Home > Credit Cards > Why the CFPB Changed Course on Lowering Fees

Comments 0 Comments

Last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) backed off a plan to reduce costly up-front fees on credit cards. It’s amazing how the early headlines last week gave the impression that the CFPB was weak for changing course. The CFPB was, in fact, left with little wiggle room due to a federal court decision.

Here’s the situation: The Credit CARD Act of 2009 had included a regulation that limited up-front fees to 25 percent of the credit limit during the first year the account is open. This rule was supposed to protect consumers from what’s known as “fee harvester” credit cards.

First Premier, a subprime credit card lender that charges a $95 processing fee and a $75 annual fee, sued the CFPB and the Fed because this affected their business model. Some of their cardholders only get a $300 limit, and so charging $180 during the first year breaks the 25 percent rule.

RECOMMENDED:
FREE CREDIT CHECK TOOL

Credit Report Card
Check your credit for free with this great tool from Credit.com. It offers expert advice on how to manage your credit. And you can return every 30 days for unlimited free updates.
Sign Up Here »

[Free Resource: Check your credit for free before applying for a credit card]

First Premier believed the Fed had interpreted the rule unfairly. A federal court in South Dakota sided with First Premier. Given the court decision, the CFPB created a new proposal that applies the 25 percent cap to fees charged after the account is opened. So, in First Premier’s case, the $95 processing fee wouldn’t be included in the cap. There are many subprime lenders that charge these fees, so this ruling doesn’t just impact First Premier.

Some consumer advocates may be upset with the CFPB’s choice to “back down.” I consider myself a consumer advocate and I think the CFPB made the right decision. I don’t see it as backing down at all. This is a situation where they have to pick their battles. How much time and energy should the bureau spend on this when it’s been through a federal court and there are so many other pressing issues? If you’d like to give the CFPB your two cents, and I encourage you to do so, it’s accepting comments about this issue until June.

[Related Articles: Read More on the CFPB]

I’d like to see the CFPB focus on educating consumers and letting them know there are other choices besides fee-harvester credit cards. If you’re using a credit card that charges a 36 percent APR or more, having to pay up-front fees is the least of your worries. Check out the Orchard Bank credit cards, which also target subprime consumers. The terms are entirely reasonable.

Aside from making a practical decision, I think this is also a savvy PR move. The folks at the CFPB are showing that they aren’t going to have a knee-jerk reaction if things don’t go their way. I think that keeps the market on an even keel, which is best for consumers. This can also win over individuals who are ambivalent about the bureau. All good things for consumers.

Ultimately, it’s important to remember that the CFPB is not operating in a vacuum. There are economic laws that have to be considered, too. Banks are going to push back when revenue is on the line. When you take away a revenue source, other fees pop up. The bureau has to walk a fine line to keep the markets a safe place for all involved. And, so far, I think it’s doing a good job.

[Credit Cards: Research and compare credit cards at Credit.com]

Image: lovestromp, via Flickr.com

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team