CFPB · Withdrawal of Proposed Rule FR Doc. 2024-31385 · Published

CFPB Withdraws Proposed Rule on Fees for Instantaneously Declined Transactions

The CFPB withdrew its January 2024 proposed rule that would have prohibited nonsufficient funds fees on instantaneously declined transactions such as debit card purchases and ATM withdrawals. It will consider whether a broader rulemaking covering other NSF fees is appropriate; no new obligations are imposed.

InformationalEffective Jan 14, 2025All checks passedRead the rule ↗ (opens in a new tab)

Loan impact

From the rule text · verified

Applies to: Does not affect mortgage loans; concerns NSF fees on deposit account transactions at banks and other financial institutions.

Effective
Jan 14, 2025
Applicability confidence
Verified: every row above is supported by the source text

What to do

AWACS interpretation · not source language

What to review: No change here is mandatory: the CFPB withdrew its proposed rule on NSF fees for instantaneously declined transactions as of 2025-01-14, no new obligations are imposed, and the record says mortgage loans are not affected, so compliance only needs to note the withdrawal.

Source and record

Version 1 · archived

Checks passed

  • Schema valid
  • Effective quotes verbatim
  • Document ID appears in the source
  • Doc id matches catalog
  • Mandatory status is backed by requirement language
  • Mandatory entries have requirement language
  • Published on present
  • Title summary length
  • Controlled vocabulary
  • No placeholder tokens
  • Source link resolves
  • Loan impact quotes verbatim
  • Loan impact vocabulary
  • Changes quoted
  • Impact type consistent
  • Every required change is backed by obligation language
  • Only new or tightened changes are marked required
  • Loan impact covers every required change
  • Quotes are complete sentences
  • Unflagged must
  • Diff complete
  • Mandatory date resolved
  • Audience verbatim
  • Scope residential
  • Out of scope
  • Published in window
  • Interpretation schema valid
  • Interpretation separate