CFPB Pay Fairness Act: Director Gets Authority to Set Employee Pay Under General Schedule

The “CFPB Pay Fairness Act of 2025” is short, focused, and administrative—it’s all about who signs the paychecks at the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) and how much those checks are for. Essentially, this bill hands the authority to set and adjust the basic pay rates for all CFPB employees directly to the CFPB Director.

Who’s Setting the Salaries Now?

Before this Act, the CFPB had its own unique system for setting pay, which often allowed it to offer higher salaries than the rest of the federal government to attract highly specialized talent in finance and technology. This bill changes that by requiring the Director to set employee pay according to the General Schedule (GS) pay structure (Section 5332 of title 5, U.S. Code). This is the standard pay scale used by the vast majority of federal workers, from the Department of Defense to the IRS. This shift brings CFPB employees into the same pay framework as their counterparts across the government, ending the agency’s unique pay flexibility. This new system kicks in 90 days after the bill becomes law.

The Real-World Impact: Trading Flexibility for Conformity

For the average person, this might seem like bureaucratic noise, but it matters for how effectively the CFPB can do its job protecting consumers. The CFPB handles complex issues like mortgage fraud and predatory lending, often requiring specialized financial analysts, lawyers, and tech experts who could earn significantly more in the private sector. By forcing the CFPB back onto the standard GS scale, the agency might find it harder to recruit and retain top talent, especially when competing with Wall Street firms. The Director gains centralized control over setting pay, but that control is now tightly constrained by the GS system, which has specific salary caps based on location and grade level.

Why This Matters for Taxpayers and Other Agencies

While the bill aims for “fairness” by aligning CFPB pay with the rest of the government, it creates a few subtle ripple effects. First, if the CFPB can’t compete on salary, it might struggle to hire the best people to police big financial institutions, potentially impacting consumer protection efforts. Second, for taxpayers, this change might initially look like a cost-saver by reducing high-end salaries at the CFPB. However, if the agency struggles to retain staff, the resulting operational inefficiencies could lead to higher long-term costs. Finally, this move might be cheered by other federal agencies who felt the CFPB’s previous pay flexibility gave it an unfair advantage in poaching high-skilled employees. This bill levels that playing field, for better or worse, by making the CFPB conform to the federal government’s standard employment rules.