Reportedly, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) now plans to pursue a notice‑and‑comment rulemaking process for its rewrite of the Biden‑era open banking rule, marking a shift from prior indications that the CFPB would issue an interim final rule.
In December 2025, reports suggested that the Section 1033 open banking rulemaking might be advanced through an interim final rule ahead of the CFPB’s expected funding lapse. By issuing an interim final rule, the CFPB could have bypassed soliciting public comment as required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and steps required under the Dodd-Frank Act, such as convening a Small Business Review Panel[1] to consider the potential economic impact of the proposal on small businesses. Now, with the CFPB agreeing to seek and subsequently receiving additional funding from the Federal Reserve, reports suggest that the CFPB is reverting to a traditional rulemaking track.
Even if the CFPB ultimately maintains the substantive direction of the Trump‑era revisions – including allowing banks to charge limited fees to data aggregators – a return to full notice and comment will extend the timeline before a final rule is issued. The more deliberative process could help the CFPB limit challenges to the final rule stemming from legal vulnerabilities, especially at a moment when CFPB rulemakings continue to face significant litigation risk (including as to whether the rulemaking process violates the APA).
[1] As outlined in the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996.
[View source.]
