber writes.

CFPB Director Chopra has garnered a bit of reputation for his views. He was previously a director of the FTC and rode into the top role of the CFPB through the Biden Administration. Chopra now finds himself in the crosshairs of the US Chamber of Commerce, the “world’s largest business organization.” With more than three million members, the Chamber warned that if the agency attempts to enforce its “unlawful” powers, that it is prepared to engage in litigation.

“Instead of perpetuating an improper exercise of authority, the Bureau should respect the limits of its authority and rescind these troubling amendments,” the Chamber’s Chief Counsel wrote on “Litigation Center” letterhead. “We encourage you to follow this course. The Chamber will not hesitate to take legal action to defend businesses (and the economy that they serve) against the Bureau’s unlawful actions.”

Two versions of the letter were sent. This is a link to one of them.

Should financial literacy be a requirement in school curriculums?

Michigan recently became the 14th state in the U.S. to mandate high schoolers to take a half-credit finance education course before graduating. This mandate was put into effect by the HB 5190 bill signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer just last week.

“As a mom, I want every kid who graduates in Michigan to enter the world with a diverse set of skills and knowledge, and that must include financial literacy,” said Whitmer.

Along with Michigan; Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah and Virginia all require high school students to take personal finance courses.

According to a survey conducted by Next Gen Personal Finance, 22.7% of US high school students will have guaranteed access to a personal finance course. An additional 48.2% of students in 2022 have access to one either as an elective or as a possible option to fulfill a graduation requirement. Only 4.87% have no access to any financial education in any of their courses.

In non-guaranty states, personal finance courses were least likely to be available in city areas with only 1 in 20 receiving personal financial education. In rural areas, that figure increased to 1 in 7. The numbers also fluctuate based upon the schism in location, race, and socioeconomic status.

The importance of financial education early on can’t be overstated as the benefits of it seem to wane into adulthood, almost to zero.

According to Mariel Beasley, principal at the Center for Advanced Hindsight at Duke University and Co-Director of the Common Cents Lab (CCL), “Content-based financial education classes [for adults] only accounted for .1 percent variation in financial behavior.” She added, “We like to joke that it’s not zero but it’s very, very close.”

Connecticut Commercial Financing Disclosure Bill Didn’t Make it Through

In an era where it has become almost fashionable for states to introduce commercial financing disclosure laws, the bill proposed in Connecticut this past March did not make it through. Its first draft was rough, freely using ambiguous terminology like “double dipping” which was clearly drawn from an original draft presented to the New York State legislature more than a year ago.

The bill stalled in the Senate despite a couple of favorable committee reports. The legislature adjourned for the year on May 4th, ending the bill’s prospects for advancement in 2022. This was the second time the bill had appeared so a version of it will likely return in 2023.

Posting Fake Reviews To Make Your Financial Services Company Look More Appealing? The CFPB Says You Will Face The Consequences

The CFPB has put companies that offer financial products and services on notice. If you post fake reviews about yourself online, it “may result in significant penalties.”

“Corporate disinformation campaigns that suppress legitimate reviews or manufacture fake reviews are not only a threat to free speech and fair competition, they are also illegal,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. According to the agency, manipulating customer reviews is unlawful under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. “Laundering fake reviews in ways that appear completely independent from the company to improve their ratings may constitute a deceptive practice,” the agency states.

Examples were provided. One involved a company that relied on its own employees to leave reviews of the company’s products, which it said was unlawful because they had not disclosed that they were employees in the reviews themselves. Another example involved paying non-employees to post materially misleading reviews.

Also apparently illegal is only showing positive reviews about ones own products while hiding or refusing to publish the negative ones.

The CFPB cited a similar initiative undertaken by the FTC. “Fake reviews and other forms of deceptive endorsements cheat consumers and undercut honest businesses,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Advertisers will pay a price if they engage in these deceptive practices.”

With the CFPB’s purview being more narrow than the FTC’s, the CFPB’s closing message was that “Banks and financial companies should ensure that their customer review practices comply with all applicable laws, including the Consumer Financial Protection Act. Violations are subject to civil penalties and other legal consequences.”