On May 12, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced a sweeping withdrawal of 67 guidance documents issued since the CFPB’s inception, signaling a marked shift in its regulatory approach. This move reflects a departure from the practices of past CFPB leadership, under which the CFPB frequently used interpretive rules, advisory opinions and other forms of guidance to effectuate policy changes outside the formal rulemaking process. The CFPB stated that while some guidance may be reissued in the future, the CFPB aims to limit the issuance and reliance on guidance documents that are not required by statute.
Overview
The withdrawal document cited Executive Order (EO) 13891, which directed agencies to avoid using guidance documents to create regulatory burdens on the private sector. The EO was issued by President Trump in his first term and was later rescinded by the Biden administration. The CFPB maintains that the principles it outlined remain consistent with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and are reflected in the CFPB’s April 11 internal memo. The memo imposed a moratorium on the issuance of new guidance documents and initiated an agencywide review of all existing guidance. It also required senior CFPB staff to review all guidance materials by April 25. Any guidance not explicitly flagged for retention, with a clear justification, would be subject to rescission after leadership review.
The CFPB explained its withdrawal of guidance materials for three independent reasons:
- The CFPB will now only issue guidance when it is truly necessary and when such guidance will lower, rather than raise, compliance burdens for regulated entities.
- In response to President Trump’s deregulatory initiatives aimed at reducing bureaucracy, the CFPB is scaling back its enforcement activities and, as a result, does not require interpretive guidance to remain in effect at this time.
- The CFPB has determined that there are no significant reliance interests justifying retention of the withdrawn guidance. This is because parties generally recognize that guidance is nonbinding and does not create substantive rights.
The CFPB detailed that while some pieces of guidance may be reissued in the future, it does not intend to prioritize enforcement against parties that do not conform to the guidance while it is withdrawn.
Rescinded Guidance
As noted above, the document rescinded 67 individual guidance documents covering a range of the CFPB’s activities. The rescinded guidance documents spanned numerous areas, including fair lending, overdraft fees, disclosure policies, earned wage access, consumer information requests, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, credit reporting, mortgage servicing and whistleblower protections. Changes will also impact the housing industry as it relates to background screening and the use of automated intelligence. Several notable rescissions include:
Consumer Complaint Database
The CFPB rescinded guidance related to its public consumer complaint database, including a 2013 final policy statement that established the public disclosure of certain consumer complaint data that does not include personally identifiable information (PII). The CFPB also rescinded a 2012 final policy statement on exercising its discretion to publicly disclose certain credit card complaint data. Financial services market participants have argued the public database harms firms’ reputations, as complaints are not independently verified and often reflect mere inquiries rather than substantiated grievances. Recently, industry groups wrote a letter urging the CFPB to follow other regulators in running a nonpublic consumer complaint database following Congress’ original intent. As of May 12, the consumer complaint database remains public on the front page of the CFPB’s website.
The CFPB also rescinded a 2015 final policy statement outlining the CFPB’s approach to publicly disclosing consumer complaints in free-form text submitted by consumers describing their experiences with financial products and services. This guidance established the framework, safeguards and rationale for such disclosures.
Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices
Additionally, the CFPB rescinded an April 2023 policy statement on its Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices (UDAAP) authority. The policy statement argued that entities could be liable for taking advantage of an unreasonable lack of understanding on the part of the consumer that the entity itself had no role in causing. The CFPB’s broad reading of its UDAAP authority and its stated intent to pursue enforcement beyond the limits of its own policy statements drew criticism for creating uncertainty and expanding regulatory risk. Industry argued that this is problematic because the CFPB, in its most recent Policy Statement, appears to reserve the right to use UDAAP for virtually any business practice it does not like.
Authority of States to Enforce the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010
The CFPB also rescinded an impactful May 2022 interpretive rule that describes its view of states’ authorities to pursue actions that violate the provisions of federal consumer financial protection law. Brownstein previously detailed that the rule exerted broad state authority to pursue actions against a wide range of entities and clarified that CFPB enforcement actions did not preclude parallel state actions. The withdrawal of the rule reflects the CFPB’s intent to reconsider the scope of state enforcement authority and to ensure that future guidance is firmly grounded in statutory text.
Nonbank Registry Rule Rescission
In a separate effort, the CFPB issued a proposed rule and request for comment to rescind all provisions of its nonbank registry rule finalized in July 2024. The final rule established a registry of nonbank companies that have entered into consent agreements or that have otherwise been found by the CFPB to be in violation of laws under their jurisdiction. The final rule required debt collectors, mortgage lenders, payday and other nonbank lenders, credit reporting agencies and other nonbank financial services companies to report regulatory actions taken against them at the federal and state levels. Brownstein’s complete analysis of the rule can be found here.
Within the proposed rule, the CFPB argued that the final rule poses significant regulatory burden and is unnecessary since Congress has already empowered multiple other federal and state agencies to enforce consumer financial laws. The CFPB is expected to issue additional proposed rules to rescind or revise CFPB regulations issued under the prior administration. Comments on the proposed rule are due 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.
Next Steps
The CFPB’s withdrawal of guidance documents is part of a broader Trump administration deregulatory agenda aimed at reducing duplicative enforcement and streamlining regulatory obligations. While some guidance may be reissued if deemed necessary, the default position is withdrawal, and enforcement will focus on statutory and regulatory requirements. Against this backdrop, the leadership situation at the CFPB remains fluid. The administration formally withdrew Jonathan McKernan’s nomination, and Acting Director Russell Vought continues to lead the CFPB. Stakeholders are continuing to seek clarity on a number of rules and working to educate the new administration about regulatory burdens and, alternatively, important areas of clarity.
THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE YOU WITH GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING WITHDRAWN CFPB GUIDANCE IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE SPECIFIC LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT OR IF YOU NEED LEGAL ADVICE AS TO AN ISSUE, PLEASE CONTACT THE ATTORNEYS LISTED OR YOUR REGULAR BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP ATTORNEY. THIS COMMUNICATION MAY BE CONSIDERED ADVERTISING IN SOME JURISDICTIONS.