Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 2, 2022 / Notices 5801 

1https://www.ucl.ac.uk/∼uctpbwa/papers/priceframing.pdf; https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/∼xgabaix/ 

papers/shrouded.pdf. 

2https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/ 

whitehouse.gov/files/documents/hiddenfeesreport_

12282016.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Hapeman or Erin Markin, (301) 

427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

20, 2021, notice was published in the 

Federal Register (86 FR 38296) that a 

request for a permit to conduct research 

on leatherback and unidentified sea 

turtles had been submitted by the abovenamed applicant. The applicant has 

withdrawn the application from further 

consideration. 

Dated: January 27, 2022. 

Julia M. Harrison, 

Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02117 Filed 2–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB302] 

Draft 2021 Marine Mammal Stock 

Assessment Reports; Correction 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; correction. 

SUMMARY: NMFS published a document 

in the Federal Register on October 25, 

2021 requesting comments on the Draft 

2021 Marine Mammal Stock Assessment 

Reports. The document contained 

incorrect link for submitting electronic 

comments. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

February 16, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Zachary Schakner, Office of Science and 

Technology, 301–427–8106, 

Zachary.Schakner@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of October 25, 

2021 (86 FR 58887), in FR Doc 2021– 

23225 on page 58887 in the second 

column, correct the ‘electronic 

submission’ directions to read: 

You may submit comments or new 

information, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2022–0013, through the Federal 

e-Rulemaking Portal: 

Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and enter 

NOAA–NMFS–2022–0013 in the Search 

box. Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

Dated: January 27, 2022. 

Evan Howell, 

Director, Office of Science and Technology, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02102 Filed 2–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

[Docket No.: CFPB–2022–0003] 

Request for Information Regarding 

Fees Imposed by Providers of 

Consumer Financial Products or 

Services 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) is 

seeking comments from the public 

related to fees that are not subject to 

competitive processes that ensure fair 

pricing. The submissions to this request 

for information will serve to assist the 

CFPB and policymakers in exercising its 

enforcement, supervision, regulatory, 

and other authorities to create fairer, 

more transparent, and competitive 

consumer financial markets. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 31, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CFPB–2022– 

0003, by any of the following methods: 

• Electronic: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: CFPB_

FederalRegisterComments@cfpb.gov. 

Include Docket No. CFPB–2022–0003 in 

the subject line of the message. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Comment Intake—Fee Assessment, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 

20552. Please note that due to 

circumstances associated with the 

COVID–19 pandemic, the CFPB 

discourages the submission of 

comments by hand delivery, mail, or 

courier. 

Instructions: The CFPB encourages 

the early submission of comments. All 

submissions should include document 

title and docket number. Because paper 

mail in the Washington, DC area and at 

the CFPB is subject to delay, 

commenters are encouraged to submit 

comments electronically. In general, all 

comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov. In addition, once 

the CFPB’s headquarters reopens, 

comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying at 1700 G Street 

NW, Washington, DC 20552, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. At that 

time, you can make an appointment to 

inspect the documents by telephoning 

202–435–7275. 

All comments, including attachments 

and other supporting materials, will 

become part of the public record and 

subject to public disclosure. Proprietary 

information or sensitive personal 

information, such as account numbers 

or Social Security numbers, or names of 

other individuals, should not be 

included. Comments will not be edited 

to remove any identifying or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Shearer, Senior Advisor; Grace 

Bouwer, Advisor, Public Engagement, 

Director’s Front Office, Office of the 

Director at 202–435–7700. If you require 

this document in an alternative 

electronic format, please contact CFPB_

Accessibility@cfpb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Consumers can only realize the 

benefits of competition if companies 

transparently advertise the true price of 

their products or services, and the full 

price is subject to the competitive 

process. Both empirical studies and 

theoretical models suggest that when 

companies use hidden back-end fees— 

which are mandatory or quasimandatory fees added at some point in 

the transaction after a consumer has 

chosen the product or service based on 

a front-end price—it can lure consumers 

into making purchasing decisions based 

on a perceived lower price.1 In addition, 

when a company charges for individual 

activities that are typical attributes of a 

product or service, it can give the 

company the power to substantially 

overcharge for those activities because 

consumers are not choosing a provider 

at the time they choose to engage in the 

activity. Well-known examples of such 

‘‘junk fees’’ include resort fees added to 

hotel bills and service fees added to 

concert ticket prices. Government 

agencies and economists have raised 

concerns about the ways in which 

America’s growing ‘‘fee economy’’ 

undermines competition.2


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
5802 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 2, 2022 / Notices 

3 12 U.S.C. 5511(a). 

4https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/ 

newsroom/cfpb-research-shows-banks-deepdependence-on-overdraft-fees/. 

5https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/ 

cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2021.pdf, 

at 46. 

6https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/ 

cfpb_consumer-credit-card-market-report_2021.pdf, 

at 54–57. 

7CFPB Compliance Bulletin 2017–01, Phone Pay 

Fees (July 31, 2017), available at https://

files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201707_

cfpb_compliance-bulletin-phone-pay-fee.pdf. 

8https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/foreclosure_

mortgage/archive/title_insurance_

testimony042606.pdf; https://www.texasobserver.

org/entitled-to-profit-in-texas-title-insurance-is-atotal-scam/. 

The Consumer Financial Protection 

Act (CFPA) directs the CFPB to enforce 

Federal consumer law for the purpose of 

ensuring consumer financial markets are 

fair, transparent, and competitive.3 The 

CFPB has grown increasingly concerned 

that consumer finance has become part 

of this ‘‘fee economy.’’ Exploitative junk 

fees charged by banks and non-bank 

financial institutions have become 

widespread, with the potential effect of 

shielding substantial portions of the true 

price of consumer financial products 

and services from competition. The 

CFPB is concerned about fees that far 

exceed the marginal cost of the service 

they purport to cover, implying that 

companies are not just shifting costs to 

consumers, but rather, taking advantage 

of a captive relationship with the 

consumer to drive excess profits. 

Excessive and exploitative fees, whether 

predictable and transparent to the 

customer or not, can add up and pose 

significant costs to people, especially 

those with low wealth and income. 

Many Americans have experienced 

inflated or surprise fees that, however 

nominally voluntary, are not 

meaningfully avoidable or negotiable in 

the moment. These fees in consumer 

finance can take many forms: Penalty 

fees such as late fees, overdraft fees, 

non-sufficient funds (NSF) fees, 

convenience fees for processing 

payments, minimum balance fees, 

return item fees, stop payment fees, 

check image fees, fees for paper 

statements, fees to replace a card, fees 

for out-of-network ATMs, foreign 

transaction fees, ACH transfer fees, wire 

transfer fees, account closure fees, 

inactivity fees, fees to investigate 

fraudulent activity, ancillary fees in the 

mortgage closing process, and more. 

These fees have become the norm 

among financial services that Americans 

rely on every day, and a substantial 

amount of the revenue earned by 

financial services companies comes 

from these fees. The following are a few 

examples from select products and 

markets: 

Deposit Accounts. The price of a 

deposit account is made up of, among 

other fees, account maintenance fees, 

minimum balance fees, savings transfer 

fees, NSF fees, overdraft fees, and ATM 

fees. Overdraft and NSF fees are backend fees that make up the majority of 

total revenue banks derive from deposit 

accounts. Overdraft and NSF fees 

exceeded $15.4 billion in 2019.4 By 

comparison, banks make only about $1 

billion annually in account maintenance 

fees. Since the back-end fees are the 

bulk of the price, there is effectively no 

price competition amongst the major 

banks for deposit accounts. Only 

recently have companies started to 

substantially vary their overdraft 

practices. This is of course a positive 

development, but these changes will not 

reverse the trend of pricing deposit 

accounts primarily through back-end 

fees. 

Credit Cards. Fees represent about 

20% of the total cost of credit cards. 

Card issuers charged $23.6 billion in 

fees in 2019 alone and nearly $14 

billion of those fees were late fees not 

subject to competitive pricing pressure.5

Nearly every bank charges the same for 

late fees—the maximum allowed by law 

of $30 for the first late payment and $41 

for subsequent late payments—and the 

average late fee has increased to $31, 

nearing the average of $33 before the 

Credit Card Accountability 

Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) 

Act of 2009.6

Remittances and Payments. Financial 

institutions charge ‘‘convenience’’ fees 

on payment transfers, return item fees, 

stop payment fees, check image fees, 

online or telephone bill pay fees, ACH 

transfer fees, and wire transfer fees. 

International transfers are subject to a 

significant number of fees as well. In 

2017, after observing many abuses, the 

CFPB issued a Compliance Bulletin on 

unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or 

practices relating to fees for making 

payments over the telephone, and 

potential violations of the Fair Debt 

Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).7

These kinds of convenience fees are still 

common. 

Prepaid Accounts. Prepaid cards 

represent a way for many unbanked 

consumers and individuals with limited 

resources to have access to basic 

financial services—yet many accounts 

carry fee structures that make it 

challenging for consumers to pick the 

right product based on their needs. 

Consumers frequently select a product 

based on a monthly rate only to find out 

that the ‘‘add-on’’ fees for regular 

activities such as transaction fees, cash 

reload fees, balance-inquiry fees, 

inactivity fees, monthly service fees, 

and card cancellation fees, among 

others, overshadow the quoted monthly 

charge. 

Mortgages. Mortgages facilitate 

homeownership for millions of people, 

and, through homeownership, allow 

millions of families to build and 

maintain intergenerational wealth. But 

priced into most mortgages are 

thousands of dollars in application fees 

and closing costs, which few people are 

well-positioned to shop on. These fees 

can act as a barrier to homeownership, 

strip wealth from homeowners 

accessing their equity through 

refinancing or home sales, and deter 

some homeowners from refinancing 

when doing so would lower total 

housing costs and be financially 

advantageous. Advocates and reporters 

have noted that many closing costs, like 

title insurance,8 may not always be 

subject to standard or appropriate 

competitive forces. Even aside from 

inflated and padded fees rolled into the 

mortgage at closing, homeowners can 

find themselves forced to pay fees for 

making payments over the phone or 

online or even for the servicer’s bill pay 

service. Borrowers who face financial 

hardship and struggle to make mortgage 

payments can find themselves unable to 

catch up due to the snowballing of a 

plethora of fees related to the mortgage 

delinquency. Monthly property 

inspection fees, new title fees, legal fees, 

appraisals and valuations, broker price 

opinions, force-placed insurance, 

foreclosure fees, and miscellaneous, 

unspecified ‘‘corporate advances’’ can 

all price a homeowner out of a home. 

Other Loans. The CFPB is interested 

in other loan origination and loan 

servicing fees, including for student 

loans, auto loans, installment loans, 

payday loans, and other types of loans. 

For example, some servicers charge fees 

to reschedule payment dates or make 

online or phone payments. Loan 

originators often charge application fees 

and some even charge to receive loan 

proceeds in an expedited manner. 

II. Request for Comment 

This request for information seeks 

information from the public on how 

junk fees—exploitative, back-end, 

hidden, or excessive fees—have 

impacted peoples’ lives. The CFPB is 

particularly interested in hearing from 

individuals (including older consumers, 

students, servicemembers, consumers of 

color, and lower-income consumers), 

social services organizations, consumer 

rights and advocacy organizations, legal 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 2, 2022 / Notices 5803 

aid attorneys, academics and 

researchers, small businesses, financial 

institutions, and state and local 

government officials. 

The CFPB welcomes stakeholders to 

submit stories, data, and information 

about fees. To assist commenters in 

developing responses, the CFPB has 

crafted the below questions that 

commenters may answer. However, the 

CFPB is interested in receiving any 

comments relating to fees in consumer 

finance. 

1. If you are a consumer, please tell 

us about your experiences with fees 

associated with your bank, credit union, 

prepaid or credit card account, credit 

card, mortgage, loan, or payment 

transfers, including: 

a. Fees for things you believed were 

covered by the baseline price of a 

product or service. 

b. Unexpected fees for a product or 

service. 

c. Fees that seemed too high for the 

purported service. 

d. Fees where it was unclear why they 

were charged. 

2. What types of fees for financial 

products or services obscure the true 

cost of the product or service by not 

being built into the upfront price? 

3. What fees exceed the cost to the 

entity that the fee purports to cover? For 

example, is the amount charged for NSF 

fees necessary to cover the cost of 

processing a returned check and 

associated losses to the depository 

institution? 

4. What companies or markets are 

obtaining significant revenue from backend fees, or consumer costs that are not 

incorporated into the sticker price? 

5. What obstacles, if any, are there to 

building fees into up-front prices 

consumers shop for? How might this 

vary based on the type of fee? 

6. What data and evidence exist with 

respect to how consumers consider 

back-end fees, both inside and outside 

of financial services? 

7. What data and evidence exist that 

suggest that consumers do, or do not, 

understand fee structures disclosed in 

fine-print or boilerplate contracts? 

8. What data and evidence exist that 

suggest that consumers do or do not 

make decisions based on fees, even if 

well disclosed and understood? 

9. What oversight and/or policy tools 

should the CFPB use to address the 

escalation of excessive fees or fees that 

shift revenue away from the front-end 

price? 

Rohit Chopra, 

Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02071 Filed 2–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

[Docket No. CFPB–2022–0007] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Comment Request 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) is 

publishing this notice seeking comment 

on a Generic Information Collection 

titled ‘‘Financial Well-Being Scale 

Malleability Survey’’ prior to requesting 

the Office of Management and Budget’s 

(OMB’s) approval of this collection 

under the Generic Information 

Collection ‘‘Generic Information 

Collection Plan for Studies of 

Consumers using Controlled Trials in 

Field and Economic Laboratory 

Settings’’ under OMB Control Number 

3170–0048. 

DATES: Written comments are 

encouraged and must be received on or 

before March 4, 2022 to be assured of 

consideration. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the title of the information 

collection, OMB Control Number (see 

below), and docket number (see above), 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: PRA_Comments@cfpb.gov. 

Include Docket No. CFPB–2022–0007 in 

the subject line of the email. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Comment Intake, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA 

Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, 

DC 20552. 

Please note that due to circumstances 

associated with the COVID–19 

pandemic, the Bureau discourages the 

submission of comments by mail, hand 

delivery, or courier. Please note that 

comments submitted after the comment 

period will not be accepted. In general, 

all comments received will become 

public records, including any personal 

information provided. Sensitive 

personal information, such as account 

numbers or Social Security numbers, 

should not be included. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Documentation prepared in support of 

this information collection request is 

available at www.regulations.gov. 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to Anthony May, 

Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, at 

(202) 841–0544, or email: CFPB_PRA@

cfpb.gov. If you require this document 

in an alternative electronic format, 

please contact CFPB_Accessibility@

cfpb.gov. Please do not submit 

comments to these email boxes. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title of Collection: Financial WellBeing Scale Malleability Survey. 

OMB Control Number: 3170–0048. 

Type of review: Submission of an IC 

under a generic information collection. 

Affected Public: Individuals. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

4,000. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 1,000. 

Abstract: The proposed research 

examines the malleability of 

individuals’ responses to CFPB’s 

Financial Well-Being Scale and/or 

changes to attitudes and behaviors 

based on completion of the scale. 

Financial practitioners and researchers 

use the CFPB Financial Well-Being 

Scale to measure financial well-being. 

This experiment will illustrate whether 

completion of the Financial Well-Being 

Scale immediately after using a 

financial tool (e.g., creating a budget) 

results in either higher or lower 

Financial Well-Being scores than 

completing the Scale without such a 

tool. The experiment will also test the 

robustness of the type of instrument 

used by testing both versions of the 

instrument (the five item Financial 

Well-Being Scale and the 10 item 

Financial Well-Being Scale). A 

maximum of 4,000 participants will be 

recruited from the panel maintained by 

the Understanding America Study 

(UAS) to complete the Financial WellBeing Scale Malleability Survey. The 

Bureau will collect information on 

financial well-being and information 

related to the budgeting tool including 

an assessment of the respondent’s 

experience using the tool, estimates of 

monthly income and spending, as well 

as questions about financial goals, 

budgeting, self-efficacy, and willingness 

to use such a tool in the future. The 

CFPB will not receive any personal 

identifiable information (PII). 

Request for Comments: The Bureau is 

publishing this notice and soliciting 

comments on: (a) Whether the collection 

of information is necessary for the 

proper performance of the functions of 

the Bureau, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) The accuracy of the Bureau’s 

estimate of the burden of the collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methods and the assumptions used; 

(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1