ARTICLE
28 June 2026

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Update

JW
Jones Walker

Contributor

At Jones Walker, we look beyond today’s challenges and focus on the opportunities of the future. Since our founding in May 1937 by Joseph Merrick Jones, Sr., and Tulane Law School graduates William B. Dreux and A.J. Waechter, we have consistently asked ourselves a simple question: What can we do to help our clients succeed, today and tomorrow?
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has fundamentally shifted its enforcement approach, moving away from subjective consumer choice evaluations toward prosecuting actual fraud cases with identifiable victims and measurable damages. This policy change, announced through updated Enforcement Principles and Supervision and Enforcement Priorities, represents a significant departure from the agency's previous regulatory philosophy.
United States Finance and Banking
Craig Landrum’s articles from Jones Walker are most popular:
  • in North America
  • in North America
  • with readers working within the Banking & Credit industries
Jones Walker are most popular:
  • within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Government, Public Sector and Criminal Law topic(s)

On May 28 and 29, 2026, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) updated its Enforcement Principles and Supervision and Enforcement Priorities. The revision to the Supervision and Enforcement Priorities on May 28 began by rescinding all prior enforcement and supervision priority documents. The CFPB will now focus on actual fraud against consumers where there are identifiable victims with material and measurable consumer damages as opposed to matters based on the CFPB’s perception that consumers made “wrong” choices. The areas of priority are:

  • Mortgages
  • Fair Credit Reporting Act/Regulation V data furnishing violations
  • Fair Debt Collection Practices Act/Regulation F, relating to consumer contracts/debts
  • Various fraudulent overcharges and fees
  • Inadequate controls to protect consumer information, resulting in actual loss to consumers

The CFPB also announced it will shift focus back to depository institutions, although it wants to reduce the number of “events” by 50%. The CFPB will not pursue supervision under novel legal theories, clearly focusing on areas within its statutory authority.

The Enforcement Principles announced on May 29 emphasized the Supervision and Enforcement Priorities by stating that the CFPB will focus its enforcement on addressing actual harm to consumers and will not take action in cases where it believes consumers simply made unwise decisions or cases involving theoretical or highly speculative harm. The CFPB wants supervised entities to know what their duties are before the agency brings enforcement actions against them, and it does not seek to stretch the bounds of its statutory authority through novel interpretations or advance a policy agenda through its enforcement actions. The CFPB seeks to collaborate with institutions to remedy legal violations voluntarily and make consumers whole for any harm they have suffered. Self-reporting institutions will not be unnecessarily punished for their candor and willingness to proactively address problems.

Also on May 28, the CFPB issued its 2025 Enforcement Lookback, which confirmed the CFPB is now focusing its enforcement resources on pressing threats to consumers and actual consumer fraud with identifiable victims who sustain material and measurable consumer damages in areas that are clearly within the CFPB’s supervisory authority. In pursuing these changes, the CFPB closed approximately 40% of its pending investigations, consistent with its new enforcement priorities.

On June 17, the CFPB published the recission of its December 2020 advisory opinion regarding Regulation B as it applies to special purpose credit programs (SPCPs). The December 2020 advisory opinion contained statements that conflict with recent amendments to Regulation B, which prohibit any SPCP being offered as a result of using the common characteristic of race, color, national origin, or sex (or any combination thereof) as a factor in determining eligibility for the program. The CFPB has determined that any SPCP that based eligibility on protected class membership inherently discriminates against ineligible individuals in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, unless the SPCP’s use of the otherwise prohibited basis is necessary to overcome a demonstrated inability to access credit that is specifically based on those same characteristics.

It remains to be seen whether or how soon these changes will filter through to the other federal banking regulators.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More