CFPB Director Richard Cordray delivered a report to Congress on March 16, 2016, on the “state of the CFPB,” and some tough questions were raised and answered. Since the bureau's inception, NAFCU has worked tirelessly at every stage of the regulatory process to ensure credit union interests are represented in everything that it does.

For instance, NAFCU worked diligently to have the bureau issue small-creditor definition amendments that offer more flexibility for small entities to take advantage of benefits written into the ability-to-repay/qualified mortgage rule and others.

We also mobilized our efforts to have the bureau delay the effective date of the TILA-RESPA integrated mortgage disclosure rule implementation, granting credit unions some valuable time to incorporate the rule changes.

Additionally, NAFCU advocated for the suspension of the requirement to submit credit card agreements to the bureau while they create a streamlined and efficient submission mechanism.

When Congress passed the transportation funding bill in December 2015, which included NAFCU-sought regulatory relief, a statutory change produced an inconsistency between the language of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and Regulation P. NAFCU wrote the CFPB urging the bureau to weigh in on the controlling law regarding the annual privacy notice requirements. The bureau responded promptly to our request and issued an official statement that the newly adopted statutory language controlled, providing immediate regulatory relief to credit unions.

The most recent example of how this persistence can bear fruit is evidenced by the CFPB's handling of the TRID final rule. In May 2015, the bureau scheduled the fifth and final webinar on TRID titled, “Implementation Challenges and Questions.” Although the bureau had no plans to issue additional webinars or resources to assist financial institutions with implementing this costly and complex rule, NAFCU and the rest of the trades continued to take the case to the CFPB that more needed to be done. As a result, last month, the bureau issued a fact sheet on construction loans, and, just a few days ago, conducted a webinar on construction loan lending. Clearly, regulatory advocacy doesn't end when the final rule drops. These resources were provided as a direct response to advocacy efforts and included much needed answers to burning questions.

However, just like many times before, NAFCU has continued to stress to the bureau that more needs to be done. In the case of TRID, NAFCU has recently had positive discussions with the bureau regarding its willingness to address a number of compliance issues that have been identified post-implementation.

And we have not stopped there. We have written lawmakers on numerous occasions to impress upon them the need to exempt credit unions from the CFPB's rulemaking authority. And they responded. Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Steve Stivers, R-Ohio, garnered bipartisan support – 329 signatures – for a letter to CFPB Director Richard Cordray to exercise the bureau's authority in Section 10229(b)(3)(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act to adapt regulations by exempting “any class” of entity from its rulemakings.

Ultimately, we will continue to take credit unions' case to the CFPB and will not compromise on behalf of our members. The road to creating clarity and mitigating regulatory burden is a tough one, but NAFCU will continue to chip away until it succeeds.

Carrie Hunt

Executive Vice President of Government Affairs and General Counsel

NAFCU

Arlington, Va.

Instant Insights /

CFPB: Persistence With Purpose

Related Stories

Recommended For You