Connect with us

Personal Finance

What CFPB cuts could mean for consumers

Published

on

The entrance to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) headquarters is seen during a protest on Feb. 10, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Anna Moneymaker | Getty Images

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was one of the early targets of the Trump administration’s attempts to dramatically reduce government spending. The bureau’s work was first suspended in early February, and legal wrangling has continued since — which experts say has created an uncertain future for many CFPB efforts to protect consumers.  

A federal judge scheduled a two-day hearing, starting Tuesday, in a case about the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle the CFPB. In March, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson blocked the administration from firing 1,500 of the bureau’s 1,700 employees, and struck down a stop-work order targeting the bureau.

Recently released court records include declarations from CFPB staff stating that the firings will hobble the agency’s ability to carry out tasks including supervising banks, maintaining the consumer complaint database and providing oversight and enforcement of mortgage and credit fair lending laws. 

More from Your Money:

Here’s a look at more stories on how to manage, grow and protect your money for the years ahead.

The hearing aims to help determine how many employees the agency needs to fulfill what it is required to by law.

Mark Paoletta, acting chief legal officer of the CFPB, said in a court filing that the agency should be pared back to about a 200-person staff that can “fulfill its statutory duties and better aligns with the new leadership’s priorities and management philosophy.”

CFPB could be ‘a vastly different animal’ after cuts

The Trump administration’s attempts to hobble to CFPB have created uncertainty about the agency’s work for consumers and companies.

“The biggest challenge for innovators in financial services is the lack of clarity regarding the regulatory structures in which they have to abide and live,” said Phil Goldfeder, CEO of the American Fintech Council, a standards-based trade association.

The CFPB was created in the aftermath of the financial crisis to establish a single agency responsible for enforcing consumer protection laws. It took over the supervision of consumer products from other bank regulators.

Those won’t be picking up work the CFPB had been doing; it “just won’t be done, or will be done much less,” said Ian Katz, a managing director at Capital Alpha Partners, a policy research and political forecasting firm. 

Supporters of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rally after Acting Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Russell Vought told all of the agency’s staff to stay away from the office and do no work, outside the CFPB in Washington, U.S., Feb. 10, 2025. 

Craig Hudson | Reuters

In recent years, the CFPB has moved to cap bank overdraft fees, regulate payment apps and resolve consumer complaints. Now many of those efforts have been overturned or left in doubt. 

Under the Trump administration, the bureau has also been dropping lawsuits it previously filed. These include a case against National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts related to improper debt collection practices against private student loan borrowers, and a suit against Early Warning Services, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo over Zelle fraud.

“There is a risk that this could go badly,” said Katz. “It’s not like they’re taking a 20% cut of the personnel or a 15% and people say, ‘Well, we might lose a few things here and there, but basically, we’ll be okay.’ It will be a vastly different animal and I think there’s no avoiding that.”

The CFPB did not respond to requests for comment.

Here’s what experts expect could happen with some CFPB rules and programs.

Cap on bank overdraft fees

Bank overdraft fee caps were scheduled to go into effect in October 2025, but Congress is now in the process of overturning the rule. Analysts expect banks to compete on keeping fees low. “I don’t think they’re going to immediately rush to raise them because of that competitive aspect,” said Katz.

Payment app regulations

CFPB expands oversight of digital payments services: Here's what you need to know

The CFPB had also moved to require that nonbank firms offering financial services like payments and wallet apps follow the same regulations as banks. That is no longer going to happen — lawmakers voted to overturn the rule and President Donald Trump has indicated he will sign it.

As a result, “some payment apps are going to be supervised, and other ones won’t,” said Adam Rust, director of financial services for the Consumer Federation of America. 

Zelle, which is a bank product, will still fall under bank regulations, he said, but fintech firms such as Paypal, Venmo and Block’s Cash App, will be “be able to evade that” oversight.

Consumer complaint database

It’s also unclear how effective the CFPB will be at resolving consumer conflicts. The CFPB is required by law to maintain a database of the consumer complaints and receives an estimated 25,000 complaints each week.

In 2023, the CFPB received more than 1.6 million consumer complaints, according to its annual report.

The complaints are shared with the companies for a response, but consumer advocates worry without strong enforcement behind it, the database will lose its effectiveness.

“If there is a complaint and it’s received, that doesn’t mean that there will be a response, it will just potentially sit there in the queue,” Rust said. “So if you’re a consumer, you thought you did what you should, to seek someone to help find a remedy. But in fact, nothing’s happening.”

State attorneys general from 23 states have come out against the administration’s efforts to defund the bureau. In a court filing in February, they said that referrals of consumer complaints to the CFPB have been left in limbo, communications about enforcement investigations are lacking and direct inquires from the AG offices to the agency have gone unanswered. 

SIGN UP: Money 101 is an 8-week learning course on financial freedom, delivered weekly to your inbox. Sign up here. It is also available in Spanish.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Personal Finance

What Medicaid, SNAP cuts in House Republican bill mean for benefits

Published

on

A “Save Medicaid” sign is affixed to the podium for the House Democrats’ press event to oppose the Republicans’ budget on the House steps of the Capitol on Tuesday, February 25, 2024. 

Bill Clark | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday includes historic spending cuts to Medicaid health coverage and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Now, it is up to the Senate to consider the changes — and to perhaps propose its own.

As it stands, the legislation — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — would slash Medicaid spending by roughly $700 billion and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, by about $300 billion.

“Bottom line is, a lot of people will lose benefits, including people who are entitled to these benefits and who are not the target population of this bill,” said Jennifer Wagner, director of Medicaid eligibility enrollment at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

More from Personal Finance:
How the House Republican tax bill favors the rich
Tax bill includes $1,000 baby bonus in ‘Trump Accounts’
Food stamps face ‘biggest cut in the program’s history’

The cuts to Medicaid and SNAP — the largest in the programs’ histories — come as the reconciliation bill would add roughly $3 trillion to the nation’s debt including interest over the next decade, estimates the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

To help pay for a variety of tax perks included in the bill, House Republicans have targeted Medicaid and SNAP for savings.

“We don’t want any waste, fraud or abuse,” President Donald Trump said Tuesday on Newsmax when asked about prospective Medicaid changes. “Other than that, we’re leaving it.”

Likewise, some Republican leaders have pointed to rooting out abuse of SNAP benefits.

One way House Republicans are seeking to curb the programs’ spending is through new work requirements.

New Medicaid work requirements to get earlier date

Under the House proposal, new Medicaid work requirements will apply to people who are covered through the Affordable Care Act expansion. To be eligible, those individuals will need to participate in qualifying activities for at least 80 hours per month unless they can prove they have an approved exemption, according to Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of KFF’s Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured.

In last-minute negotiations, House Republicans moved the date for implementing those work requirements to no later than Dec. 31, 2026, up from a previously proposed effective date of Jan. 1, 2029 — around two years earlier than the original version, CBPP’s Wagner noted.

Notably, it also gives states permission to start implementing the work requirements earlier than that date.

“On the Medicaid side, the work requirement is arguably the harshest provision,” Wagner said. “It will lead to the greatest cuts of enrollment in Medicaid.”

Rep. Chip Roy on House tax bill: Hope the Senate addresses issues around deficit and Medicaid

The new accelerated timeline also doesn’t allow time for rulemaking, a process by which the public can submit comments, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may respond to those submissions, Wagner noted. Instead, the legislative proposal calls for guidance to be issued by the end of 2025, which she said is a “big deal” because it eliminates the opportunity for adjustments to be made in response to public comments.

Moving up the effective date also limits the ability to conduct public outreach to notify individuals of the coming changes, said Tolbert of KFF. States will also have less time to adjust their systems to track whether individuals are working the required number of hours or engaging in other necessary activities, she said.

CMS Administrator Dr. Oz: Major goal in Medicaid is to align the federal government with the states

Within the work requirements, the House also moved to limit the discretion to determine other medical conditions that may make someone exempt that had been in the original version, Wagner said.

Notably, the proposal also calls for states to conduct more frequent eligibility redeterminations for adults who are eligible for Medicaid through Affordable Care Act expansions. Starting Dec. 31, 2026, states will be required to conduct redeterminations every six months, compared to current requirements that require eligibility reviews within 12 months of changes in a beneficiary’s circumstances, according to KFF.

The increased frequency of the redeterminations are “likely to have a big impact,” Tolbert said.

Ultimately, the work requirements may make it difficult for people to access the health coverage they need, she said.

“What this may end up doing is having the opposite of the intended effect,” Tolbert said. “They may lose access to the very treatments and services that are enabling them to work.”

SNAP work requirements would be expanded

Under the House Republican bill, work requirements would also be expanded for SNAP benefits.

Individuals ages 18 to 54 who have no dependents and are able to work are already face SNAP benefit limitations based on 80-hour per month work requirements.

The proposal would extend those requirements to individuals ages 55 to 64, as well as households with children, unless they are under age seven. In addition, states would also be limited in the flexibility they may provide with waivers of the work requirements or discretionary exemptions, according to the Urban Institute.

In addition, federal funding cuts would make it so states would have to contribute more toward benefits and administration of the program.

Ultimately, those changes could take away food assistance for millions, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

‘Big beautiful’ tax bill skipped ACA credits: How it affects insurance

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) (R) talks with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) while attend an event to mark the 14 anniversary of the passage of the Affordable Care Act at the U.S. Capitol on March 21, 2024 in Washington, DC. 

Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package House Republican passed on Thursday contains a multitude of changes that may affect consumers’ finances.

But the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” is missing something health care advocates hoped to see: an extension of the premium tax credits under the enhanced Affordable Care Act that are set to expire at the end of the year. The credits’ absence is notable when the bill includes other proposed changes to the ACA marketplace, experts say.

The ACA’s enhanced premium credits help make health insurance policies through the marketplace more affordable. Eligible applicants can use the credit to lower insurance premium costs upfront or claim the tax break when filing their return. 

Instead of a lower-income person paying 2% of their income on their premium, they pay nothing, according to KFF. Higher income people, who were originally ineligible for credits, currently pay no more than 8.5% of their income on their premium.

More from Personal Finance:
House Republican budget bill boosts maximum child tax credit to $2,500
What the House GOP budget bill means for your money
Judge orders Trump administration to reinstate Education Department employees

Without the extension, nearly all subsidized ACA enrollees can expect their monthly premiums to rise, said Cynthia Cox, vice president and director of the program on the ACA at KFF.

For example, a family of four making $85,000 would have to pay an additional $313 in premiums for coverage in 2026 and face a $900 increase in their out-of-pocket maximum, according to an April report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

“Pretty much everyone, almost everybody who’s buying their own health insurance, now would see their costs go up,” Cox said.

Here’s what to know if you buy health insurance through the federal marketplace.

Tax credits boosted ACA marketplace enrollment

The extended subsidies were passed via the American Rescue Plan Act during the pandemic, and covered plans in 2021 and 2022. The Inflation Reduction Act extended the benefit until the end of 2025. 

The premium tax credits made health insurance purchased through the marketplace much more attractive and affordable for people, Cox said.

Since the extended tax credits have been in place, the enrollment in ACA marketplace grew from 12 million in 2021 to a record 24.2 million in 2025, according to a February report by the Commonwealth Fund. 

But if the benefits expire, “we’re basically back to the same Affordable Care Act that existed the last time Trump was president,” Cox said. 

Some consumers may lose eligibility

If premium tax credits aren’t extended, some people may see their costs rise high enough that they can’t afford coverage. Under the original version of the ACA, middle-income households were often priced out of the health care subsidies.

Latinos drive 'Affordable Care Act' marketplace enrollment

If we go back to earlier thresholds, those who earn more than four times the federal poverty level — $62,000 for an individual or $128,600 for a family of four with 2026 coverage — would lose eligibility for subsidies and would have to pay the full cost for their health plans, according to KFF.

Researchers at KFF anticipate that between the potential lapse of the credits coupled with the proposals, enrollment could shrink by one-third, leaving about 8 million uninsured in the U.S.

One change that is in the House GOP tax bill would make both the share of income that people pay for premiums after tax credits and the maximum out-of-pocket limit 4.5% higher in 2026 than they would have been without the rule, according to Gideon Lukens, senior fellow at the CBPP. He wrote a report in April about the ACA changes in the House proposal and the absence of the premium tax credits.

‘An issue of contention’

The premium tax benefits have been “an issue of contention” among lawmakers as Republicans have not indicated an interest in extending the enhanced premium credits any further, said Jonathan Burks, executive vice president of economic and health policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Yet, there have been at least two GOP senators that are interested in extending the credits, KFF’s Cox said.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has said she supports extending the enhanced subsidies to help people afford premiums. “I think we’re going to need to continue these premium tax credits,” Murkowski said in an interview with the Alaska Beacon in January. 

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., also expressed interest in extending the premiums in an interview with AxiosPro in March.

Neither Murkowski nor Tillis responded to CNBC for comment.

It’s possible that the ACA premium tax credits could be addressed in a different piece of legislation later in the year, Cox said.

“But at least right now, that’s not in this bill that’s being debated right now,” she said.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Harvard, Trump battle over international enrollment; students scramble

Published

on

Education Secretary Linda McMahon to Harvard: Obey the law and you can be eligible for funding

Immediately after the Trump administration blocked Harvard University on Thursday from enrolling future international students and retaining currently enrolled foreign students, some members of next year’s freshman class started scrambling.

“I was on the phone with a parent who was visibly shaken and completely frantic,” said Christopher Rim, president and CEO of college consulting firm Command Education.

Rim, who works with a large share of international students from abroad, said a few of his clients were accepted into the Class of 2029 and committed to Harvard on May 1, also known as National College Decision Day, which was just three weeks ago.

Now, they don’t know what to do.

“This is a major moment in these students’ lives,” Rim said. “Given the circumstances and policies and laws that we have right now, we are advising these families to look into taking a gap year — hopefully by then, the Trump administration and Harvard can come to an agreement.”

An escalating legal battle

On Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security terminated Harvard’s student and exchange visitor program certification, therefore blocking foreign students from enrolling and forcing existing foreign students to transfer or lose their legal status.

Harvard sued the Trump administration on Friday, asking a federal judge to reverse the ban on international students.

International students accounted for 27% of Harvard’s total enrollment in the 2024-25 academic year. That’s up from 20% during 2006-07.

More from Personal Finance:
Wage garnishment for defaulted student loans to begin
What loan forgiveness opportunities remain under Trump
Is college still worth it? It is for most, but not all

The latest move came amid an escalating standoff between the government and the Ivy League school after Harvard refused to meet a set of demands issued by the Trump administration’s Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism.

“It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their multibillion-dollar endowments,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement Thursday.

In a statement on Friday, Harvard called Thursday’s action “unlawful and unwarranted.”

“It imperils the futures of thousands of students and scholars across Harvard and serves as a warning to countless others at colleges and universities throughout the country who have come to America to pursue their education and fulfill their dreams,” Harvard said.

Colleges rely on international enrollment

“It’s a shock,” said Hafeez Lakhani, founder and president of Lakhani Coaching in New York. 

“At a time when international applications — and international yield — are under pressure, this sends a signal to the rest of the world that not only is Harvard closed to the international best and brightest, but that the U.S. is not a welcome place for international students,” Lakhani said.

International enrollment is an important source of revenue for schools, which is why colleges tend to rely on a contingent of foreign students, who typically pay full tuition.

Altogether, international student enrollment contributed $43.8 billion to the U.S. economy in 2023-24, according to a report by NAFSA: Association of International Educators.

During that academic year, there were more than 1.1 million international undergraduate and graduate students in the U.S., mostly from India and China, making up slightly less than 6% of the total U.S. higher education population, according to the latest Open Doors data, released by the U.S. Department of State and the Institute of International Education.

In the 2023-24 academic year, the U.S. hosted a record number of students from abroad, marking a 7% increase from the previous year. 

Next steps for Harvard students in limbo

FILE PHOTO: People walk on the Business School campus of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S., April 15, 2025.

Faith Ninivaggi | Reuters

The Trump administration’s move puts Harvard international students in a “limbo state,” said Mark Kantrowitz, a higher education expert.

His advice to admitted or enrolled international students: Start exploring your options but don’t make any sudden moves until you hear from the university.

“Harvard is going to be scrambling to deal with this, and they will issue guidance to admitted students and the enrolled students,” Kantrowitz said.

In its statement, Harvard called international students and scholars “vital members of our community.”

“We will support you as we do our utmost to ensure that Harvard remains open to the world,” it said.

Kantrowitz doesn’t expect the Trump administration to prevail in Harvard’s lawsuit, though of course it’s a possibility, he said. Transferring to another U.S. school may have its own risks.

“I’ve heard from [Harvard] students who are seeking to transfer,” Kantrowitz said. “But that might be jumping from the frying pan into fire. These other colleges could be targeted soon enough.”

It may also be difficult for Harvard’s incoming freshman class to transfer to another university, Kantrowitz said. Many institutions may already be at full enrollment for the coming academic year, he said.

There are currently more than 300 U.S. schools still accepting applications for prospective first-year and transfer students for the upcoming fall term, according to the National Association for College Admission Counseling.

Harvard students who require financial aid may have a tougher time transferring, depending on the university, compared to those who don’t need assistance, Kantrowitz said.

That’s because many schools use “need sensitive” or “need aware” admissions for international students, Kantrowitz said. That means they consider the student’s financial need when choosing whether to accept the student.

Already, some of Lakhani’s college-bound clients have started considering schools outside the U.S., fueled by fear about rapid policy changes, he said.

Indeed, some schools overseas are trying to woo Harvard’s international students in light of the Trump administration’s recent maneuver. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, for example, issued an “open invitation” to Harvard students on Friday to continue their education there, to “pursue their educational goals without disruption.”

“This sends a clear signal for the best and brightest to look elsewhere — including other countries — to thrive intellectually,” Lakhani said.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Continue Reading

Trending