[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6258082,"mediaKeyId","3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc","parentId",3150543,"title","House lawmakers back Home Buyers Privacy Protection Act to curb mortgage 'trigger leads'","audioSeconds",5301,"startMs",2243000,"endMs",7544000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc&start=2243&end=7544","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc/thumbnail_2243000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6258082/House-lawmakers-back-Home-Buyers-Privacy-Protection-Act-to-curb-mortgage-trigger-leads","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6258082-b91316e8cb3a64898f61195b1803e9f0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770498777&Signature=VQPy~gEUmhVgRTv7qX3uHBy34hYkC6X3eV86~rFIs5lWdPSfqqgG-yMFjxBxyxRyU5quY0VYhiZgzxYwJYZdzMPLyxazuCU1stjF6Wf0xGuf9ADYUdzvZwQdPcgwF6z7ewNBudSnCEs03vMazwENktt9tBsZ0FT2VFKn1kdu1YcLu7NybaNIs5fC9LSIcB4tZfFnxeq3XFN9XNnHTA2FM5CC3Xaqz17aNZ3HyEUL7XKD6WzpZYQUxqWuyH77KgTE7WwtMghhS3xuncIAoP0otDzU7zsZCiAA4jGvyyUF8T-i0BshO8TRwmPZlJKqwg~nHJGvB7ac0am6wFThIBjQ-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. House Committee on Financial Services","date","2025-04-29T00:00:00Z","article","Members of the House Financial Services Subcommittee and witnesses described widespread, unwanted marketing that follows mortgage credit checks and discussed a bipartisan bill that would curb that practice.

Why it matters: Witnesses said the sale of trigger leads—lists created when a consumer applies for a mortgage or has a credit inquiry—generates hundreds of calls and text messages at a stressful moment for consumers. Lawmakers said this practice is deceptive and that legislative limits would protect homeowners while preserving legitimate credit offers.

Michael Radcliffe, chairman and CEO of Community Financial Services Bank, described how a neighbor received a text that appeared to come from the bank and how his own recent mortgage application produced a ‘‘mailbox full’’ of marketing materials that used his bank’s name without clearly identifying the sender. He told the committee the practice can appear deceptive and is “oppressive” at a high‑stress time for homebuyers.

Representative Tom Rice? (note: transcript identifies sponsor as Representative Rose) and Representative John Rose emphasized the Home Buyers Privacy Protection Act, which Representative Rose said had broad bipartisan support in the Senate and would bar the sale of contact information in most circumstances. Representative Rose entered a coalition letter from 17 organizations into the record in support of the bill and said he intends to advance the legislation swiftly.

The bill would limit sharing of mortgage applicant contact information for unsolicited marketing, while preserving legitimate offers of credit and other specified exceptions; witnesses and members said the legislation should not be amended in ways that would prioritize credit reporting agencies’ commercial interests over consumers’ privacy rights.

The hearing included no recorded vote on HR 2808; members and witnesses signaled continued bipartisan interest in moving the measure. Proponents urged that any final text preserve legitimate credit offers while giving consumers an opt‑in to receive marketing after a mortgage inquiry.

Ending: Members said the committee will keep the bill under active consideration and urged rapid action to curb trigger leads that inundate homebuyers.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Regulatory Overreach: The Price Tag on American Prosperity (EventID=118144)","oneSentenceSummary","Members and witnesses described how mortgage 'trigger leads' and data sales inundate prospective homebuyers with calls and texts; the committee discussed the Home Buyers Privacy Protection Act (HR 2808) and witness testimony supporting legislative relief.","taxTitle","Financial Services: House Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1981,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6258087,"Witnesses warn CFPB cuts would cripple consumer oversight; committee to consider proposals that cut funding",2138,1437000,3575000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc&start=1437&end=3575","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc/thumbnail_1437000.jpg","/articles/6258087/Witnesses-warn-CFPB-cuts-would-cripple-consumer-oversight-committee-to-consider-proposals-that-cut-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6258087-5860106686c90d5b7364377ae3fa717a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770498777&Signature=fOV8NYOFZzZ4MEwoE2724Pnv4TMLYWuPb~znnCOcoodKII4OqQLX1f~RPF4BiSw7SInpnW4SliAnH3o6ulHccFnNSJN6L2wMTpN7AAWUdGTUWgYYJL5dgZqIU79-Zn9SLN0wM0AUcDqEpQxSBF7UL6QRFPxe8qXhvbN4uJZA-XLK4vpCiAhCf-AIiqo0usrWiDNlST2atpUtQHJwFRcxrU8KcnGxdX2wPCmNnLFcsYpxEUYLr8hhxENqQHstTCeEizPP4JY05LlwUtz~VCpg0j5ePM4IQnzZRMa9pz2QcQwFxrPYtFoHnKOBft9Go90PBIHi8wdyhFPmyjxQIjO1aw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Financial Services Subcommittee spent substantial time on the potential impact of major reductions to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Ranking Member Foster told the panel that “Tomorrow, our committee will consider legislation that would cut the CFPB's budget by roughly 70%,” and witnesses detailed consequences for consumer supervision and complaint handling.

Why it matters: Witnesses and several members said steep budget cuts and staff reductions at the CFPB would leave millions of consumers and financial products without dedicated supervision, create an uneven regulatory playing field and reduce enforcement actions that return money to harmed consumers.

Graham Steele, academic fellow at Stanford Law School’s Rock Center for Corporate Governance and former Treasury assistant secretary, said cutting the CFPB “by that much, and it's gonna be basically non functional.” Steele and other witnesses noted that the CFPB has returned large sums to consumers over its lifetime and performs supervision of nonbank providers that otherwise receive little oversight.

Members highlighted particular consumer groups they said would be affected if CFPB capacity is curtailed. Representative Lynch described the loss of the bureau’s military affairs unit and the removal of supervisors who handled complaints important to service members and veterans. Steele and others warned that rescinding supervision of nonbanks, including fintechs and big‑tech payment entrants, would create an unlevel field between supervised banks and unsupervised providers.

Witnesses and some members also tied CFPB cuts to broader policy choices. Steele said the agency had played a key role in supervision of nonbanks and had issued rules that could have saved consumers substantial amounts annually; he cited two rules (overdraft and credit‑card fee rules) that he said would have saved consumers a combined $15 billion per year. Committee members and witnesses also linked CFPB staffing and enforcement to the agency's ability to respond to consumer complaints and to carry out rulemakings.

Several members urged preserving the bureau’s mission and resources. Representative Velázquez and others described CFPB actions that returned recovered funds to consumers and cautioned that shrinking the bureau would shift consumer oversight unevenly to other regulators or leave gaps. Witnesses urged Congress either to preserve CFPB capacity or ensure other agencies have resources to supervise nonbank fintech providers.

The hearing recorded discussion but no markups or votes on CFPB funding; committee members warned that legislation slated for future consideration could dramatically reduce the bureau’s scope and capability.

Ending: Members and witnesses agreed on the high stakes for consumers and signaled continued oversight and potential legislative action on CFPB authority and budget.","Members and witnesses at the House subcommittee hearing debated proposed reductions to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with witnesses saying deep cuts would render the bureau nonfunctional and harm consumers, including military service members and users of fintech services.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6258092,"House subcommittee presses for tailored bank supervision, limits on subjective examiner discretion",1054,971000,2025000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc&start=971&end=2025","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3150543-8761bdd0bcae265f5d850456c81e44dc/thumbnail_971000.jpg","/articles/6258092/House-subcommittee-presses-for-tailored-bank-supervision-limits-on-subjective-examiner-discretion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6258092-f3b3b98809c0d1cba12090f3c43adeab/orig.mp4?Expires=1770498777&Signature=CX2tlmlK7d5mcUHisJw27p8tyVsnNMwFybasxrje4eguvvaC0gdLVx~JjoTPqGZT0ZQRlYmajLTsAvdW7tzlGLuYoWMsyQ4gESacRsMQZmlyqI9cWvQgly3NPnOW3QZoSC6pUo7xhp2C~2fitGK1~Iea8vhOPXIJV8nQbgLM2VAKDAGUtDis-t~0zDCjjGjpJ-Do7C5~X8GunwjhWrR7txH-ZNE0umqjhCVjnlnbyxRi4YcYULq2R8KelAul9dgUpvEv02dwLMw8tU7k11EsmY9g~bdBWWJr6I-DMtUMat-t5Khsd3UKkEDjMJJ8NZZgqegGuApr-eBmOEH6AsX~7Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions met June 3 to examine what lawmakers called regulatory overreach and the costs it imposes on community financial institutions. Subcommittee Chair Barr opened the hearing by saying community banks have been “crushed by the weight of burdensome and politically driven regulations,” and invited witnesses to recommend reforms.

Why it matters: Members and witnesses said one‑size‑fits‑all supervision and an opaque exam process impose large compliance costs on small and regional banks, discourage new charters and competition, and risk diverting supervisory focus away from material financial threats to subjective judgments about management and reputational concerns.

Bank Policy Institute witness Sarah Flowers, senior vice president and senior associate general counsel, said “there's an urgent need to index regulatory tailoring thresholds for all banks for economic growth and inflation,” and argued supervision must refocus on “material financial risks” rather than subjective measures. Flowers added, “the exam ratings framework is broken,” and urged Congress and regulators to constrain how the management component of CAMELS is used in practice.

Michael Radcliffe, chairman and CEO of Community Financial Services Bank, a $1.3 billion community bank in rural western Kentucky, told the committee his bank spends “over $632,000 annually on compliance cost alone,” and that uneven application of supervisory expectations creates a ‘‘cliff’’ effect around asset thresholds. Radcliffe and other witnesses urged transition periods for banks growing toward higher supervisory categories and supported bills noted for the hearing that would expand tailoring and ease certain compliance burdens.

Davis Polk partner Margaret Tyre and former Treasury official Graham Steele both urged greater transparency and stronger congressional oversight of regulators’ participation in international forums. Flowers and Tyre criticized parts of the Basel III endgame follow‑through as insufficiently tailored, and Flowers said industry requests for agency records about Basel deliberations were denied under FOIA exemptions.

Several witnesses recommended specific supervisory changes: define “unsafe or unsound practice” by a financial materiality standard, create an independent appeals mechanism for exam findings, publish anonymized aggregate exam data to check for consistency, and index tailoring thresholds to inflation and economic growth. Tyre called for independent review of appeals and recommended that appeals be ‘‘rare but fair.’’

Members described bills attached to the hearing that they said would advance these aims, including the Taylor Act (requiring regulators to tailor rules to institution profiles), the Promoting New Bank Formation Act, the FDIC Board Accountability Act (to add seats with depository institution experience), and the Smart and Trust acts (targeted relief for well‑managed community banks). Witnesses generally supported the concept of tailoring and better appeals but stressed implementation details matter.

The hearing also included discussion of examiner discretion and secrecy. Tyre urged releasing very old exam reports and more consistent aggregate metrics on exams, and said current appeals processes “involve senior personnel of the same agency involved in the dispute,” creating a conflict with fairness. Flowers suggested banks should be permitted to appeal CAMELS exam findings to a neutral authority.

The hearing closed without committee votes. Members said the subcommittee will press oversight and legislative steps to codify risk‑based tailoring and strengthen review and transparency of supervisory action.

Looking ahead: Committee members signaled plans for follow‑up oversight and legislation to enshrine tailoring practices and an independent appeal process; agencies were urged to begin reforms voluntarily while Congress considers statutory changes.","Witnesses and members at a House Financial Services subcommittee hearing urged Congress and regulators to restore risk‑based tailoring in bank supervision, tighten appeals for exam findings, and increase transparency about international regulatory engagements such as Basel and the NGFS.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House lawmakers back Home Buyers Privacy Protection Act to curb mortgage 'trigger leads'

Witnesses warn CFPB cuts would cripple consumer oversight; committee to consider proposals that cut funding

House subcommittee presses for tailored bank supervision, limits on subjective examiner discretion