A federal judge in Texas has ruled against a Biden administration regulation that would have capped credit card late fees at $8, marking a significant setback for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and a major win for the banking industry.
The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, continues an injunction he imposed in May, preventing the regulation from taking effect. The blocked rule was part of President Joe Biden’s broader crackdown on so-called "junk fees," which include excessive penalties charged by financial institutions.
Legal Grounds for Blocking the Fee Cap
The CFPB proposed the rule to limit late fees for card issuers managing more than one million accounts. Under the regulation, higher fees would only be allowed if companies could prove they were necessary to cover operational costs.
However, Judge Pittman ruled the CFPB overstepped its authority under the Credit Card Accountability and Disclosure Act (CARD Act) of 2009. The law permits penalty fees for contract violations, such as late payments, but requires they be reasonable and proportional. Pittman argued that the $8 cap effectively eliminated the ability for issuers to impose legitimate penalty fees.
Using a baseball analogy in his ruling, Pittman stated, “Congress assigned the CFPB as an umpire to call balls and strikes on the reasonableness and proportionality of penalty fees. But by preventing card issuers from actually imposing penalty fees, the CFPB impermissibly established a strike zone only large enough for pitches right down the middle.”
The judge also denied the CFPB’s request to transfer the case to Washington, further complicating the agency’s path forward.
Billions in Consumer Costs at Stake
The CFPB estimates that without the cap, American consumers will pay over $56 billion in credit card fees over the next five years. The agency’s spokesperson called the ruling “a gift to big banks,” emphasizing that late fees cost families $27 million each day.
Critics argue that the decision benefits financial institutions at the expense of vulnerable consumers. Erik Huberman, a financial analyst, commented, “This ruling highlights a troubling trend—where regulatory limitations aimed at consumer protection are consistently rolled back.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Bankers Association, which challenged the rule, praised the ruling, arguing the fee cap was unreasonable and overly restrictive.


Oil Prices Slip as Oversupply Concerns and U.S.-Iran Talks Shape Market Outlook
Kawasaki Heavy Shares Slide on Report of ¥200 Billion Capital Raise Plan
SoftBank’s LY Corp, Bain Raise Kakaku.com Bid to ¥670 Billion, Intensifying Takeover Battle
Wall Street Ends Mixed as Weak Jobs Data Lowers Fed Rate Hike Bets, Chip Stocks Tumble
Super Micro Employees Detained in Taiwan AI Server Export Investigation
Anthropic Tightens AI Access Controls After Reports of China-Based Workarounds
Asian Stocks Rebound as Tech Shares Rally on Fed Rate Cut Hopes and Easing Iran Tensions
Mary Daly Says AI Uncertainty Clouds Fed Rate Outlook Despite Restrictive Policy
Apple Eyes Chinese Memory Chips as AI Shortage Pressures iPhone Supply Chain
Lockheed Martin Emerges as Frontrunner to Acquire Ultra Maritime in $3.5 Billion Defense Deal
BHP Workers Approve New Labour Agreement at WA Iron Ore Operations
New Zealand Consumer Confidence Rises in June as Inflation Expectations Ease
Brazil to Phase Out Gasoline Subsidy First as Diesel Support Stays Longer
Gold Price Holds Above $4,000 as Fed Rate Hike Expectations and U.S. Jobs Data Weigh on Market
Moody’s Says Peru’s President-Elect Keiko Fujimori Could Boost Investor Confidence
Denmark Central Bank Intervenes to Support Krone Peg Against Euro 



