CFPB to ditch open banking rule
The Financial Technology Association (FTA) has hit out at US regulators over plans to rescind open banking rules, calling the move a "handout to Wall Street banks".
1
In a legal filing, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) says it will petition a court to have the 1033 open banking rule rescinded.
The CFPB only published the Personal Financial Data Rights final rule in October, giving Americans the right to instruct their banks to share their financial data with third party providers.
However, the plan has long proved unpopular with many in the traditional financial industry and banks have taken advantage of the change in administration to raise concerns about potential liability for data breaches and the ability to charge for access to data.
At the beginning of May, reports surfaced suggesting that Wall Street was likely to get its way, with the CFPB looking to amended or eliminated the rule. It is now moving ahead with elimination.
Penny Lee, CEO, FTA, says: "Vacating the 1033 rule is a handout to Wall Street banks, who are trying to limit competition and debank Americans from digital financial services. Americans must have the right to control their financial lives, not the nation's biggest banks."
For the CFPB, this is the latest example of a starkly different approach under Trump as it scales back its activities and reverses previous positions under acting Director Russell Vought.
In March it ditched an interpretive rule declaring that pay-in-four BNPL lenders should be treated in the same way as credit cards.
In recent weeks it has also dropped a host of lawsuits, including against JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo over fraud on the Zelle P2P payments network.
Meanwhile, a rule that would give the watchdog oversight of tech giants such as Apple, Google and X, that offer digital payment apps and wallets has been killed off by the Senate and House of Representatives.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
21 minutes ago
- BBC News
The fallout from Trump's war on Harvard will outlast his term
Donald Trump has had a busy seven days. On Monday, he threatened to redirect $3bn in Harvard research funding to vocational schools. On Tuesday, the White House sent a letter to federal agencies, instructing them to review the approximately $100m in contracts the government has awarded Harvard and "find alternative vendors" where possible. On Wednesday, he had more to say on the matter still."Harvard's got to behave themselves," he told reporters gathered in the Oval Office. "Harvard is treating our country with great disrespect, and all they're doing is getting in deeper and deeper and deeper."When combined with other administration attempts – freezing more than $3bn in research grants and suspending foreign students from enrolling in Harvard – Trump's directives represent a frontal attack on one of America's most prestigious, and wealthy, institutions of higher education. Even if court challenges overrule some of these actions – some have already been put on hold – the impact is being felt across the landscape of American higher education."They're doing multiple things every single day, some of those things are sneaking through," says Greg Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors. "But more importantly, they're changing the culture. They're changing people." At Harvard's commencement ceremonies on Thursday, students said there was a "palpable concern" on campus."People sort of knew Trump was trying some of these moves but [they were] shocked when it happens," admits one graduate, a British national who requested anonymity because he was concerned public comments could threaten his US work visa. "It feels like the nuclear option.""If this can happen to Harvard it can happen to any university in the country," he the repercussions of this apparent Harvard-Trump fight run far deeper than the management of a single Ivy League university. Could the measures Trump is taking mark, as some suggest, the latest, albeit most ambitious, step by conservatives to erode some of the traditional pillars of support for the Democratic Party?If that is the case, the campus has become a pivotal battle in shaping America's cultural and political landscape. Accusations of antisemitism and bias Trump and his administration have offered various explanations for their actions, including a perceived lack of conservatives among the ranks of Harvard's professors, along with suggestions of admitting too many foreign students and financial links to according to the White House, the most immediate cause has been the university's apparent failure to address antisemitism on campus, in the wake of anti-Israel protests at universities across the US since the start of the Gaza December 2023, three prominent university presidents - including the then-president of Harvard, Claudine Gay - struggled to answer whether calling for the "genocide of Jews" violated their student conduct codes on bullying and harassment, sparking a firestorm of Gay, who was asked the question at a congressional hearing about antisemitism on US college campuses, answered that it depended on the context. She later apologised, telling the student newspaper: "When words amplify distress and pain, I don't know how you could feel anything but regret." On the campaign trail last year, Trump promised to cut off federal funding and government accreditation for colleges that he said were engaging in "antisemitic propaganda". Once Trump returned to the White House in January, he began following through on universities - including Columbia, which saw some of the most high profile protests - agreed to sweeping changes in campus security rules and closer supervision of its Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies April, Harvard released the results of a university task force review (commissioned before Trump's election) of antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice on its own campus. It found that many Jewish and Muslim students faced bias, exclusion and alienation from the university curriculum and its the administration's demands go well beyond calls to address antisemitism. In a letter to the university, its "Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism" laid out a laundry list of changes that Harvard must make, including terminating diversity programmes, reforming admissions and hiring, screening foreign students for views hostile to "American values", and expanding and protecting "viewpoint diversity" among students and faculty. Trump's shock-and-awe strategy of rapid and aggressive pressure has stunned many in higher education, who never imagined the scope of the demands or the force behind them."It's not about higher education," argues Mr Wolfson. "Higher education is one of the levers they see as critical to transforming our society."But the potential for a long-term transformation could largely depend on whether the majority of American universities choose to accommodate the administration's demands - or whether it stands and fights, as Harvard is trying to do. An across-the-board war While Harvard has been the most prominent target of the administration's ire, and the most visible in its resistance, it is just one of many high-profile American universities that has received funding cuts or been subject of and the University of Pennsylvania have reported that the administration has suspended hundreds of millions of dollars in their research grants. The Department of Education has launched investigations of 10 universities for alleged antisemitism - and warned dozens of others that they could face similar inquiries. It is also investigating 52 universities for illegal race-based some, this all amounts to an across-the-board war on elite higher education by the Trump administration in an effort to reshape universities in a more conservative-friendly image. To others, this is no bad thing."Universities are not about the pursuit of knowledge, they're about the forceful pushing of a left-wing world view," Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative group Turning Point USA, said in a Fox News interview last month. "We're here to shake it up." Many on the right have long viewed American college campuses as hotbeds of liberal indoctrination, whether it has taken the form of left-wing anti-war radicalism in the 1960s, "political correctness" of the 1990s, Occupy Wall Street anti-capitalism of the 2000s or the Black Lives Matter movement and anti-Israel demonstrations in recent has illustrated a certain divide in beliefs between those who have and haven't attended college. In a recent survey by the polling company Civiqs, non-college graduates were split on the job Trump is doing in office, with 49% disapproving and 47% approving. College graduates, on the other hand, had a significantly different view, as 58% disapproved of Trump's performance in office versus only 38% who approved."I think a lot of this blowback is from the sense that they have become the universities of blue [Democratic] America, and that this is the consequence," says Rick Hess, senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Universities 'brought this on themselves' In recent years, according to Mr Hess, American higher education has become more closely tied to the government and more reliant on government funding. He says that the new Trump team has simply adopted levers of control over higher education employed by recent Democratic administrations – including civil rights investigations, federal anti-discrimination laws and control over funding."In classic Trump form," he added, "it's absolutely the case that these levers have been turned up to 11." And there are fewer procedural and legal safeguards than there were under the Joe Biden and Barack Obama presidencies."It's both an evolution and a revolution," says Mr it is one, he argues, that universities have brought on themselves by being overtly political during Trump's first term and making elite school the face of American higher education."The price for collecting billions a year in tax dollars is that institutions should both honour the promises they make, such as enforcing civil rights law, and hew to a mission in which they explicitly serve the whole nation," says Mr Hess. Withholding federal funding from universities may be a new challenge for higher education, but to some this is just the latest in a long effort by conservatives to undercut key traditional pillars of liberal a combination of legislation and court rules, the influence of labour unions – which had provided the Democratic Party with volunteer personnel and funds – had diminished long before Trump succeeded in winning over white working-class voters in his three presidential lawsuit reforms have also curtailed the vast sums that trial lawyers could contribute to Democratic coffers. And ongoing efforts to shrink the government workforce – which reached a peak with Elon Musk's Doge reductions – have eroded another traditionally Democratic Mr Wolfson fears that something greater could be lost if some of the Trump administration's measures are enforced."The fact that we have multiracial, multicultural, multinational universities is a boon to our universities," he says. "It creates really diverse communities, really diverse intellectual thought." How the Ivy Leagues fought back Harvard - perhaps best known for its renowned law school - has turned the courts into its principle tool to resist Trump's Thursday, a federal judge indefinitely suspended the administration's attempts to prohibit foreign students from receiving visas to attend the university has also sued to prevent the Trump administration from terminating more than $2.2bn in federal grants, although that case is pending."The trade-off put to Harvard and other universities is clear," Harvard wrote in its complaint filed with a Massachusetts federal court. "Allow the government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardise the institution's ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions." Harvard's president, Alan Garber, has also defended his university, saying that Harvard would be "firm" in its commitments to education and truth, during an interview with NPR."Harvard is a very old institution, much older than the country," he continued. "As long as there has been a United States of America, Harvard has thought that its role is to serve the nation."Trump, meanwhile, has shared strong words of his own. "Harvard wants to fight," he said on Wednesday. "They want to show how smart they are, and they're getting their ass kicked." Breaching the walls of the ivory tower Opinion polls show that Trump's political base supports his efforts, and the underlying message. Yet those same polls suggest a majority of the general population support American universities and don't approve of his proposed funding opinion aside, the practicality of achieving such a fundamental reordering of America's system of higher education, even with all the tools at the federal government's disposal, is a daunting to Mr Wolfson, however, repairing what he says is the damage being done to academic independence will be equally challenging. A growing number of members of the American Association of University Professors fear the consequences of expressing political views or conducting disfavoured research."The destruction is real," argues Mr Wolfson. "Even if the courts step in, there will still be a massive undermining of the higher education project in this country due to Trump's reckless, reckless moves."Mr Hess, who has pushed for conservative education reform for years, is less concerned. He believes that Trump's chaotic, scattershot approach - including last week's comments - could end up less effective than a more methodical restructuring of American universities."This is all an ambitious experiment," Mr Hess said. "Whether it's a strategy that's going to work is very much an open question."One thing seems clear, however. Even if American universities resist - or outlast - Trump's efforts, they are no longer insulated from the scorched-earth warfare of American politics. The walls of the ivory tower have been breached, regardless of whether one believes it is the barbarians - or liberators - at the image credit: Getty Images BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk savages 'idiot' Bono over 'lies' about DOGE on Joe Rogan
Elon Musk unleashed a storm of fury against U2 frontman Bono, branding the rock legend a 'liar' and an 'idiot' after the singer claimed Musk's proposed DOGE cuts to USAID have led to hundreds of thousands of deaths. Appearing on The Joe Rogan Experience on Friday, Bono, 65, whose real name is Paul David Hewson, criticized proposed funding reductions by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a federal body led by Musk that aims to streamline US agencies. The longtime humanitarian claimed the cuts to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) have already resulted in more than 300,000 deaths worldwide, including over 200,000 children suffering from malnutrition, malaria and pneumonia. 'It's not proven, but there is surveillance enough to suggest that 300,000 people have already died from just this cut off, this hard cut, of USAID,' Bono said. He alleged that mass layoffs have left tons of food, water and medical aid undelivered. 'There's food rotting in boats and warehouses,' Bono continued. 'There is 50,000 tons of food that are stored in Djibouti, South Africa, Dubai... that is rotting rather than going to Gaza or Sudan. Because the people who knew the codes for the warehouses [where the food is stored] were fired ... gone. What is that? That's not America, is it?' Musk, clearly incensed, took to X, formerly Twitter, to scorch the U2 frontman. 'He's such a liar/idiot. Zero people have died!' the billionaire Tesla and SpaceX CEO wrote in a now-viral post. But, he didn't stop there - Musk followed up with: 'Got a big one here @lfindRetards.' Later, he posted a clip from South Park titled 'Is Bono the Biggest Piece of Crap in the World?' with the caption 'Bono.' Bono cited a study by Boston University professor Brooke Nichols to support his claims, he also acknowledged concerns about downsizing government but warned that steep cuts to the aid agency are already having dire consequences. 'To destroy, to vandalize, it felt like with glee, that these life support systems were being pulled out of the walls,' Bono said before referencing a story published in Christianity Today. '[One worker said], "We don't have the funds, we have to choose which child to pull off the IVs." It just seems to me, I don't know if "evil" is too strong a word, but what we know about pure evil is that it rejoices in the deaths, in the squandering of human life - particularly children. It actually rejoices in it. And whether it's incompetence, whether it's unintended consequences, it's not too late for people.' Bono added that he raised the issue with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who he said is 'convinced people aren't dying yet.' Rogan, 57, then challenged Bono's position, describing USAID as a 'money-laundering operation' that has lost even a 'trillion' dollars with 'no oversight, no receipts.' While the organization has faced credible accusations of waste and fraud, such cases are believed to represent only a small portion of its $40 billion budget. Still, the Trump administration placed most USAID workers on leave in February after Musk declared it a 'criminal organization' and said it was 'time to die.' That said, Rogan acknowledged the humanitarian necessity of USAID's work. 'We help the world, and when you're talking about making wells for people in the Congo to get fresh water, when you're talking about food and medicine to places that don't have access - no way that should have been cut out. And that should have been clear before they make these radical cuts. There's got to be a way to keep aid and not have fraud.' Rogan also noted, 'The ironic thing is, even though Elon Musk has proposed all these things and the DOGE committee has proposed all these things, they've made no cuts in terms of the budget. They've cut nothing.' Musk and Rubio's insistence that 'zero people have died' may refer to the fact that the 300,000 figure is a projection, not a confirmed death toll. In the Christianity Today article Bono referenced, aid workers acknowledged recent cuts and warned that child deaths could soon follow. 'I do think we can expect to see increased mortality rates, increased infection, and increased despair if things aren't corrected,' one worker reportedly said. However, Nichols, the infectious disease expert who authored the projection, told The Times UK that tens of thousands likely have already died. 'Because I've been doing HIV [research] for so long, I just assumed that would be where the biggest impact would occur,' she said. 'But I was really shocked by the child deaths from diarrhea, pneumonia and malnutrition. Tens of thousands of children have died because we've pulled out our funding from diarrhea, pneumonia and food programs.' While there is debate about how many have already died, experts widely agree that the proposed 80 percent reduction in USAID's budget will be catastrophic if fully implemented or left unaddressed. Previously, Bill Gates also criticized Musk for the proposed cuts, telling The Financial Times, 'The picture of the world's richest man killing the world's poorest children is not a pretty one.' The controversy comes amid Musk stepping down from his official White House role and a New York Times report alleging that he took large quantities of ketamine and other drugs while overseeing DOGE. Musk has denied the claims, calling the report 'bs' and saying his packed schedule would make such behavior impossible. Also during the Friday podcast, Bono warned against the Trump administration's broader isolationist stance. 'I just want to remind Americans of the size of their country, and I'm not talking about the geography,' he said. 'The size of the idea, it's just an extraordinary thing. It's an idea big enough to fit the whole world, and when it becomes an island rather than a continent … when it shrinks, America seems to stop being America.'
Times
39 minutes ago
- Times
Who's most afraid of the working class? Labour
Act now to keep your subscription We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
