Advertise on podcast: Consumer Finance Monitor

New Jersey is signaling a more aggressive approach to the regulation of so-called "junk fees." In a recent enforcement statement issued by the New Jersey Attorney General and the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs, state regulators outlined how they intend to use the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act to address business practices involving fees that they consider deceptive, unconscionable, or abusive. The enforcement statement was issued in conjunction with Governor Mikie Sherrill's Executive Order No. 19, which directed state agencies to review and recommend measures to eliminate or reduce junk fees across a broad range of industries. Although the enforcement statement does not create new legal obligations, it provides important insight into how New Jersey regulators intend to interpret and enforce existing law. Businesses operating in New Jersey should pay close attention. To explore the enforcement statement and its potential implications, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group) was joined on the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast by Beverly Brown Ruggia, Financial Justice Program Director at New Jersey Citizen Action (NJCA). NJCA is a statewide grassroots nonprofit organization focused on social, economic, and racial justice. Beverly has long been involved in consumer financial protection advocacy, including efforts to strengthen the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and participated in providing input into the development of New Jersey's enforcement statement. Alan and Beverly's discussion examined the meaning of junk fees, the distinction between permissible fees and potentially unlawful charges, and how the New Jersey initiative could affect businesses in the consumer financial services industry. Key Points Discussed:  What constitutes a junk fee? Earned wage access and overdraft fees Credit card late fees and the limits of disclosure All-in pricing and mandatory versus optional charges Payday lending and buy now, pay later What does the New Jersey initiative mean for businesses? Alan's conversation with Beverly was particularly useful because it explored both the consumer advocates' perspective and some of the difficult legal and practical questions raised by New Jersey's initiative. Alan and Beverly did not agree on every aspect of what should qualify as a junk fee, and Alan pressed Beverly on several issues where he believes the distinction between an unlawful fee and a junk fee matters. Those differences make the discussion especially worthwhile for financial institutions, nonbank financial services companies, and their counsel. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In this week's episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, our host, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, practice group leader for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group) is joined by two leading commercial law scholars, Christopher Odinet, Professor at Texas A&M University School of Law, and Andrea Tosato, Professor at SMU Dedman School of Law. Chris and Andrea are the co-authors of the recently published book Digital Commercial Law: Private Law in the Age of Tokens, Platforms, and Automation, which examines how traditional commercial law principles apply to digital assets and why those principles remain indispensable in an increasingly digital economy. The book makes a compelling case that the emphasis on public law regulation, while understandable, has obscured fundamental questions of private law. As Andrea explains during our discussion, private law governs the relationships among individuals and businesses, including their contractual obligations, property rights, and rights against third parties. These rules operate alongside financial regulation, not in opposition to it. Without a sound private law foundation, regulatory requirements alone cannot provide the legal certainty that digital financial markets need. Key Topics Discussed:  Property Rights Versus Contractual Rights Digital Asset Custody and Bankruptcy Risk Stablecoins and the GENIUS Act Tokenization and Secured Transactions The CLARITY Act and the Future of Digital Commercial Law The central takeaway from the conversation is straightforward: Digital finance cannot operate on regulation and technology alone. Clear rules governing property, contracts, custody, secured lending, and insolvency are essential to determining who owns digital assets, what rights attach to them, and who bears the risk when things go wrong. The book, Digital Commercial Law: Private Law in the Age of Tokens, Platforms, and Automation, is available on AMAZON. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The consumer reporting system is undergoing rapid change, raising important questions for financial institutions, consumer reporting agencies, data furnishers, and consumers. In this week's episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, our host Alan Kaplinsky (founder, former practice group leader for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group) is joined by Dan Smith, President and CEO of the Consumer Data Industry Association (CDIA), and Adam Maarec, a member of our Consumer Financial Services Group, for an in-depth discussion of the legal, regulatory, and technological developments reshaping the consumer reporting ecosystem. Key Topics Discussed:  The broad reach of consumer reporting, including its role in underwriting, tenant and employment screening, fraud prevention, identity verification, and other activities that affect consumers' everyday lives. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the obligations of consumer reporting agencies and data furnishers to maintain accurate information and investigate consumer disputes. The effects of the growing use of artificial intelligence The CFPB's recent changes to its consumer complaint portal The distinction between the FCRA's formal dispute process and complaints submitted to the CFPB The expanding role of alternative data in credit underwriting Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act Regulatory outlook for the consumer reporting industry This episode offers a timely and practical examination of an industry in transition. For financial institutions, fintech companies, consumer reporting agencies, data furnishers, and their counsel, understanding these developments is increasingly important to navigating compliance obligations, evaluating emerging underwriting tools, and preparing for the next generation of consumer reporting. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The Supreme Court's June 29, 2026 decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook raise fundamental questions about presidential power, the independence of federal agencies, and the constitutional structure of the administrative state. Although both cases involved the President's authority to remove federal officials, the Court's decisions appear to point in different directions. In our latest Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, our host, Alan Kaplinsky (founder and former practice group leader for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Financial Services Group) discuss these decisions and their potentially far-reaching implications with Professor Lev Menand of Columbia Law School, one of the country's leading scholars on administrative law, constitutional structure, financial regulation, and the Federal Reserve System. In our discussion, Professor Menand questions the historical analogy between those early banks and the modern Federal Reserve Board, emphasizing the distinction between a bank (which is what the First and Second Banks of the United States were) and a government agency that regulates banks (which is a significant part of what the Federal Reserve Board does.) We explore whether Cook establishes a meaningful exception to Slaughter, how far that exception might extend, and whether other financial regulators, including the FDIC, might be able to invoke similar arguments to preserve their independence. The conversation also examines several other important issues: The future of independent agencies The Federal Reserve's constitutional status Justice Gorsuch's nondelegation concerns Potential responses by Congress and the courts What lies ahead for financial services regulation The discussion concludes with Professor Menand's assessment of where the law may be headed over the next five years and why the long-term consequences of these decisions remain difficult to predict. Listen to our latest Consumer Finance Monitor podcast for an in-depth discussion of these consequential decisions and their implications for the future of the administrative state and federal financial regulation. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry. Postscript: Trump Establishes Committee to Reconsider Lisa Cook's Removal Since recording this podcast, President Trump has announced a new effort to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. On October 7, Trump established a three-member committee of inquiry to investigate allegations that Cook made false statements in connection with mortgage documents and to recommend whether there is "cause" for her removal under the Federal Reserve Act. The committee consists of Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council; Keith Sonderling, acting director of the Office of Government Ethics; and Andrea Lucas, chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  The committee is scheduled to hold a closed, transcribed hearing at the White House on November 5, at which Cook may respond to the allegations and present evidence and arguments through counsel. It must provide written findings and a recommendation to Trump after receiving any post-hearing submission from Cook, due November 10. The initiative follows the Supreme Court's June decision leaving in place an injunction against Cook's removal while litigation proceeds, with the Court emphasizing the need to provide her notice of the allegations and an opportunity to respond. Cook's attorneys have questioned whether the new process will be impartial, pointing to Trump's repeated statements that he has already decided to fire her. The committee's proceedings could therefore provide an important test of the procedural requirements governing a President's authority to remove a Federal Reserve governor for cause.

Artificial intelligence is increasingly changing single‑plaintiff consumer litigation, particularly by enabling pro se plaintiffs to file longer, more citation‑dense complaints more quickly, while simultaneously giving defense counsel tools to assess cases, identify weaknesses, and pursue early resolution or dismissal strategies. In the first episode of this series focusing on consumer financial services litigation, Joseph Schuster and Matthew Morr, partners at Ballard Spahr in our Consumer Financial Services Group, discuss both the tactical opportunities and the professional responsibility/ethics risks created by AI use in litigation. Key Topics Discussed: AI is driving higher volume and "more complete" pro se complaints: Complaints that were once handwritten and sparse are now often lengthy, AI‑generated filings that may include irrelevant material but appear more sophisticated Defense "jujitsu" strategy: attack AI tell‑tales early: A key defense tactic is verifying whether pro se plaintiffs' case citations are real and accurately stated; phantom or mischaracterized citations can support motions to strike, motions to dismiss, or requests for sanctions/show cause AI enables faster defense-side case assessment: Defense teams use AI for first‑pass complaint analysis, chronology building, allegation‑by‑allegation factual mapping, claim‑element matrices, missing record identification, and surfacing potential defenses Professional responsibility remains with counsel despite AI assistance: The transcript stresses that lawyers must verify both law and facts produced with AI, with courts criticizing parties who submit (or fail to flag) phantom cases and incorrect standards Privilege/work product issues are unsettled and fact‑dependent: The speakers describe an emerging debate about whether AI interactions are protected work product, including a Colorado ruling extending Rule 26 work product to AI‑assisted work and (in some circumstances) to pro se litigants, while also noting arguments that public generative AI use may waive confidentiality Concern about non-lawyers using AI as "agents": The transcript flags potential unauthorized practice of law where non‑lawyer companies use AI to negotiate or litigate on behalf of individuals, with anticipated defense efforts to investigate and challenge such conduct Overall, the conversation frames AI as both an equalizer for pro se litigants and a tool for defendants to more efficiently evaluate, rebut, and resolve claims where appropriate, while emphasizing that accuracy, diligence, and evolving privilege/ethics rules remain central litigation risks.

In the episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast released today, the host of the show, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, former leader for 25 years, and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial  Services Group) spoke with James Fallows Tierney, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Associate Professor of Law at Chicago-Kent College of Law, about his working paper, "The Value of Class Action Waivers: Evidence from Invalidation of the CFPB Arbitration Rule." Professor Tierney's research focuses on the intersection of law, financial markets and consumer finance.  His study uses financial-market data to examine how investors reacted to developments affecting the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements containing class action waivers. Key Points Discussed: ·                 An Eight-Year Project ·                 Letting the Market "Speak" ·                 What Did the Study Find? ·                 What About Consumers? ·                 Important Limitations ·                 A Different Way of Looking at an Old Debate Listen to the full Consumer Finance Monitor podcast with Professor James Fallows Tierney to hear our discussion of his methodology, the 11 events examined in the study, the stock-market reaction to Congress's repeal of the CFPB arbitration rule, the study's limitations, and where this research could go next. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The SpaceX IPO generated enormous attention for obvious reasons. It was the largest IPO in history, and the company's stock price initially surged after trading began. But an important legal development associated with the IPO has received considerably less attention: SpaceX adopted an unusually comprehensive shareholder dispute-resolution regime (the "Regime") in its bylaws. In our Consumer Finance Monitor podcast released today, our host, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, former leader for 25 years, and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group) spoke with Professor Mohsen Manesh of the University of Oregon School of Law about the Regime and the significant legal questions it raised.  Manesh is an authority on corporate, contract, and LLC law and has written extensively about arbitration provisions in corporate charters and bylaws. This was his second appearance on our podcast to discuss shareholder arbitration and the SEC's changing position on the subject. Key Topics Discussed: ·                 Why the SpaceX provisions are notable ·                 How the SpaceX dispute-resolution regime works ·                 The distinction under the federal securities laws ·                 The importance of the class action waiver ·                 The distinction between the two waivers ·                 Shareholder consent ·                 Broader competition between Delaware and Texas for corporate charters ·                 Professor Manesh's theory for why the FAA may not preempt Delaware's restrictions As Professor Manesh and I discussed, SpaceX's Regime is about much more than arbitration. It presents a novel test of the intersection between corporate law, federal arbitration policy, federal securities law, forum selection, and class action practice. The litigation that eventually tests these provisions could shape the development of shareholder dispute resolution for years to come. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In our Consumer Finance Monitor podcast show being released today, our special guest John McNamara, Chief Growth Officer at Avtal (a fintech and software as a service (SAS) company that provides an AI-powered, white-labeled digital engagement platform to help third-party consumer debt collection agencies automate communication and process self-service payments) and a former CFPB senior official who played a significant role in developing Regulation F promulgated under the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act explained that the debt collection industry needs to distinguish genuine AI applications from the marketing hype surrounding the technology. He also emphasized that the use of AI must be accompanied by careful attention to data governance, explainability, consumer protection, and human oversight. Our show is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, founder and former leader for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group. Key Topics Discussed: ·                 Where AI is being used in debt collection ·                 Consumer-facing AI presents greater risks ·                 AI can also improve consumer outcomes ·                 Data governance may be the most important issue ·                 The "black box" problem ·                 Hallucinations and the importance of a human in the loop ·                 Vendor management remains critical ·                 AI may become infrastructure rather than a separate technology The central lesson from McNamara's discussion is that responsible deployment should begin with the use case rather than the technology. Companies should ask what they are trying to accomplish, what data is actually necessary, what legal authority they have to use that data, whether the system's output can be understood and defended, and where human oversight is required. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast we are releasing today, Alan Kaplinsky, founder and former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group, spoke with Professor Mark Bartholomew of the University at Buffalo School of Law, co-author with Professor Samuel Becher of "The End of Shopping," a forthcoming article in the William & Mary Law Review. The article explores how autonomous shopping agents could transform consumer commerce and raises fundamental questions concerning consumer autonomy, privacy, competition and consumer protection. The implications for financial services are especially significant. Consumers could use AI agents to select credit cards, auto loans, mortgages, insurance policies, bank accounts, certificates of deposit and investment products. An agent potentially could compare thousands of offerings in seconds and execute a transaction that a consumer might otherwise never undertake because of the time and complexity involved. For banks, lenders, insurers, credit-card issuers and investment firms, agentic AI could reduce customer-acquisition costs, increase switching and intensify competition. But it also could make technology companies the principal gatekeepers between financial institutions and their customers. The company controlling the agent could determine which products consumers see, how those products are compared and whether a particular provider receives the consumer's business. Agentic AI also presents difficult legal and policy questions. Who is responsible when an AI agent makes a mistake? What happens when an agent has a financial incentive to steer a consumer toward a particular provider? Are existing disclosure, fair-lending, privacy, advertising and investor-protection rules adequate when the "consumer" making the initial decision is effectively an algorithm? Key Topics Discussed: ·                 Why Financial Services May Be an Especially Attractive Use Case ·                 Implications for Banks, Lenders, Insurers and Investment Firms ·                 Who Is Making the Decision? ·                 Conflicts of Interest and Self-Dealing ·                 Consumer Protection Law May Have to Change ·                 Fair Lending, Insurance and Investment Concerns ·                 The Need for Guardrails ·                 Competition and Data Portability ·                 Privacy and Cybersecurity Risks Will Increase ·                 What Should Financial Institutions Do Now? ·                 Do We Need a New AI Regulator? ·                 Don't Lock in the Wrong Rules ·                 What Does the Future Hold? Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The future of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) has rarely been more uncertain. Since its creation, the CFPB has been at the center of intense political and policy debate, with its priorities changing dramatically as administrations change. The events of the past year or so under the leadership of Acting Directors chosen by President Trump, however, have taken that policy whiplash to a new level. In our latest Consumer Finance Monitor podcast released today, Alan Kaplinsky (the founder and former leader for 25 years of the Consumer Financial Services Group at our firm) was joined by two former CFPB officials with decades of experience inside the Bureau: Jason Brown, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and former CFPB Assistant Director for Research, and David Silberman, former Acting Deputy Director and longtime Associate Director for Research, Markets and Regulation. We discussed their recent Brookings commentary, "The CFPB: Where to Go From Here," which proposes a series of structural reforms designed to make the Bureau a more stable and effective financial regulator. Their recommendations are noteworthy not because they seek to preserve every aspect of the CFPB as it has operated in the past. Rather, they focus on a more fundamental question: How can the CFPB carry out its statutory mission while allowing presidential administrations to pursue different policy agendas without repeatedly dismantling and rebuilding the agency? Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

National bank preemption is headed toward another Supreme Court showdown. The Second Circuit has held that New York's mortgage escrow-interest requirement is preempted, directly conflicting with the First Circuit's decision upholding a comparable Rhode Island requirement and the Ninth Circuit's decision allowing a similar California law to remain in effect. The OCC has sided with the Second Circuit, issuing final preemption regulations concluding that state laws requiring national banks to pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts are preempted. In the latest episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast released today, Alan Kaplinsky (founder and former chair for 25 years, and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group) is joined by Professor Emeritus Arthur Wilmarth of George Washington University Law School to discuss the Second Circuit's post-remand decision in Cantero v. Bank of America, the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in the case, the conflicting decisions in Conti v. Citizens Bank in the First Circuit and Kivett v. Flagstar Bank in the Ninth Circuit and the OCC's The immediate dispute is whether national banks must pay interest on residential mortgage escrow accounts under state law. The broader question is whether state consumer financial laws (other than state usury laws) may regulate national banks and, if so, when those laws are preempted by the National Bank Act. With certiorari petitions pending in Cantero and Kivett, further proceedings in Conti potentially bringing that case back before the Supreme Court, and the OCC's regulations now under challenge by ten state attorneys general, the circuit split and the OCC's intervention make another Supreme Court review increasingly likely. Our podcast with Professor Wilmarth explores these issues in depth and provides an important perspective on what could become one of the most significant national bank preemption disputes in years. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

Disclosure has long been one of the principal tools of consumer protection. The basic premise seems straightforward: if consumers are given better information about the terms of a transaction, they should be able to make better-informed decisions. But what if better disclosure works differently for different consumers? And what if a disclosure that improves decision-making overall can, in some circumstances, actually worsen outcomes for financially vulnerable consumers? Those are among the important and provocative questions explored in the latest episode released today of the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast, hosted by Alan Kaplinsky (founder and former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at our firm) Alan's guest is Professor Florencia Marotta-Wurgler of NYU School of Law, a leading scholar of consumer law, behavioral law and economics. We discuss her new article, "The Distributional Costs of Effective Consumer Regulation," co-authored with Tamar Kricheli-Katz.  The article is available for free on SSRN. The article challenges the conventional way regulators and academics have evaluated consumer disclosures. Rather than simply asking whether disclosure "works," the authors ask a more nuanced question: for whom does it work, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Key Topics Discussed Include: ·                 Better disclosure can reduce mistakes, but not necessarily for everyone in the same way ·                 When salience changes the trade-off ·                 The implications for regulators ·                 What does this mean for behavioral regulation? ·                 A broader lesson about disclosure Professor Marotta-Wurgler's research is particularly compelling because it challenges the assumption that making information more effective is necessarily an unqualified good. Sometimes, a disclosure may not merely inform consumers. It may change what they focus on, how they perceive trade-offs and ultimately what choices they make. That is a lesson regulators, policymakers and industry participants should keep in mind as they design the next generation of consumer protection disclosure rules. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In the latest episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast that we are releasing today, we explore a topic that is becoming increasingly important for financial services companies and virtually every other business operating in today's digital economy: how privacy, cybersecurity, and AI governance can be transformed from compliance obligations into sources of customer confidence, resilience, and competitive advantage. Alan Kaplinsky (founder, founder lease for 25 years and now Senior counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group) hosts and interviews our guests. Our guests are Amy Reeder Worley, managing director at BRG and author of a new book entitled The Confidence Advantage: Optimizing Privacy, Cybersecurity, and AI Governance for Growth, and Greg Szewczyk, chair of Ballard Spahr's Privacy and Data Security Group. Amy advises senior executives and boards on cybersecurity, privacy, and AI risk, while Greg regularly counsels clients on privacy, cybersecurity, data governance, incident response, and the rapidly evolving legal issues surrounding AI. Amy's book is available on Amazon. Key Topics Include: ·                 From "trust" to evidence-based confidence; A central concept in Amy's book is the distinction between trust and confidence. She describes trust as a feeling, while confidence is an evidence-backed belief. ·                 Breaking down privacy, cybersecurity and AI silos; discussion about the need to move away from treating privacy, cybersecurity, and AI governance as separate disciplines operating in organizational silos. ·                 "Confidence by design"; Amy describes a framework she calls "confidence by design." ·                 The danger of the "FOMO" approach to AI; what Amy describes as the "FOMO" approach to AI: moving as quickly as possible to deploy AI tools and planning to establish governance later. ·                 Where should companies begin?; For organizations that are just beginning to address these issues, Amy's advice is surprisingly basic: start by determining what data the company has and where it is located. ·                 Boards need to know who owns the risk; discussion on the growing role of boards and senior management. ·                 Governance as a competitive advantage; Perhaps the most important message from the podcast is that good governance should not necessarily be viewed as a cost center. ·                 A rapidly changing legal landscape; the extraordinary uncertainty surrounding AI regulation. We encourage our readers and listeners who are interested in these issues to listen to the full episode and to consider reading Amy's book, The Confidence Advantage: Optimizing Privacy, Cybersecurity, and AI Governance for Growth. It provides a useful framework for thinking about an issue that is quickly moving from the privacy and technology departments into the boardroom. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The CFPB's June 5, 2026 statement on "Ability to Repay and Immigration Status" presents creditors with a difficult, and potentially unprecedented, compliance dilemma. The Bureau says that when creditors are required to assess a consumer's ability to repay, they may, and in some circumstances may be required to, consider information about the consumer's immigration status if that information bears on the consumer's current or reasonably expected future income. But how can creditors take immigration status into account without violating federal or state fair-lending laws that prohibit discrimination based on national origin? That was the central question explored in the latest episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast, released today. Our host, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, leader for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of our Consumer Financial Services Group) was joined by three Ballard Spahr lawyers with complementary expertise: Dustin O'Quinn, a nationally recognized immigration lawyer; Richard Andreano, leader of the firm's Mortgage Banking Group and a leading authority on mortgage lending regulation; and John Culhane, a longtime member of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group. The discussion demonstrates just how difficult the CFPB's guidance may be for creditors to operationalize. Key Topics Discussed Include: ·                 What exactly did the CFPB say? ·                 Credit cards and mortgages are different; John Culhane explained that the credit card ability-to-repay requirement is fundamentally a point-in-time assessment. ·                 Immigration status is anything but binary; nOne of the most important points made during the podcast was that creditors cannot sensibly divide applicants into two categories—those who are "legal" and those who are "illegal." ·                 The ITIN issue; The CFPB guidance also raises questions about lending to consumers who have an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) rather than a Social Security number. ·                 The fair-lending problem; Rich Andreano described the problem succinctly: The guidance raises the risk associated with failing to consider immigration status but does not provide clear guideposts for considering immigration status without running afoul of ECOA and other civil-rights laws. ·                 Simply lending only to citizens and permanent residents is not the answer; One possible reaction might be for a creditor to adopt a bright-line policy: lend only to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. ·                 The banking agencies have entered the picture; Among the subjects addressed are credit risk and underwriting, source of repayment, collateral considerations, documentation and verification, portfolio and concentration risk, and consumer compliance. ·                 What should creditors do? The podcast participants agreed that simply ignoring the CFPB guidance is unlikely to be a satisfactory answer, particularly for banks subject to regular examination. The CFPB's immigration-status guidance sits at the intersection of ability-to-repay requirements, immigration law, fair lending, safety and soundness, and state law. It is therefore an unusually complicated issue that cannot be analyzed solely from a consumer-finance or immigration-law perspective. Our latest Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast brings those disciplines together. Dustin O'Quinn, Richard Andreano, and John Culhane provide a detailed discussion of what the guidance means, the practical problems it creates for creditors, and how lenders should begin thinking about their policies and procedures. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In today's episode of the award-winning Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast, our host, Alan Kaplinsky (founder, chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr LLP) is joined by Delicia Hand, a nationally recognized expert on digital civil rights, AI governance, and consumer protection who leads AI policy initiatives at Consumer Reports. The discussion centers on Consumer Reports' recently released report, AI and Consumer Finance: A Landscape Analysis of Market Forces, Evaluation Frameworks, and Regulatory Gaps, and examines how AI is reshaping consumer finance while exposing important gaps in existing regulatory frameworks. Key topics discussed are: ·        Why approximately 75% of consumers express concern that AI could result in bias or unfair treatment in financial services, while only 8% believe current laws adequately protect them. ·        Whether the rapid adoption of AI is being driven more by competitive pressures than by demonstrated consumer benefits. ·        Consumer Reports' proposed framework for evaluating AI systems used in financial services, including twelve key dimensions designed to assess whether AI systems adequately protect consumers. ·        The growing use of AI in credit underwriting and lending, including both its potential to expand access to credit and its potential to perpetuate existing biases. ·        The increasing use of algorithmic and personalized pricing and the consumer protection concerns raised by AI-driven pricing models. ·        The risks associated with consumers relying on general-purpose AI systems as financial advisors despite the absence of traditional fiduciary obligations or regulatory oversight. ·        Privacy concerns arising from AI systems that access consumers' financial account information through data aggregation services. ·        The need for meaningful consumer redress mechanisms when AI systems make mistakes, including access to human review and effective dispute resolution. ·        The absence of a comprehensive federal framework governing AI in financial services and the unresolved questions surrounding accountability among AI developers, financial institutions, and other participants in the AI supply chain. This episode will be of particular interest to banks, fintech companies, financial services providers, compliance professionals, regulators, and attorneys seeking to understand the rapidly evolving legal and policy landscape governing the use of artificial intelligence in consumer finance. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.