Today, it would certainly be hard to argue that the CFPB has not created an additional paperwork and regulatory burden. When talk of a new consumer protection agency started in Washington back in 2009, I was wary of increased regulatory burden and certain we did not need another layer of bureaucracy and red tape. Regardless, we were certain there would be a substantive and swift reaction to the 2008 meltdown. In the lead up to Dodd-Frank, and the subsequent creation of the CFPB, CUNA worked closely with credit union industry representatives across the country to assess the political realities and develop a strategy to navigate through a rapidly changing landscape.
At CUNA, we weighed the likelihood that the CFPB would become a reality and the extent to which it would have authority over credit unions. With a newly-elected president and new majorities in the Senate and the House, something was going to be enacted into law, and credit unions could not avoid inclusion. It should also be noted that the credit union system was not united on many aspects of Dodd-Frank, including the creation of the CFPB.
One benefit of being engaged at the beginning is that to this day, CUNA has a credible voice in dealing with the CFPB instead of being completely at odds and out of the conversation. I know that within any regulated industry, there are those who believe that working with regulators is akin to sleeping with the enemy. Some maintaining this position may never be satisfied with any level of engagement.
Recommended For You
The original legislation would have given the CFPB authority to examine credit unions with more than $1 billion in assets, while at the same time establishing a $10 billion threshold for banks. CUNA's leadership led to that threshold being increased to $10 billion, protecting hundreds from CFPB examination. Early versions of the CFPB legislation also required financial institutions to offer "plain vanilla" products to members before offering them a product that would better meet a member's need; thanks to our intervention, that provision was not included in the final legislation.
In addition, credit unions do not pay for the operation of the bureau, they are not required to submit deposit account data to the bureau, and the bureau is required to address outdated, unnecessary and unduly burdensome regulation with an eye toward reducing regulatory burden – a provision that was first suggested by CUNA. Had CUNA been on the sidelines, and not at the table, these improvements would not have been possible.
Second guessing in politics is a great American sport. I am absolutely certain that if CUNA had just opposed the legislation, we would have the CFPB without the aforementioned beneficial changes.
Daniel A. Mica
Principal, The DMA Group
Former President/CEO, CUNA
Alexandria, Va.
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
