1968 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2018 / Unified Agenda 

1The listing does not include certain routine, 

frequent, or administrative matters. Further, certain 

of the information fields for the listing are not 

applicable to independent regulatory agencies, 

including the CFPB, and, accordingly, the CFPB has 

indicated responses of ‘‘no’’ for such fields. 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

12 CFR CH. X 

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Semiannual regulatory agenda. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection (CFPB or Bureau) is 

publishing this agenda as part of the 

Fall 2017 Unified Agenda of Federal 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. 

The CFPB reasonably anticipates having 

the regulatory matters identified below 

under consideration during the period 

from November 1, 2017 to October 31, 

2018. The next agenda will be published 

in spring 2018 and will update this 

agenda through fall 2018. Publication of 

this agenda is in accordance with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). 

DATES: This information is current as of 

September 28, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection, 1700 G Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20552. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A 

staff contact is included for each 

regulatory item listed herein. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CFPB 

is publishing its Fall 2017 Agenda as 

part of the Fall 2017 Unified Agenda of 

Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory 

Actions, which is coordinated by the 

Office of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866. The agenda lists 

the regulatory matters that the CFPB 

reasonably anticipates having under 

consideration during the period from 

November 1, 2017, to October 31, 2018, 

as described further below.1 The CFPB’s 

participation in the Unified Agenda is 

voluntary. The complete Unified 

Agenda is available to the public at the 

following website: http://

www.reginfo.gov. 

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection 

Act, Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 

(Dodd-Frank Act), the CFPB has 

rulemaking, supervisory, enforcement, 

and other authorities relating to 

consumer financial products and 

services. These authorities include the 

ability to issue regulations under more 

than a dozen Federal consumer 

financial laws, which transferred to the 

CFPB from seven Federal agencies on 

July 21, 2011. The Bureau’s general 

purpose, as specified in section 1021 of 

the Dodd-Frank Act, is to implement 

and enforce Federal consumer financial 

law consistently for the purpose of 

ensuring that all consumers have access 

to markets for consumer financial 

products and services and that markets 

for consumer financial products and 

services are fair, transparent, and 

competitive. 

The CFPB is working on a wide range 

of initiatives to address issues in 

markets for consumer financial products 

and services that are not reflected in this 

notice because the Unified Agenda is 

limited to rulemaking activities. Section 

1021 of the Dodd-Frank Act specifies 

the objectives of the Bureau, including 

providing consumers with timely and 

understandable information to make 

responsible decisions about financial 

transactions; protecting consumers from 

unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and 

practices and from discrimination; 

addressing outdated, unnecessary, or 

unduly burdensome regulations; 

enforcing Federal consumer financial 

law consistently in order to promote fair 

competition, without regard to the 

status of a covered person as a 

depository institution; and promoting 

the transparent and efficient operation 

of markets for consumer financial 

products and services to facilitate access 

and innovation. The CFPB’s regulatory 

work in pursuit of those objectives can 

be grouped into three main categories: 

(1) Implementing statutory directives; 

(2) other efforts to address market 

failures, facilitate fair competition 

among financial services providers, and 

improve consumer understanding; and 

(3) modernizing, clarifying, and 

streamlining consumer financial 

regulations to reduce unwarranted 

regulatory burdens. 

Implementing Statutory Directives 

Much of the Bureau’s rulemaking 

work is focusing on implementing 

directives mandated in the Dodd-Frank 

Act and other statutes. As part of these 

rulemakings, the Bureau is working to 

achieve the consumer protection 

objectives of the statutes while 

minimizing regulatory burden on 

financial services providers and 

facilitating a smooth implementation 

process for both industry and 

consumers. 

For example, the Bureau is continuing 

efforts to facilitate implementation of 

critical consumer protections under the 

Dodd-Frank Act that guard against 

mortgage market practices that 

contributed to the nation’s most 

significant financial crisis in several 

decades. Since 2013, the Bureau has 

issued regulations as directed by the 

Dodd-Frank Act to implement certain 

protections for mortgage originations 

and servicing, integrate various Federal 

mortgage disclosures, and amend 

mortgage reporting requirements under 

the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act 

(HMDA). The Bureau is conducting 

follow-up rulemakings as warranted to 

address issues that have arisen during 

the implementation process for these 

rules and to provide greater clarification 

and certainty to financial services 

providers. The Bureau has three such 

efforts underway at this time: 

• In August, the Bureau finalized 

amendments to Regulation C to facilitate 

implementation of a rule it issued in 

2015 to effectuate Dodd-Frank Act 

amendments to HMDA. The 

amendments included a number of 

clarifications, technical corrections, and 

minor changes to the HMDA regulation, 

which largely takes effect in 2018, as 

well as temporarily changing the 

reporting threshold for open-end lines 

of credit. The Bureau issued a final rule 

in September amending Regulation B, 

which implements the Equal Credit 

Opportunity Act (ECOA), that also 

concerns data collection. The Bureau is 

also continuing to work closely with 

industry and other regulators to 

streamline and modernize HMDA data 

collection and reporting in conjunction 

with implementation of the Dodd-Frank 

amendments. For example, the Bureau 

in September sought comment on draft 

guidance for what HMDA information 

will be released to the general public in 

light of privacy concerns as specified in 

the Dodd-Frank Act. 

• The Bureau is expecting to issue a 

proposed rule and an interim final rule 

in early October to address narrow 

issues concerning the timing of certain 

mortgage servicing disclosure 

requirements. The proposed rule and 

interim final rule relate to concerns 

raised by industry participants in 

connection with the mortgage servicing 

rule that the Bureau issued in August 

2016, under Regulation X, which 

implements the Real Estate Settlement 

Procedures Act (RESPA) and Regulation 

Z, which implements the Truth in 

Lending Act (TILA). 

• The Bureau is seeking comment on 

a follow up rulemaking concerning 

certain consolidated mortgage 

disclosures that consumers receive in 

connection with applying for and 

closing on a mortgage loan under the 

TILA and RESPA. The proposed 

amendments relate to when a creditor 

may compare charges paid by or 

imposed on the consumer to amounts 

disclosed on a Closing Disclosure, 

instead of a Loan Estimate, to determine 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2018 / Unified Agenda 1969 

if an estimated closing cost was 

disclosed in good faith. The 

consolidated disclosures rule is the 

cornerstone of the Bureau’s broader 

‘‘Know Before You Owe’’ mortgage 

initiative. 

The Bureau is also working to 

implement section 1071 of the DoddFrank Act, which amends ECOA to 

require financial institutions to report 

information concerning credit 

applications made by women-owned, 

minority-owned, and small businesses. 

This rulemaking could provide critical 

information about how these 

businesses—which are critical engines 

for economic growth—access credit. The 

Bureau held a public hearing on this 

subject in spring 2017, and released a 

white paper summarizing preliminary 

research on the small business lending 

market. In May 2017, the Bureau also 

issued a Request for Information seeking 

public comment on, among other things, 

the types of credit products offered and 

the types of data currently collected by 

lenders in this market and the potential 

complexity, cost of, and privacy issues 

related to, small business data 

collection. The comment period closed 

on September 14, 2017. The information 

received will help the Bureau determine 

how to implement the rule efficiently 

while minimizing burdens on lenders. 

Other Efforts To Address Market 

Failures, Facilitate Fair Competition 

Among Financial Services Providers, 

and Improve Consumer Understanding 

The Bureau is considering rules in 

places where there are substantial 

market failures that make it difficult for 

consumers to engage in informed 

decision making and otherwise protect 

their own interests. In addition, the 

Dodd-Frank Act directs the Bureau to 

focus on activities that promote fair 

competition among financial services 

providers, which itself has substantial 

benefits for consumers. 

For example, the Bureau released a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in June 

2016, building on several years of 

research documenting consumer harms 

from practices related to payday loans, 

auto title loans, and other similar credit 

products. In particular, the Bureau is 

concerned that product structure, lack 

of underwriting, and certain other 

lender practices are interfering with 

consumer decision making with regard 

to such products and trapping large 

numbers of consumers in extended 

cycles of debt that they do not expect. 

The Bureau is also concerned that 

certain lenders’ payment collection 

practices are causing substantial harm to 

consumers, including substantial 

unexpected fees and heightened risk of 

losing their checking accounts. The 

Bureau received more than one million 

comments in response to the proposal 

and is carefully considering how best to 

address concerns raised in the proposal 

in a manner consistent with the 

Bureau’s objectives under the DoddFrank Act. 

The Bureau is also engaged in 

rulemaking activities regarding the debt 

collection market, which continues to 

be a top source of complaints to the 

Bureau. The Bureau is concerned that 

because consumers cannot choose their 

debt collectors or ‘‘vote with their feet,’’ 

they have less ability to protect 

themselves from harmful practices. In 

January 2017, the Bureau published the 

results of a survey of consumers about 

their experiences with debt collection. 

The Bureau has also received 

encouragement from industry to engage 

in rulemaking to resolve conflicts in 

case law and address issues of concern 

under the Fair Debt Collection Practices 

Act (FDCPA), such as the application of 

the 40-year-old statute to modern 

communication technologies. The 

Bureau released an outline of proposals 

under consideration in July 2016 

concerning practices by companies that 

are ‘‘debt collectors’’ under the FDCPA, 

in advance of convening a panel under 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) in 

conjunction with the Office of 

Management and Budget and the Small 

Business Administration’s Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy to consult with 

representatives of small businesses that 

might be affected by the rulemaking. 

The Bureau expects to release a 

proposed rule concerning FDCPA 

collectors’ communications practices 

and consumer disclosures. The Bureau 

intends to follow up separately at a later 

time about concerns regarding 

information flows between creditors and 

FDCPA collectors and about potential 

rules to govern creditors that collect 

their own debts. 

The Bureau is also engaged in policy 

analysis and further research initiatives 

in preparation for a potential 

rulemaking regarding overdraft 

programs on checking accounts. After 

several years of research, the Bureau 

believes that there are consumer 

protection concerns with regard to these 

programs. Consumers do not shop based 

on overdraft fee amounts and policies, 

and the market for overdraft services 

does not appear to be competitive. 

Under the current regulatory regime 

consumers can opt in to permit their 

financial institution to charge fees for 

ATM and point-of-sale debit overdrafts, 

but the complexity of the system may 

complicate consumer decision making. 

Despite widespread use of disclosure 

forms, the regime produces substantially 

different opt-in rates across different 

depository institutions and the Bureau’s 

supervisory and enforcement work 

indicates that some institutions are 

aggressively steering consumers to opt 

in. The CFPB is engaged in consumer 

testing of revised opt-in forms and 

considering whether other regulatory 

changes may be warranted to enhance 

consumer decision making. 

In addition, the Bureau is continuing 

rulemaking activities that will ensure 

meaningful supervision of non-bank 

financial services providers in order to 

create a more level playing field for 

depository and non-depository 

institutions. Under section 1024 of the 

Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB is authorized 

to supervise ‘‘larger participants’’ of 

markets for various consumer financial 

products and services as defined by 

Bureau rule. The Bureau has defined the 

threshold for larger participants in 

several markets in past rulemakings, 

and is now working to develop a 

proposed rule that would define nonbank ‘‘larger participants’’ in the market 

for personal loans, including consumer 

installment loans and vehicle title loans. 

The Bureau is also considering whether 

rules to require registration of these or 

other non-depository lenders would 

facilitate supervision, as has been 

suggested to the Bureau by both 

consumer advocates and industry 

groups. 

The Bureau’s October 2016 

rulemaking concerning prepaid 

financial products also advanced 

fairness and consistency objectives by 

creating a uniform disclosure regime 

and providing basic protections similar 

to those enjoyed by users of debit cards 

and credit cards. In April 2017, the 

Bureau extended the general effective 

date of the rule to April 1, 2018. In June 

2017, the Bureau issued a proposal that 

would make targeted changes to the 

2016 prepaid rule to reduce 

implementation and compliance 

burdens on the industry and ensure 

consumer understanding of and access 

to these products. The Bureau expects to 

issue a final rule in fall 2017. 

Modernizing, Streamlining, and 

Clarifying Consumer Financial 

Regulations 

The Bureau’s third group of activities 

concerns modernizing, streamlining, 

and clarifying consumer financial 

regulations and other activities to 

reduce unwarranted regulatory burdens 

and facilitate consumer-friendly 

innovation and increased access to 

consumer financial markets as directed 

by the Dodd-Frank Act. Since most of 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
1970 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2018 / Unified Agenda 

2 76 FR 75825 (Dec. 5, 2011). 

3See 79 FR 64057 (Oct. 28, 2014); 78 FR 25818 

(May 3, 2013); 78 FR 18221 (Mar. 26, 2013). In some 

cases Congress took action related to the same 

topics identified as part of the Bureau’s 

streamlining initiative. See, e.g., 81 FR 44801 (July 

11, 2016); 78 FR 18221 (Mar. 26, 2013). 

4The Bureau expects to complete work later this 

year on a final rule amending certain requirements 

concerning annual privacy notices under the 

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The Bureau conducted a 

prior rulemaking to create an exception to facilitate 

the ability of financial services providers to deliver 

such notices via their websites. 79 FR 64057 (Oct. 

28, 2014). Congress then amended the underlying 

law to create a broader exception. That amendment 

took effect in December 2015, and the Bureau is 

completing certain conforming regulatory 

amendments to reflect the statutory change. 

5See, e.g., Press Release, Bureau of Consumer 

Fin. Prot., CFPB Announces First No-Action Letter 

to Upstart Network (Sept. 14, 2017), https://

www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/ 

cfpb-announces-first-no-action-letter-upstartnetwork/. 6 81 FR 83806 (Nov. 22, 2016). 

7 82 FR 11183 (Feb. 17, 2017). 

8Further, the Bureau is moving Amendments to 

FIRREA Concerning Appraisals (Automated 

Valuation Models) into the Long-Term Actions 

based on continuing interagency discussions. 

the Federal consumer financial laws 

that the Bureau administers were 

enacted in the 1960s and 1970s, there is 

often substantial demand for these 

activities from both industry and 

consumer advocates alike. 

In addition to some of the projects 

mentioned above that advance these 

objectives, such as the HMDA processes 

modernization and debt collection 

rulemaking, the Bureau is pursuing a 

number of other research, policy, and 

rulemaking initiatives. For example, 

section 1022(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act 

specifically directs the Bureau to assess 

the effectiveness of significant rules five 

years after they are implemented, 

including seeking public comment. In 

spring and summer 2017, the Bureau 

published requests for comment on its 

plans to assess the effectiveness of 

mortgage servicing rules, rules 

implementing portions of the DoddFrank Act requiring mortgage lenders to 

assess consumers’ ability to repay, and 

rules implementing provisions of the 

Dodd-Frank Act regulating remittance 

transfers sent by consumers located in 

the United States to international 

recipients. The Bureau has received 

comments on all three section 1022(d) 

assessment plans. The comments also 

included recommendations for 

modifying, expanding, or eliminating 

various aspects of the three rules at 

issue. The Bureau is conducting 

substantial research for each of the 

section 1022(d) assessments, collecting 

and analyzing quantitative data where 

feasible. It will publish reports of these 

section 1022(d) assessments by the 

statutory deadlines (October 2018 for 

remittance transfers, January 2019 for 

the mortgage rules described above). 

The findings in these reports will help 

the Bureau and the public evaluate the 

recommendations the Bureau received 

and inform the Bureau’s decisions 

whether adjustments to rules are 

warranted. 

The Bureau is also beginning work 

this fall on the first in a series of reviews 

of existing regulations that it inherited 

from other agencies through the transfer 

of authorities under the Dodd-Frank 

Act. The Bureau had previously sought 

feedback on the inherited rules as a 

whole,2 and identified and executed 

several burden reduction projects from 

that undertaking.3 The Bureau has 

largely completed those initial projects,4

and believes that the next logical step is 

to review individual regulations—or 

portions of large regulations—in more 

detail to identify opportunities to clarify 

ambiguities, address developments in 

the marketplace, or modernize or 

streamline provisions. The Bureau notes 

that other Federal financial services 

regulators have engaged in these types 

of reviews over time, and believes that 

such an initiative would be a natural 

complement to its work to facilitate 

implementation of new regulations. 

For its first review, the Bureau 

expects to focus primarily on subparts B 

and G of Regulation Z, which 

implement TILA with respect to openend credit generally and credit cards in 

particular. As part of this general effort, 

the Bureau is considering rules to 

modernize the Bureau’s database of 

credit card agreements to reduce burden 

on issuers that submit credit card 

agreements to the Bureau and make the 

database more useful for consumers and 

the general public. The Credit Card 

Accountability Responsibility and 

Disclosure Act of 2009 (CARD Act) 

requires credit card issuers to post their 

credit card agreements to their internet 

site, and submit those agreements to the 

Bureau to be posted on an internet site 

maintained by the Bureau. The Bureau 

believes an improved submission 

process and database would be more 

efficient for both industry and the 

Bureau and would allow consumers and 

the general public to access and analyze 

information more easily. 

The Bureau has also launched several 

initiatives focusing on ways to facilitate 

technological and product innovation 

that could benefit consumers. These 

include the CFPB’s Trial Disclosure 

Waiver Program, which is designed to 

implement the Bureau’s authority under 

section 1032 of the Dodd-Frank Act to 

grant financial services providers 

temporary waivers to conduct 

controlled field experiments of 

consumer disclosures. In addition, the 

Bureau has published a policy to 

facilitate the issuance of ‘‘No Action 

Letters’’ indicating that Bureau staff has 

no present intention to recommend 

enforcement or supervisory action with 

respect to specific applicants who wish 

to provide innovative financial products 

or services that promise substantial 

consumer benefit but raise substantial 

uncertainty as to application of existing 

consumer financial laws.5 The Bureau 

has also recently published two 

‘‘Requests for Information’’ (RFI) 

seeking to explore the potential benefits 

and risks to consumers of recent 

developments in the marketplace 

relating to use of consumer data. 

Specifically, one RFI focused on 

gathering information about the 

consumer benefits and risks associated 

with market developments related to the 

provision of products and services, 

based on the aggregation of a 

consumer’s financial information 

maintained by multiple financial 

institutions that a consumer uses (e.g., 

personal financial management services) 

and that rely on third-party entities 

referred to as data aggregators acting 

with consumer permission to collect 

consumer financial account and 

account-related information.6 The other 

concerned use of so-called ‘‘alternative 

data’’ in the credit process, including to 

assess the creditworthiness of 

consumers who do not have substantial 

traditional credit histories.7

In light of the feedback received in 

response to the RFIs and various other 

outreach to industry, consumer 

advocates, and other stakeholders, the 

Bureau has decided to add two new 

entries to its long-term regulatory 

agenda.8 This portion of the agenda, 

which focuses on potential regulatory 

actions that an agency may engage in 

beyond the current fiscal year, already 

contains entries concerning consumer 

reporting and student loan servicing. 

The Bureau is now adding entries 

concerning potential rulemakings to 

modernize Regulation E, which 

implements the Electronic Fund 

Transfer Act (EFTA), and to address 

issues of concern in connection with 

data aggregators, either under existing 

regulatory regimes such as EFTA and 

the Fair Credit Reporting Act or under 

the Dodd-Frank Act more generally. In 

both cases, the Bureau believes that 

technological and market developments 

may warrant rulemaking application to 

clarify the application of existing 

statutes and regulations, modernize and 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2018 / Unified Agenda 1971 

streamline those laws, and address 

emerging consumer protection concerns. 

The Bureau has also launched an 

internal task force to coordinate and 

bolster the agency’s continuing effort to 

fulfill its mandate to identify and relieve 

regulatory burdens, including with 

regard to small businesses, consistent 

with the Bureau’s other objectives under 

section 1021 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The 

task force is currently engaged in 

reviewing ideas for reduction of 

regulatory burden that have been 

suggested by Bureau stakeholders. 

Further Planning 

Finally, the Bureau is continuing to 

conduct outreach and research to assess 

issues in various other markets for 

consumer financial products and 

services beyond those discussed above. 

As this work continues, the Bureau will 

evaluate possible policy responses, 

including possible rulemaking actions, 

taking into account the critical need for 

and effectiveness of various policy tools. 

The Bureau will update its regulatory 

agenda in spring 2018, to reflect the 

results of this further prioritization and 

planning. 

Dated: September 28, 2017. 

Kelly Thompson Cochran, 

Assistant Director for Regulations, Bureau of 

Consumer Financial Protection. 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU—PRERULE STAGE

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. 

391 .................... Business Lending Data (Regulation B) ............................................................................................................ 3170–AA09 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU—COMPLETED ACTIONS

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. 

392 .................... Payday, Vehicle Title, and Certain High-Cost Installment Loans .................................................................... 3170–AA40 

393 .................... Arbitration ......................................................................................................................................................... 3170–AA51 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 

BUREAU (CFPB) 

Prerule Stage 

391. Business Lending Data (Regulation 

B) 

E.O. 13771 Designation: Independent 

agency. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1691c–2 

Abstract: Section 1071 of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) 

amends the Equal Credit Opportunity 

Act (ECOA) to require financial 

institutions to report information 

concerning credit applications made by 

women-owned, minority-owned, and 

small businesses. The amendments to 

ECOA made by the Dodd-Frank Act 

require that certain data be collected, 

maintained, and reported, including the 

number of the application and date the 

application was received; the type and 

purpose of the loan or credit applied for; 

the amount of credit applied for and 

approved; the type of action taken with 

regard to each application and the date 

of such action; the census tract of the 

principal place of business; the gross 

annual revenue of the business; and the 

race, sex, and ethnicity of the principal 

owners of the business. The Dodd-Frank 

Act also provides authority for the CFPB 

to require any additional data that the 

CFPB determines would aid in fulfilling 

the purposes of this section. The Bureau 

is focusing on outreach and research to 

develop its understanding of the 

players, products, and practices in the 

small business lending market and of 

the potential ways to implement section 

1071. The CFPB then expects to begin 

developing proposed regulations 

concerning the data to be collected, 

potential ways to minimize burdens on 

lenders, and appropriate procedures and 

privacy protections needed for 

information-gathering and public 

disclosure. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Prerule Activities 05/00/18 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Agency Contact: James Wylie, Office 

of Regulations, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau, Phone: 202 435– 

7700. 

RIN: 3170–AA09 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 

BUREAU (CFPB) 

Completed Actions 

392. Payday, Vehicle Title, and Certain 

High-Cost Installment Loans 

E.O. 13771 Designation: Independent 

agency. 

Legal Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5531; 12 

U.S.C. 5532; 12 U.S.C. 5512; 12 U.S.C. 

5551 

Abstract: The Bureau is conducting a 

rulemaking to address consumer harms 

from practices related to payday loans 

and other similar credit products, 

including failure to determine whether 

consumers have the ability to repay 

without default or re-borrowing and 

certain payment collection practices. 

The Bureau released a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in June 2016 that 

would identify it as an abusive and 

unfair practice for a lender to make a 

covered loan without reasonably 

determining that the consumer has the 

ability to repay the loan. Among other 

things, the proposal would require that, 

before making a covered loan, a lender 

must reasonably determine that the 

consumer has the ability to repay the 

loan. The Bureau received more than 1 

million comments on the proposal. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/22/16 81 FR 47863 

Request For Information.07/22/16 81 FR 47781 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/07/16 

Request For Information Comment Period 

End.

11/07/16 

Final Rule ............ 11/17/17 82 FR 54472 

Final Action Effective.01/16/18 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Agency Contact: Mark Morelli, Office 

of Regulations, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau, Phone: 202 435– 

7700. 

RIN: 3170–AA40 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
1972 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2018 / Unified Agenda 

393. Arbitration 

E.O. 13771 Designation: Independent 

agency. 

Legal Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5512(b); 12 

U.S.C. 5518(b) 

Abstract: In July 2016, the Bureau 

finalized a rulemaking concerning the 

use of agreements providing for 

arbitration of any future dispute 

between covered persons and 

consumers in connection with the 

offering or providing of certain 

consumer financial products or services. 

The rulemaking followed on a report 

that the Bureau issued to Congress in 

March 2015 as required by the DoddFrank Act, as well as on preliminary 

results of arbitration research that were 

released by the Bureau in December 

2013, and a May 2016 Notice of 

Proposed rulemaking. The Bureau 

received more than 110,000 comments 

in response to the proposal. The rule 

prohibited covered providers of certain 

consumer financial products and 

services from using an arbitration 

agreement to bar the consumer from 

filing or participating in a class action. 

Under the rule companies would still 

have been able to include arbitration 

clauses in their contracts. However, for 

contracts subject to the rule, the clauses 

would have had to say explicitly that 

they cannot be used to stop consumers 

from being part of a class action in 

court. The rule also required a covered 

provider that has an arbitration 

agreement and that is involved in 

arbitration pursuant to a pre-dispute 

arbitration agreement to submit 

specified arbitral records to the Bureau. 

Congress passed a joint resolution under 

the Congressional Review Act 

disapproving the arbitration rule; the 

President signed the joint resolution on 

November 1, 2017. Under the 

resolution, the arbitration rule shall 

have no force or effect.’’ 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/24/16 81 FR 32830 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/22/16 

Final Rule ............ 07/19/17 82 FR 33210 

Final Rule Effective.09/18/17 

Notice of CRA 

Revocation.

11/22/17 82 FR 55500 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Agency Contact: Eric Goldberg, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

Office of Regulations, Phone: 202 435– 

7700. 

RIN: 3170–AA51 

[FR Doc. 2017–28241 Filed 1–11–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS