Browse regulations

Regulation N governs mortgage advertising, requiring clear disclosure of material terms if any rates, payments, or financial figures are advertised, and prohibits misleading representations about loan products.

Without this rule, deceptive mortgage advertising would proliferate, leading consumers to uninformed decisions, higher defaults, and financial distress. The rule achieves transparency cost-effectively in a way private enforcement cannot, as individual consumers lack resources to pursue every violation.

Requires depository institutions lacking federal deposit insurance to disclose this fact to consumers, ensuring transparency about deposit safety.

Without this regulation, consumers could unknowingly deposit funds in uninsured banks, risking loss of savings. Disclosure ensures informed financial decisions at minimal compliance cost; market forces alone would not reliably provide this information due to information asymmetry and incentives to obscure lack of insurance.

FTC Green Guides: prescriptive rules for environmental marketing claims (recyclable, biodegradable, etc.) to avoid deception under Section 5 of the FTC Act; require scientific substantiation and specific qualifications.

High compliance costs, especially for small businesses; chilling effect on truthful environmental claims reduces consumer information; FTC's general deceptive practices authority is sufficient without prescriptive guides; unseen costs include stifled innovation and suppressed market-driven eco-labels.

This regulation establishes reporting requirements for international trade in services and direct investment data collection programs under the International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act. It defines key terms, sets thresholds for various surveys (BE-10, BE-12, BE-13, BE-120, BE-140), and specifies reporting forms, due dates, and exemptions for different types of business entities and transactions.

This regulation imposes massive compliance costs on businesses without clear benefits. The extensive reporting requirements create barriers to entry, protect incumbents through regulatory capture, and violate principles of limited government by federalizing data collection that states could handle. The unseen costs of compliance distort market behavior and reduce economic freedom.

This regulation establishes the legal framework for Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZs) in the United States, allowing certain commercial activities to occur in zones treated as outside customs territory, thereby deferring duties and facilitating international trade. It covers zone authorization, operations, production activities, and tax exemptions while maintaining CBP oversight and public interest protections.

This regulation creates a privileged class of economic actors who can avoid customs duties and taxes that ordinary businesses must pay, distorting market competition and creating regulatory arbitrage opportunities. The complexity of 185,000+ pages of federal regulations already suffocates small businesses - adding specialized zones that benefit large multinational corporations further entrenches incumbent advantages and undermines free market principles.

Establishes procedures for the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) to designate nonbank financial companies as 'systemically important' and subject them to Federal Reserve supervision and prudential standards. Covers both U.S. and foreign companies, sets factors for consideration (leverage, interconnectedness, credit importance, etc.), provides for notice, hearings, and emergency waivers. Grants FSOC authority to collect information and designate companies whose financial activities could threaten U.S. financial stability.

Imposes billions in compliance costs on designated firms, creates regulatory capture by institutionalizing 'too big to fail,' and violates Tenth Amendment by federalizing insurance oversight. Vague 'threat to stability' standard enables arbitrary application, distorts market competition by protecting incumbents, and cannot overcome the knowledge problem—regulators cannot identify systemic risks better than dispersed market actors. Emergency waiver powers bypass due process, while designation itself creates moral hazard, inviting future bailouts and encouraging risk-taking.

Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) prudential management and operations standards for regulated entities including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Federal Home Loan Banks, establishing internal controls, audit functions, market risk management, and corrective action procedures for unsafe and unsound practices.

Creates excessive regulatory burden on housing finance entities with compliance costs exceeding $2 trillion annually across federal regulations, distorts market incentives, protects incumbents through regulatory capture, and represents unconstitutional federal overreach into state-level financial matters that should be governed by market forces and state regulation.

This regulation prohibits regulated entities from purchasing or dealing in mortgages and securities related to properties with private transfer fee covenants, unless the covenants are excepted (providing direct benefits to the community or meeting specific shared equity loan criteria). It also exempts pre-2023 shared equity loans and preserves state-level restrictions on such covenants.

This regulation creates unnecessary barriers to legitimate property transactions and mortgage financing. Private transfer fee covenants are contractual arrangements between willing parties that should be governed by state law and market forces. Federal interference adds compliance costs, restricts financing options, and prevents property owners from freely entering into agreements that could fund community improvements or shared equity programs. The stated goal of protecting consumers is better achieved through state disclosure requirements and contract law rather than federal prohibition.

Establishes the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) as an independent federal agency with authority to supervise Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Federal Home Loan Banks, and the Office of Finance. Defines organizational structure, director responsibilities, and various offices/departments. Includes logo specifications and Paperwork Reduction Act compliance information.

Creates a federal bureaucracy that centralizes housing finance regulation, distorting free market mechanisms and enabling moral hazard through implicit government guarantees. The agency's existence enables the 'too big to fail' dynamic that led to the 2008 crisis, where private profits were privatized while losses were socialized through taxpayer bailouts. State-level regulation and market discipline would better serve housing finance without federal overreach.

Regulation 12 CFR Part 1090 defines which nonbank financial companies qualify as 'larger participants' in specific consumer financial markets (consumer reporting, debt collection, student loan servicing, international money transfers, automobile financing, and digital payment apps) based on revenue or transaction thresholds. Those exceeding thresholds become subject to CFPB supervisory authority including examinations and reporting requirements.

This regulation imposes substantial compliance burdens on businesses near arbitrary thresholds ($7M receipts for consumer reporting, $10M for debt collection, 1M accounts for student loans), with small businesses bearing 30% higher per-employee costs than large corporations. It creates barriers to entry protecting incumbents, violates Tenth Amendment federalism over consumer finance, and assumes distant federal bureaucrats can outperform market discipline, state regulations, and private litigation. The unseen costs—reduced competition, innovation suppression, and higher consumer prices—dwarf any speculative consumer protection benefits. Regulatory capture is endemic; the foxes design the henhouse.

Requires state attorneys general and regulators to notify the CFPB at least 10 days before initiating enforcement actions under the Dodd-Frank Act, with detailed specifications about the action, and grants the CFPB authority to intervene, remove cases to federal court, and appeal.

Flagrantly violates federalism by imposing federal oversight on state enforcement, creating a chilling effect on state consumer protection efforts, and centralizing power in Washington through intervention and removal authority—burdens that outweigh any coordination benefits.

Establishes Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection investigative procedures under Dodd-Frank Act, including civil investigative demands, oral testimony procedures, and custodian responsibilities for consumer financial law enforcement.

Creates an expansive federal investigative apparatus that intrudes on private business operations, imposes compliance burdens on small financial firms, and centralizes consumer financial regulation at federal level rather than allowing state-level solutions.

The Bureau's policy statement clarifies that supervisory guidance (e.g., advisories, FAQs, bulletins) does not have the force of law and cannot be the basis for enforcement actions. It limits the use of numerical 'bright-line' thresholds in guidance, prohibits examiners from criticizing institutions for failing to comply with guidance, aims to reduce duplicative guidance, and encourages public comment and transparency.

This regulation imposes important guardrails on the Bureau's power by explicitly stating that guidance is non-binding and unenforceable. It protects financial institutions from de facto regulation without notice-and-comment rulemaking, reduces arbitrary enforcement through 'bright-lines,' and promotes transparency. Repealing it would remove these constraints, increasing regulatory uncertainty and enabling agencies to exert pressure through informal channels, which violates rule of law principles and increases compliance burdens.

Implements Sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act at the CFPB, prohibiting disability discrimination in programs and activities and ensuring accessibility of electronic and information technology. Requires reasonable accommodations, auxiliary aids, facility accessibility, and establishes a comprehensive complaint procedure with investigations and appeals.

Imposes direct compliance costs and creates a bureaucratic enforcement apparatus that diverts CFPB resources from its core consumer protection mission. Unseen effects include mission creep in disability definitions, growing administrative overhead, and normalization of micromanagement that will expand over time. The agency could ensure non-discrimination through simpler, less costly means without this regulatory layer.

This regulation implements the Equal Access to Justice Act for Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection proceedings, providing attorney fee awards to eligible parties who prevail against the Bureau or successfully defend against excessive demands, with eligibility based on net worth and entity size limits.

Creates perverse incentives by making taxpayers fund legal battles against their own government, effectively subsidizing litigation against regulatory agencies and distorting the adversarial system where parties should bear their own costs.