36 JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2023 Robert S. Nichols President and CEO American Bankers Association RNichols@ABA.com In an American Banker op-ed last year, I called out the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the leadership of Rohit Chopra as a “regulator gone rogue.” I’m not alone in my criticism: in September, 12 Republican lawmakers took the bureau to task over what they called a “radical and highly politicized agenda unbounded by statutory limits.” Unfortunately, the bureau has continued to push legal boundaries on several different fronts in recent months. First, the bureau has waged an aggressive PR campaign against so-called “junk fees” – using a term it coined to demonize the legitimate fees, including overdraft fees, that banks charge consumers for the products and services they offer. Throwing these fees in with things like concert ticket processing fees, resort fees and other surprise fees charged by retailers and hospitality businesses was a deliberate move to confuse the public about the well-disclosed fees they currently pay. (For the record, banks don’t charge resort or ticket fees, nor does the CFPB have authority to regulate those types of fees.) Another alarming step by the Chopra bureau was its decision to update the Unfair, Deceptive and Abusive Acts or Practices (UDAAP) section of its exam manual in a way that fundamentally upends the regulatory approach to fair lending supervision and enforcement, without providing industry stakeholders or the public Reining in a Regulator Gone Rogue the opportunity to provide feedback through the notice and comment process under the Administrative Procedure Act. Instead, the CFPB chose to take a backdoor route to expand its authority – giving itself the ability to examine for alleged disparate treatment or impact across all areas of bank operations using the authorities granted by the Dodd-Frank Act under its authority to prevent UDAAP. In reality, the CFPB’s authority to enforce antidiscrimination laws is limited to credit products. It’s clear that this move is an attempt by the bureau to set itself up as a “super-regulator” of financial practices using authority Congress did not give it. To be clear: the American Bankers Association fully supports the fair enforcement of the nation’s anti-discrimination laws. We simply believe these laws should be enforced by regulators within the boundaries set by Congress. This updated manual does not qualify. Given that the bureau has not seen fit to rescind the manual – despite previous calls from ABA and other trade groups – we were left with no choice but to pursue legal action. ABA’s lawsuit, which was filed in late September jointly with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Longview Chamber of Commerce, the Texas Bankers Association, the Independent Bankers Association of Texas, the Texas Association of Business and the Consumer Bankers Association, alleges violations of the Administrative Procedures Act in three ways. FEATURE (Continued on page 53.)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTg3NDExNQ==