This resolution seeks to overturn the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection’s rule regarding the withdrawal of regulations on debt collection "pay-to-pay" fees.
Angela Alsobrooks
Senator
MD
This joint resolution seeks to exercise congressional disapproval of a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule regarding "Debt Collection Practices (Regulation F); Pay-to-Pay Fees." If passed, this measure would nullify the Bureau's withdrawal of the previous regulation, effectively rendering the withdrawal without force or effect.
This joint resolution is a legislative 'undo' button aimed at a recent move by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Specifically, it targets a rule from July 5, 2022, which had withdrawn a previous restriction on 'pay-to-pay' fees. By disapproving that withdrawal, this resolution effectively reinstates the ban on these convenience charges. In plain English: if you are trying to pay off a debt, collectors would be blocked from tacking on an extra $5 or $10 fee just for the 'privilege' of paying over the phone or online.
At its core, this resolution is about 'junk fees' in the debt collection industry. Under the original Regulation F guidelines, debt collectors were restricted from charging extra fees unless the underlying contract specifically allowed for them. However, the CFPB later pulled back on some of these protections. This resolution steps in to say 'not so fast,' aiming to ensure that if a worker—say, a mechanic or a teacher—is finally in a position to settle an old medical bill or credit card balance, they aren't hit with a surprise surcharge just for using a debit card. By nullifying the CFPB’s recent withdrawal (87 Fed. Reg. 39733), the resolution forces the industry back to a standard where these extra costs are largely off the table.
For the average person juggling bills, this is a matter of transparency and math. If you owe $500, you should be able to pay $500 without a $15 processing fee being skimmed off the top by a third-party collector. For debt collection agencies and the financial institutions that hire them, this is a significant operational shift. These companies often rely on these fees to cover the costs of high-speed payment processing or to boost their own margins. If this resolution holds, those agencies will have to eat those costs or find other ways to fund their payment infrastructure, as they will no longer have the legal green light to pass those specific 'pay-to-pay' costs onto the consumer.
This move uses the Congressional Review Act, which is a powerful tool that allows Congress to overrule federal agencies. While the immediate effect is a win for the consumer’s wallet, the 'how' matters just as much as the 'what.' By bypassing the usual long-winded process of writing new regulations, this resolution creates a sudden shift in the rules of the road for the financial sector. For a small business owner who handles their own accounts receivable, or a specialized debt firm, this means a quick pivot is required to remain compliant. It’s a direct intervention that prioritizes immediate consumer protection over the slower, more bureaucratic adjustments usually seen in federal finance policy.