Here’s the first real disappointment from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The Obama administration’s consumer financial watchdog agency is backing off a plan to limit big upfront fees on credit cards, a move that could hit borrowers with poor credit histories especially hard.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau acknowledged Thursday that its proposal would increase costs for some cardholders and allow banks to charge more in fees [...]
Banks aren’t allowed to charge fees totaling more than 25 percent of a person’s credit limit in the first year that the account exists. But there’s no limit to the fees they can charge before the card is activated.
Under a rule proposed last year, those upfront fees would have counted toward the 25 percent cap. The CFPB is retreating from that idea after a federal court in South Dakota prevented it from taking effect.
Obviously there’s a legal aspect to this, and the court ruling in (credit card industry-friendly) South Dakota. And experts quoted in this article described it as “strategic thinking” by CFPB, and an example of them choosing their battles wisely.
But there is an existing court case, so the battle would rise or fall there. CFPB could have just let that process play out. I don’t understand the view that regulators should exist not to antagonize the industries they regulate. Implicit in that view is the idea that banks don’t currently do everything humanly possible to avoid regulation. Because the regulators cozy up to them, they’ve soothed the savage beast. I don’t buy that at all. If CFPB wants to protect new borrowers from upfront fees that could range beyond 25% of their credit limits, they shouldn’t weigh whether more lobbyists will take a run at them later.
The other justification is that the banks have to be able to make money so they can increase lending to those who would otherwise get locked out of the marketplace for credit cards or mortgages or car loans. This undermines the entire purpose of the CFPB. Their job is not to preserve profits for industry, or allow a little bit of stealing to convey benefits on those being robbed. Their job is supposed to be to protect consumers, period, full stop.
Under the new rule, banks can charge significant processing and activation fees on new cards, with the cap only applied afterwards. This walks back a rule proposed by the Federal Reserve, not exactly crusaders on behalf of the American consumer. And these new fees will get specifically targeted at subprime borrowers with bad credit scores, the kind that the industry wants to feast on. Now we know why; they can run up all kinds of fees and prey upon people with low financial literacy.
CFPB published their proposed rule in the Federal Register; AP had to dig it out. They would not comment beyond a press release. They know better than to be proud of this, at least.
The jury’s still out on CFPB, and they’ve done a lot of good so far as well. But this is a troubling sign.




13 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Thanks David. This is indeed a bad move by the CFPB on behalf of consumers.
My concern is along the same line as yours. They are the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; their job is to protect consumers ONLY. This move exposes consumers and protects profit for lenders. Certainly not a promising development…
What a farce.
This explains the offer I got the other day – first in quite awhile – for a card w/ a $700 limit and an annual fee (to be paid first, of course) of $175.00. I think there were other fees too…I didn’t look, just threw it in the trash. In the past I’ve gotten offers with so many up-front fees that there was about $35 of available credit on activation.
No thanks.
AND THE KILLIN GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen David Dayen:
Just a heads up with a little more cheerful news: The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has just released a scathing denoucement of the Ryan budget…copy Hunter at Daily Kos.
There is so much confusion and outright craziness in the political discourse right now, all the way down to local school board elections and contests for animal control office that I’m wondering if we aren’t in for a real wave election season, beginnin’ in May here in Wisconsin. Rob Zerban is building a real opposition force against Ryan in his own district and the debacle of the national war on women’s health and birth control has the Catholic hierarchy and local Catholic political wankers scramblin’ all over the place to distance themselves from lunatics like Ryan. Now if ObamaRahma would just stop adding to the confusion and keep from self-immolating in the burning dump that the lunatic fascists have lit for us, we might get somethin done in this country.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, NOBODY’S GUNNA FIGHT THIS ONE FOR YOU!!
I don’t know why we expect banks to ignore fair and practical risk mitigation practices.Its those kind of lapses in judgement that led to the real estate crisis. Hard to believe we have come full circle to where we expect more cheap credit regardless of risk profile.
If you don;t want to pay the fees than don;t use a credit card. Its very fair and straight forward.
Boobus Americanus you are
If you don’t want to pay the fees than don’t use a credit card. Its very fair and straight forward.
I remember when E. Warren held a White House Q&A soon after the CFPB got into gear, to answer questions submitted by the public. There were a ton of questions, posted on line, about Credit Card rates and fees and usury in general. She wasn’t asked a single one of them. No mention of Credit Cards at all.
Our bi-partisan commission of screwing the little guy, including Ms. Warren if she’s elected, will NOT be doing a damn thing about this. Indeed, they’ll make it worse.
Hey troll! Ready for the weekend?
I’m sorry your credit sucks. Live within your means and you don’t end up paying these fees.
My credit score currently stands at an average of 706 between the 3 bureaus. Thanks for playing, though.
Mine’s 810 and I cannot qualify for a loan that’s not sub-prime. I need home repairs, and I have way too many friends in the constructin field who are desparate for work, but can’t get it because banks aren’t lending. They are more than willing to issue me a credit card at 18% apr (variable) but I will not repair on a credit card. By the time I’ve saved for the work, the bathtub will have fallen through the floor.
That’s what “living within my means” means, in case the shite-bag who hides behind peoplerstrange is still trolling.
Laura, I’m with you.
Are we living the same life? We need the credit card to be able to buy enough gas so we can get to our workplace in order to earn enough to pay off the card so we can get more gas….