Rule2023-01560
Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01: Unlawful Negative Option Marketing Practices
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 30, 2023
Issuing agencies
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Abstract
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) has issued Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01, titled "Unlawful Negative Option Marketing Practices." In this circular, the Bureau responds to the question, "Can persons that engage in negative option marketing practices violate the prohibition on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA)? "
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5727-5730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01560]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION
12 CFR Chapter X
Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01: Unlawful Negative
Option Marketing Practices
AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
ACTION: Consumer financial protection circular.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) has
issued Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01, titled
``Unlawful Negative Option Marketing Practices.'' In this circular, the
Bureau responds to the question, ``Can persons that engage in negative
option marketing practices violate the prohibition on unfair,
deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in the Consumer Financial
Protection Act (CFPA)? ''
DATES: The Bureau released this circular on its website on January 19,
2023.
ADDRESSES: Enforcers, and the broader public, can provide feedback and
comments to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#480b213a2b3d24293a3b082b2e382a662f273e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4b79d86978198958687b497928496da939b82">[email protected]</span></a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colin Reardon, Senior Counsel, Office
of Law & Policy, at (202) 570-6740. If you require this document in an
alternative electronic format, please contact
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d0939680928f91b3b3b5a3a3b9b2b9bcb9a4a990b3b6a0b2feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1754514755485674747264647e757e7b7e636e577471677539707861">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Question Presented
Can persons that engage in negative option marketing practices
violate the prohibition on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or
practices in the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA)?
Response
Yes. ``Covered persons'' and ``service providers'' must comply with
the prohibition on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in
the CFPA.\1\ Negative option marketing practices may violate that
prohibition where a seller (1) misrepresents or fails to clearly and
conspicuously disclose the material terms of a negative option program;
(2) fails to obtain consumers' informed consent; or (3) misleads
consumers who want to cancel, erects unreasonable barriers to
cancellation, or fails to honor cancellation requests that comply with
its promised cancellation procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 12 U.S.C. 5481(6), (26), 5531, 5536. For simplicity, the
remainder of this Circular refers to covered persons and service
providers as ``sellers.'' The CFPB notes, however, that entities and
individuals can be covered persons or service providers (and thus
subject to liability under the CFPA) even if they do not themselves
engage in ``selling'' a consumer financial product or service with a
negative option feature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background on Negative Option Marketing
As used in this Circular, the phrase ``negative option'' refers to
a term or condition under which a seller may interpret a consumer's
silence, failure to take an affirmative action to reject a product or
service, or failure to cancel an agreement as acceptance or continued
acceptance of the offer.
Negative option programs are common across the market, including in
the market for consumer financial products and services, and such
programs can take a variety of forms. For example, in automatic renewal
plans, consumers' subscriptions are automatically renewed when they
expire unless consumers affirmatively cancel their subscriptions by a
certain date. In continuity plans, consumers agree in advance to
receive a product or service, which they continue to receive until they
cancel the agreements. In trial marketing plans, consumers receive
products or services for free (or for a reduced fee) for a trial
period. After the trial period, consumers are automatically charged a
fee (or a higher fee) on a recurring basis unless they affirmatively
cancel.
Negative option programs can cause serious harm to consumers who do
not wish to receive the products or services for which they are
charged. Harm is most likely to occur when sellers mislead consumers
about terms and conditions, fail to obtain consumers' informed consent,
or make it difficult for consumers to cancel. The Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) has received consumer complaints, including
complaints from older
[[Page 5728]]
consumers, about being repeatedly charged for services they did not
intend to buy or no longer want to continue purchasing. Some consumers
have reported that they were enrolled in subscriptions without
knowledge of the program and its cost.\2\ Consumers have also
complained about the difficulty of cancelling subscription-based
services and about charges made to their credit card or bank account
after they requested cancellation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Consumer Response Annual Report at 25 (CFPB Mar. 2018),
<a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-response-annual-report_2017.pdf">https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_consumer-response-annual-report_2017.pdf</a>; Monthly Complaint Report at 16
(CFPB May 2017), <a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201705_cfpb_Monthly_Complaint_Report.pdf">https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201705_cfpb_Monthly_Complaint_Report.pdf</a>.
\3\ See Consumer Response Annual Report at 67 (CFPB Mar. 2022),
<a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_2021-consumer-response-annual-report_2022-03.pdf">https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_2021-consumer-response-annual-report_2022-03.pdf</a>; Consumer Response Annual Report
at 88 (CFPB Mar. 2021), <a href="https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_2020-consumer-response-annual-report_03-2021.pdf">https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_2020-consumer-response-annual-report_03-2021.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent decades, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has brought
numerous enforcement cases challenging harmful negative option
practices using its authority under section 5 of the FTC Act, which
prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices.\4\ The FTC's
enforcement cases have also frequently relied on the Restore Online
Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA) \5\ and the Telemarketing Sales Rule
(TSR).\6\ The FTC recently summarized its enforcement work regarding
negative option marketing in a policy statement, which noted that its
cases have ``involve[d] a range of deceptive and unfair practices,
including inadequate disclosures of hidden charges in ostensibly `free'
offers and other products or services, enrollment without consumer
consent, and inadequate or overly burdensome cancellation and refund
procedures.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See, e.g., FTC v. Vonage Holdings Corp., No. 3:22-cv-6435
(D.N.J. 2022); FTC v. Age of Learning, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-07996 (C.D.
Cal. 2020); FTC v. Apex Capital Group, LLC, No. 2:18-cv-09573 (C.D.
Cal. 2018); FTC v. Triangle Media Corp., No. 3:18-cv-01388 (S.D.
Cal. 2018); FTC v. AdoreMe, Inc., No. 1:17-cv-09083 (S.D.N.Y. 2017);
FTC v. RevMountain, LLC, No. 2:17-cv-02000 (D. Nev. 2017); FTC v.
Health Formulas, LLC, No. 2:14-cv-01649 (D. Nev. 2016); FTC v. JDI
Dating, Ltd., No. 1:14-cv-08400 (N.D. Ill. 2014); FTC v. Complete
Weightloss Center, No. 1:08-cv-00053 (D.N.D. 2008); FTC v.
<a href="http://Consumerinfo.com">Consumerinfo.com</a>, No. 05-cv-801 (C.D. Cal. 2005); see also 15 U.S.C.
45.
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 8401 et seq.
\6\ 16 CFR part 310.
\7\ Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Negative Option
Marketing, 86 FR 60822, 60823 (Nov. 4, 2021) (hereafter, FTC Policy
Statement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since it began enforcement in 2011, the CFPB has brought
enforcement actions to halt a variety of harmful negative option
practices, which have primarily relied on the CFPA's prohibition on
unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or practices.\8\ For example, the
CFPB has brought multiple enforcement actions involving optional ``add-
on'' products offered to credit card users, such as debt protection and
identity protection products, which featured recurring fees that
continued until consumers affirmatively cancelled.\9\ In other
enforcement actions involving negative option practices, the CFPB has
found or alleged that consumer reporting companies,\10\ debt relief
companies,\11\ credit repair companies,\12\ payment processors,\13\ and
service providers \14\ have engaged in unfair, deceptive, and abusive
acts or practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536.
\9\ See CFPB v. Sterling Jewelers, Inc., No. 1:19-cv-00448
(S.D.N.Y. 2019); First National Bank of Omaha, File No. 2016-CFPB-
0014 (Aug. 25, 2016) (consent order); Citibank, N.A., File No. 2015-
CFPB-0015 (July 21, 2015) (consent order); Synchrony Bank, f/k/a GE
Capital Retail Bank, No. 2014-CFPB-0007 (June 19, 2014) (consent
order); Bank of America, N.A., File No. 2014-CFPB-0004 (Apr. 9,
2014) (consent order); American Express Centurion Bank, File No.
2013-CFPB-0011 (Dec. 24, 2013) (consent order); Discover Bank, File
No. 2012-CFPB-0005 (Sept. 24, 2012) (joint consent order with FDIC);
Capital One Bank, (USA) N.A., 2012-CFPB-0001 (July 18, 2012)
(consent order). For a description of consumer protections
applicable to credit card add-on products and the CFPB's compliance
expectations regarding such products, see Marketing of Credit Card
Add-on Products, CFPB Bulletin 2012-06 (July 18, 2012).
\10\ CFPB v. Transunion, No. 1:22-cv-01880 (N.D. Ill. 2022);
Equifax Inc., File No. 2017-CFPB-0001 (Jan. 3, 2017) (consent
order); Transunion Interactive, Inc., File No. 2017-CFPB-0002 (Jan.
3, 2017) (consent order).
\11\ CFPB v. Student Financial Aid Services, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-
00821 (E.D. Cal. 2015).
\12\ CFPB v. Prime Marketing Holdings, LLC, No. 2:16-cv-07111
(C.D. Cal. 2016).
\13\ CFPB v. ACTIVE Network, LLC, No. 4:22-cv-00898 (E.D. Tex.
2022).
\14\ CFPB v. Affinion Group Holdings, Inc., No. 5:15-cv-01005
(D. Conn. 2015); CFPB v. Intersections Inc., No. 1:15-cv-835 (E.D.
Va. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CFPB has also relied on other Federal consumer financial laws
that it enforces to address certain harmful negative option marketing
practices. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E
prohibit preauthorized electronic fund transfers from a consumer's bank
account without written authorization.\15\ The TSR also prohibits
deceptive acts or practices by telemarketers, including failing to
disclose the material terms of a negative option feature of an offer
and misrepresenting the total cost to purchase goods or services.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 15 U.S.C. 1693e(a); 12 CFR 1005.10(b); see also CFPB v.
Student Financial Aid Services, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-00821 (E.D. Cal.
2015). The CFPB described these requirements in more detail in a
2015 compliance bulletin. See Requirements for Consumer
Authorization for Preauthorized Electronic Fund Transfers, CFPB
Compliance Bulletin 2015-06 (Nov. 23, 2015).
\16\ 16 CFR 310.3(a)(1)(vii), (a)(2)(i); see also CFPB v. Prime
Marketing Holdings, LLC, No. 2:16-cv-07111 (C.D. Cal. 2016);
Citibank, N.A., File No. 2015-CFPB-0015 (July 21, 2015) (consent
order); CFPB v. Student Financial Aid Services, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-
00821 (E.D. Cal. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, the CFPB and FTC have taken action to combat the rise of
digital dark patterns, which are design features used to deceive,
steer, or manipulate users into behavior that is profitable for a
company, but often harmful to users or contrary to their intent.\17\
Dark patterns can be particularly harmful when paired with negative
option programs, causing consumers to be misled into purchasing
subscriptions and other services with recurring charges and making it
difficult for consumers to cancel and avoid such charges.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., FTC v. Age of Learning, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-07996
(C.D. Cal. 2020); Statement of CFPB Director Rohit Chopra on
Complaint Against ACTIVE Network (Oct. 18, 2022), <a href="https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/statement-of-cfpb-director-rohit-chopra-on-complaint-against-active-network/">https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/statement-of-cfpb-director-rohit-chopra-on-complaint-against-active-network/</a>.
\18\ See Bringing Dark Patterns to Light at 11-15 (FTC Sept.
2022), <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/P214800%20Dark%20Patterns%20Report%209.14.2022%20-%20FINAL.pdf">https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/P214800%20Dark%20Patterns%20Report%209.14.2022%20-%20FINAL.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis
The CFPB is issuing this Circular to emphasize that covered persons
and service providers who engage in negative option marketing are
required to comply with the CFPA's prohibition on unfair, deceptive,
and abusive acts or practices.\19\ The CFPB further emphasizes that its
approach to negative option marketing is generally in alignment with
the FTC's approach to section 5 of the FTC Act as set forth in its
recent policy statement. In particular, the CFPB shares the view that a
seller offering a negative option program risks violating the law if
the seller (1) does not clearly and conspicuously disclose the material
terms of the negative option offer to the consumer, (2) does not obtain
the consumer's informed consent, or (3) misleads consumers who wish to
cancel, erects unreasonable barriers to cancellation, or impedes the
effective operation of promised cancellation procedures.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Sellers should also comply with other consumer protection
laws enforceable by the CFPB that may apply to their conduct, such
as EFTA, Regulation E, and the TSR.
\20\ See FTC Policy Statement, 86 FR 60823-25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure. Sellers may violate the CFPA's prohibition on deceptive
acts or practices if they misrepresent or fail to clearly and
conspicuously disclose the material terms of an offer for a product or
service with a negative option feature. Under the CFPA, a
[[Page 5729]]
representation or omission is deceptive if it is likely to mislead a
reasonable consumer and is material.\21\ A ``material'' representation
or omission ``involves information that is important to consumers and,
hence, likely to affect their choice of, or conduct regarding, a
product.'' \22\ Where a seller makes a partial disclosure about the
nature of a product or service, its failure to disclose other material
information may be deceptive.\23\ In assessing the meaning of a
representation or omission, the CFPB looks to the overall, net
impression of the communication, meaning that it considers the context
of the entire advertisement, transaction, or course of dealing rather
than evaluating statements in isolation.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See CFPB v. Gordon, 819 F.3d 1179, 1192-93 (9th Cir. 2016).
\22\ Novartis Corp. v. FTC, 223 F.3d 783, 786 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
(quoting In re Cliffdale Assocs., Inc., 103 F.T.C. 110, 165 (1984)).
\23\ See, e.g., Sterling Drug Inc. v. FTC, 741 F.2d 1146, 1154
(9th Cir. 1984) (drug company's failure to disclose that its drug
only contained ordinary aspirin was misleading when its
advertisements implied that the drug did not contain aspirin); see
also FTC v. Bay Area Business Council, Inc., 423 F.3d 627, 635 (7th
Cir. 2005) (``[T]the omission of a material fact, without an
affirmative misrepresentation, may give rise to an FTC Act
violation.'').
\24\ See, e.g., CFPB v. Aria, 54 F.4th 1168, 1173 (9th Cir.
2022); Gordon, 819 F.3d at 1193; see also FTC v. E.M.A. Nationwide,
Inc., 767 F.3d 611, 631 (6th Cir. 2014); Fanning v. FTC, 821 F.3d
164, 170 (1st Cir. 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The material terms of a negative option offer would typically
include the following, to the extent applicable:
<bullet> That the consumer is enrolling in and will be charged for
the product or service.
<bullet> The amount (or range of amounts) that the consumer will be
charged.
<bullet> That charges will be on a recurring basis unless the
consumer takes affirmative steps to cancel the product or service.
<bullet> That, in a trial marketing plan, charges will begin (or
increase) after the trial period unless the consumer takes affirmative
action.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ This list is not exhaustive, and additional terms of a
negative option offer may be material depending on the facts and
circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A seller would likely violate the CFPA by misrepresenting or
failing to adequately disclose these material terms, as the CFPB's
enforcement cases illustrate. For example, the CFPB found that consumer
reporting agencies deceptively represented that credit-related products
were ``free'' when, in reality, consumers who signed up for a ``free''
trial were automatically enrolled in a subscription program with a
recurring monthly fee unless they cancelled.\26\ In those cases,
disclosures about the negative option feature were often displayed in
fine print, in low contrast, and were generally placed in a less
prominent location, such as the bottom of a web page, grouped with
other disclosures. Thus, the disclosures were neither clear nor
conspicuous. Similarly, in several credit card add-on cases, the CFPB
found that credit card issuers engaged in deceptive marketing and
enrollment practices where they did not adequately inform consumers
that they were purchasing add-on products or misrepresented the cost of
the add-on products.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Equifax Inc., File No. 2017-CFPB-0001 (Jan. 3, 2017)
(consent order); Transunion Interactive, Inc., File No. 2017-CFPB-
0002 (Jan. 3, 2017) (consent order).
\27\ See, e.g., First National Bank of Omaha, File No. 2016-
CFPB-0014 (Aug. 25, 2016) (consent order); Synchrony Bank, f/k/a GE
Capital Retail Bank, No. 2014-CFPB-0007 (June 19, 2014) (consent
order); Bank of America, N.A., File No. 2014-CFPB-0004 (Apr. 9,
2014) (consent order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consent. Sellers engaged in negative option marketing would likely
violate the CFPA where they fail to obtain the consumer's informed
consent before charging the consumer.\28\ Consent will generally not be
informed if, for example, a seller mischaracterizes or conceals the
negative option feature, provides contradictory or misleading
information, or otherwise interferes with the consumer's understanding
of the agreement. The CFPB has brought deception and unfairness claims
under the CFPA where sellers failed to obtain consumers' informed
consent.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Cf. FTC v. Kennedy, 574 F. Supp. 2d 714, 721 (S.D. Tex.
2008) (defendant engaged in unfair practice in violation of section
5 of the FTC Act by imposing charges on consumers' telephone bills
without obtaining their informed consent).
\29\ A seller offering a negative option program must also
comply with 12 U.S.C. 5531(d), which provides that an act or
practice is abusive if it (1) materially interferes with a
consumer's ability to understand a term or condition of a consumer
financial product or service or (2) takes unreasonable advantage of
the consumer's (a) lack of understanding of the material risks,
costs, or conditions of the product or service; (b) inability to
protect their interests in selecting or using a consumer financial
product or service; or (b) reasonable reliance on a covered person
to act in the consumer's interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to deception, as noted, a representation is deceptive
if it is likely to mislead a reasonable consumer and is material.\30\
In the credit card add-on cases, the CFPB found that credit card
issuers engaged in a deceptive practice when the card issuers falsely
represented to consumers that they were agreeing to receive information
about an add-on product rather than purchasing the product.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Gordon, 819 F.3d at 1192-93.
\31\ Fifth Third Bank, File No. 2015-CFPB-0025 (Sept. 28, 2015)
(consent order); Bank of America, N.A., File No. 2014-CFPB-0004
(Apr. 9, 2014) (consent order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to unfairness, an act or practice is unfair if it
causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers which is
not reasonably avoidable by consumers and the injury is not outweighed
by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.\32\ Applying
that standard, the CFPB alleged that a debt relief company engaged in
an unfair practice by charging consumers on an automatic, recurring
basis where the recurring charges were not clearly explained or
disclosed to consumers at the time of purchase.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 12 U.S.C. 5531(c).
\33\ CFPB v. Student Financial Aid Services, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-
00821 (E.D. Cal. 2015). Specifically, the CFPB alleged that the
company's practice caused injuries by subjecting consumers to
charges they did not authorize or bargain for, those injuries were
not reasonably avoidable because the fact of the recurring charges
and negative option feature were not clearly explained or disclosed
to consumers, and the injury was not outweighed by any
countervailing benefits to consumers or competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancellation. It is understandable that sellers will generally
prefer to retain their existing customers, but they must do so in a
manner that complies with the CFPA. For purposes of the prohibition on
deception, certain types of representations are presumed to be
material, including express representations and representations
regarding costs.\34\ Consistent with that principle, the CFPB found
that a credit card issuer engaged in a deceptive practice when it
represented that consumers could cancel an add-on product
``immediately'' and with ``no questions asked'' but then directed sales
representatives to repeatedly rebut requests to cancel, with the result
that consumers were often unable to cancel unless they demanded
cancellation multiple times in succession.\35\ The CFPB has also found
that sellers engaged in deceptive practices by making
misrepresentations about the costs and benefits of their products and
services in order to persuade consumers not to cancel.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Novartis Corp., 223 F.3d at 786.
\35\ First National Bank of Omaha, File No. 2016-CFPB-0014 (Aug.
25, 2016) (consent order).
\36\ Citibank, N.A., File No. 2015-CFPB-0015 (July 21, 2015)
(consent order); Capital One Bank, (USA) N.A., 2012-CFPB-0001 (July
18, 2012) (consent order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the CFPB agrees with the FTC that sellers would likely
violate the law if they erect unreasonable barriers to cancellation or
fail to honor cancellation requests that comply with their promised
cancellation procedures. Such conduct would include, for example,
``[h]ang[ing] up on consumers who call to cancel; plac[ing] them on
hold for an unreasonably long time; provid[ing] false information about
how to cancel; or misrepresent[ing] the
[[Page 5730]]
reasons for delays in processing consumers' cancellation requests.''
\37\ Depending on the facts and circumstances, such conduct may
constitute an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice in
violation of the CFPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ FTC Policy Statement, 86 FR 60823, 60826.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Consumer Financial Protection Circulars
Consumer Financial Protection Circulars are issued to all parties
with authority to enforce Federal consumer financial law. The CFPB is
the principal Federal regulator responsible for administering Federal
consumer financial law, see 12 U.S.C. 5511, including the Consumer
Financial Protection Act's prohibition on unfair, deceptive, and
abusive acts or practices, 12 U.S.C. 5536(a)(1)(B), and 18 other
``enumerated consumer laws,'' 12 U.S.C. 5481(12). However, these laws
are also enforced by State attorneys general and State regulators, 12
U.S.C. 5552, and prudential regulators including the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency,
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the National
Credit Union Administration. See, e.g., 12 U.S.C. 5516(d), 5581(c)(2)
(exclusive enforcement authority for banks and credit unions with $10
billion or less in assets). Some Federal consumer financial laws are
also enforceable by other Federal agencies, including the Department of
Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, the Farm Credit
Administration, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of
Agriculture. In addition, some of these laws provide for private
enforcement.
Consumer Financial Protection Circulars are intended to promote
consistency in approach across the various enforcement agencies and
parties, pursuant to the CFPB's statutory objective to ensure Federal
consumer financial law is enforced consistently. 12 U.S.C. 5511(b)(4).
Consumer Financial Protection Circulars are also intended to
provide transparency to partner agencies regarding the CFPB's intended
approach when cooperating in enforcement actions. See, e.g., 12 U.S.C.
5552(b) (consultation with CFPB by State attorneys general and
regulators); 12 U.S.C. 5562(a) (joint investigatory work between CFPB
and other agencies).
Consumer Financial Protection Circulars are general statements of
policy under the Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. 553(b). They
provide background information about applicable law, articulate
considerations relevant to the Bureau's exercise of its authorities,
and, in the interest of maintaining consistency, advise other parties
with authority to enforce Federal consumer financial law. They do not
restrict the Bureau's exercise of its authorities, impose any legal
requirements on external parties, or create or confer any rights on
external parties that could be enforceable in any administrative or
civil proceeding. The CFPB Director is instructing CFPB staff as
described herein, and the CFPB will then make final decisions on
individual matters based on an assessment of the factual record,
applicable law, and factors relevant to prosecutorial discretion.
Rohit Chopra,
Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2023-01560 Filed 1-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on January 30, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.