Both NAFCU and CUNA support the Consumer Financial ProtectionBureau's rule that would amend Regulation Z to allow nonworkingspouses easier access to a credit card.

However, the two trade associations differed over some detailsin their comment letters.

The proposed rule, issued in October 2012, would remove allreferences to an independent ability to pay requirement for creditcard applicants 21 years of age or older that was added to Reg Z bythe Federal Reserve after the CARD Act was passed in 2009. Thechange would make it easier for nonworking spouses and partners to obtain credit.

Tessema Tefferi, NAFCU senior regulatory affairs counsel, wrotein his comment letter that his trade strongly supports the proposedrule, calling it a “common sense change.”

“The CFPB should move swiftly to finalize this rule with animmediate effective date,” he said.

However, Tefferi added that NAFCU encourages the CFPB to alsoamend Reg Z's ability to repay rule for share-secured credit cards.Because the borrower's ability to repay is secured by assets, thereshould be no need for ability-to-repay analysis, he said.

CUNA also supports the proposed rule, but Assistant GeneralCounsel Luke Martone wrote in the trade's comment letter thatlenders could open themselves up to litigation when determiningwhether an applicant has a “reasonable expectation of access” to aworking spouse's income.

“We believe this could occur not only in instances where theissuer denies the applicant upon determining a lack of reasonableexpectation of access, but also in instances where the issuerdetermines such access exists yet denies the applicant based onother aspects of the issuer's underwriting process,” Martonewrote.

To remedy the potential problem, Martone suggested the CFPBgrant sole discretion to the card issuer in determining whether theapplicant has reasonable expectation of access to shared income,and whether to further extend credit to the consumer. Martone also asked the CFPB to further clarify what factors anissuer may consider when determining a reasonable expectation ofaccess.

CUNA also took issue with one of the CFPB's four examples ofwhen an applicant may or may not have reasonable expectation ofaccess to household income. The questionable example assumed anon-working applicant has no access to household income, but theincome is regularly used to pay the applicant's expenses.

“We believe it would be prohibitively difficult, if notimpossible, for smaller credit card issuers–including creditunions–to verify the fact pattern,” Martone wrote.

Martone also requested the CFPB clarify how reasonable accesswould apply to marriages in community property states, if a singleapplication form could be used for working and non-workingapplicants, and if the rule could be applied to nonworking spousesunder the age of 21.