Attorney General Raoul challenges
FDIC rule that allows predatory lenders to bypass interest rate caps
Send a link to a friend
[August 25, 2020]
Attorney General Kwame Raoul, as part of a coalition of eight
attorneys general, filed a lawsuit challenging the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) final rule that exempts buyers of
high-interest loans from state interest-rate caps. These caps play a
critical role in regulating payday loans and other high-cost
lending.
Under existing federal law, federally-insured, state-chartered banks
are exempt from state interest-rate caps. The FDIC’s final rule
extends these exemptions to any non-bank lender that buys loans
originated by an exempt bank. The final rule allows predatory
lenders that would otherwise be subject to interest-rate caps to
charge consumers interest that far exceeds the rates permissible
under the law. Additionally, the final rule worsens the problem of
“rent-a-bank” schemes, in which predatory lenders partner with banks
that act as the lender in name only, allowing predatory lenders to
evade state interest-rate caps.
“Predatory lenders should not be allowed to avoid laws that protect
the most vulnerable consumers,” Raoul said. “The FDIC’s rule allows
predatory lenders to sidestep state law and makes it easier for
these lenders to prey upon Illinois residents. I will fight to
protect Illinois residents from predatory lenders, which
disproportionally target low-income and minority residents.”
[to top of second column] |
States long have played a critical role in protecting their residents from
high-cost loans. While federal law provides a carve-out from state interest-rate
caps for federally-regulated banks, state law continues to protect residents
from predatory lending by non-banks such as payday, auto title and installment
lenders. The FDIC’s final rule extends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
exemption for federally-insured, state-chartered banks to non-bank debt buyers,
a dramatic expansion that facilitates lenders’ deliberate efforts to evade state
laws that are designed to protect residents from predatory lending.
In the lawsuit, Raoul and the coalition argue that the FDIC’s final rule
conflicts with the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, exceeds the FDIC’s statutory
authority and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. Additionally, the
lawsuit asserts that the FDIC failed to consider and address the negative effect
that its final rule has on consumer financial protections by facilitating
predatory “rent-a-bank” schemes.
Joining Raoul in filing the lawsuit are the attorneys general of California, the
District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and North
Carolina.
[Annie Thompson] |