The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has reached a $1.75 million settlement with online lender MoneyLion, resolving claims that the company overcharged military service members and their families on loans. The agreement, filed in Manhattan federal court, marks one of the agency’s final enforcement actions as it scales back operations due to budget constraints.
The CFPB originally sued MoneyLion in September 2022, alleging that the lender exceeded the legally permitted 36% interest rate cap for active-duty service members under the Military Lending Act. According to the agency, MoneyLion structured its loan program so that interest rates and mandatory membership fees combined to surpass the federal limit. The complaint also stated that MoneyLion prevented borrowers from canceling their memberships until all outstanding loan balances were paid, creating additional financial strain.
Under the settlement terms, MoneyLion will distribute compensation—primarily on a pro rata basis—to affected borrowers who took out loans between December 1, 2017, and October 11, 2024. The company has also agreed to allow borrowers to cancel memberships regardless of outstanding loan balances or unpaid fees. As is common in such settlements, MoneyLion did not admit or deny wrongdoing.
MoneyLion, a unit of Gen Digital, stated that while it disputes the CFPB’s allegations, it is “glad to put this matter behind us and focus on continuing to help Americans improve their financial lives.”
The settlement comes at a time of uncertainty for the CFPB. The Trump administration has long sought to dismantle the agency, and despite a federal judge blocking those efforts in March, acting director Russell Vought has largely halted enforcement activity amid significant funding shortfalls. Sources indicate the CFPB is attempting to shift its remaining enforcement cases to the U.S. Department of Justice as it winds down operations.
The conclusion of this case underscores ongoing scrutiny of lending practices affecting military families and highlights the shifting regulatory landscape for consumer protection in the U.S.


Supreme Court Blocks California Transgender Student Privacy Laws in 6-3 Decision
CDC Acting Director Urges Measles Vaccination as U.S. Cases Surge in 2026
Panama Cancels CK Hutchison Port Contracts, Grants Temporary Control to Maersk and MSC
Venezuela Amnesty Law Frees Nearly 2,200 Prisoners, Says Jorge Arreaza
FedEx Sues U.S. Government for Refund of Trump-Era Emergency Tariffs After Supreme Court Ruling
Panama Investigates CK Hutchison’s Port Unit After Court Voids Canal Contracts
Pentagon Weighs Supply Chain Risk Designation for Anthropic Over Claude AI Use
Maduro Seeks Dismissal of U.S. Drug Trafficking Case, Citing Sanctions Interference
CFTC Asserts Authority Over Prediction Markets Amid Insider Trading Concerns
Pentagon to Halt Ivy League Programs for U.S. Military Officers Starting 2026
USITC to Review Impact of Revoking China’s PNTR Status, Potentially Raising Tariffs on Chinese Imports
California Seeks Court Order to Halt Amazon’s Alleged Price Inflation Practices
USTR Launches New Section 301 Trade Investigations After Supreme Court Tariff Ruling
U.S. Plans 4,500 Monthly Refugee Admissions for White South Africans Amid Policy Debate
Northeast Winter Storm Triggers State of Emergency, Travel Bans and Thousands of Flight Cancellations
Trump Administration Sues Harvard Over Alleged Race-Based Admissions Practices
Denver Mayor Orders Police to Protect Protesters, Restricts ICE Access to City Property 



