The American Fintech Council (AFC) has filed an amicus brief to support the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s final rule on consumer data rights.
The case ensures that consumers can access and control their financial data and protect their rights under Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act, also known as the Personal Financial Data Rights or Open Banking rule. The brief pushes for the US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky to regard the rule as a lawful, necessary framework for a secure Open Banking system.
Supporting Open Banking rules
AFC is a standards-based trade association representing major fintech firms and banks offering Embedded Finance. It supports responsible innovation, transparent and inclusive financial systems, and sound public policy. Members promote competition and develop products for underserved markets.
In this case, the AFC represents small banks, credit unions, and fintech companies that support Open Banking development and rely on fintech partnerships to compete in the industry. The council aims to present a different view on the CFPB’s rules, reflecting the practical realities faced by smaller financial institutions and responsible fintech companies seeking to innovate and compete in the financial services marketplace.
The amicus supports the recently filed motion for summary judgement by the Financial Technology Association, an intervenor in the case that is now defending the rule in court. AFC representatives believe that the CFPB’s rule supports consumers and enables innovation, ensuring consumer safety, access to their financial data, and offering clear instructions for financial institutions and third-party providers.
The AFC urges the court to declare the rule’s definition of the word ‘consumer’ to include certain authorised third parties, allowing them to access financial data with clear consumer permission. The council supports the final rule’s clarity around data security and third-party risk management, as well as its allowance for the development of consensus-based technical standards. Additionally, the decision not to make new liability rules and not to directly supervise all third parties was a reasonable approach, according to the AFC.
