Fintech

Banks and fintechs battle over financial data

In CFPB rule-making, fintech companies want more access to data. But banks beg to differ.

Banks and fintechs battle over financial data

Fintech companies are pushing for rules that allow consumers to access this data more easily through new fintech products.

Photo: Getty Images

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is preparing to change its rules on financial data, and a battle is brewing between existing financial institutions that control it, such as banks, and the upstart fintechs lookingto unlock this data.

In one of the key regulatory fintech areas under review, Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the changes could have a major impact on how consumers can access and move their financial data between banks, fintechs and other companies — as well as which companies become consumers' go-to source for financial services. The deadline for submitting comments on changing these rules was Thursday.

Fintech companies are pushing for rules that allow consumers to access this data more easily through new fintech products.

A group of 21 companies — including Plaid, TransferWise, Dave, Credit Karma and Gusto, as well as the MarketPlace Lending Association, whose members include Affirm and SoFi — wrote a letter to the CFPB arguing that consumers be able to authorize fintech companies to access this data more freely.

Meanwhile, banks and other financial institutions are pushing back against this accessibility, arguing that there are cybersecurity risks involved with sharing data and that the costs are prohibitive in implementing this technology.

The fintech companies, which do things such as help consumers track spending, save, decrease debt, improve credit scores and access loans, say that consumers need access to their financial data in order to achieve these goals. "To use our services, consumers rely on their ability to authorize the sharing of their financial data," the group wrote.

But banks and other "data holders" that have this data through a direct relationship with consumers have not shared the data with other companies in the same way they do for their own apps, the fintech companies say. "Understandably, data holders have an advantage in this current system: as data holders they can impose limits on what type of data is shared, how it is shared, and who it is shared with," the letter to the CFPB says. "When consumers lack control over their own financial data, they are impeded from accessing financial services they want to use."

However, companies' access to this financial data could put the burden of cost on banks and credit unions, without fintech companies paying their share, the Credit Union National Association wrote in its comments to the CFPB. "CUNA is concerned about the cost of market failures if a rule develops that requires credit unions to give free access to its financial data or other proprietary intellectual property," the comment reads. "In this particular instance, financial services providers invest significant resources in time, money, and continued upkeep for their databases, online access, and organized details about transactions. If third parties can access and use this data without paying their fair share, these third parties are free-riders."

Consumers may also be confused about the difference between fintech companies and credit unions, CUNA wrote. "Credit unions are concerned that consumers will encounter businesses offering financial services similar to a credit union or bank without realizing that these non-regulated entities do not provide the same data security, privacy, and consumer protections as regulated financial [institutions]," CUNA wrote.

Cybersecurity is also a risk, CUNA wrote. "Currently, there are regulatory gaps that fintech and other companies exploit to provide financial services. This leads to less consumer protection and, at its worst, leads to the exploitation of consumers as their expectation of consumer protection has historically been based on the regulation of financial institutions and the products and services they offer."

Of course, when this data access is limited, fintech companies can't do what they want to do: create and build new products such as savings, budgeting or lending apps. The lack of access to this data could make many fintech companies' products much less useful, and therefore much less valuable. It's hard to budget on an app when the spending or savings data is days or weeks old, for instance.

The fintech companies argue that this data belongs to consumers and they should be able to share it with whichever app or company they want. "Consumers' financial data belongs to consumers, and their access to that data should not depend on who is currently holding that data," the letter says.

The group is asking that banks and other data holders not be allowed to limit this data access and data sharing. "Right now some data holders restrict consumers' ability to access their own data, which prevents consumers from benefiting from financial technology," they wrote. "The Bureau should require that a data holder can not limit any information that can be reasonably construed as belonging to the consumer for both direct and authorized access."

Notably, Plaid said it would welcome direct regulatory supervision of data aggregators such as Plaid as part of larger changes to regulating this sector. But until that happens, Plaid suggests that CFPB can exercise "supervisory authority" over companies that provide data aggregation services to banks, according to John Pitts, policy lead at Plaid.

Plaid is also asking for "full parity" between direct data access from, say, a consumer's bank and other access through another fintech company that the consumer authorizes. In other words, a consumer should be able to access the same data directly from a bank and through another provider.

Plaid isn't asking for specific types of data that should be accessible to fintechs to be named, but it is asking CFPB to create broader rights for consumers and principles for data that should be made available to consumers and fintech companies they want to authorize.

The CFPB shouldn't allow data holders such as banks to restrict access to the data just to support their competition against other companies, Plaid said. For example, some banks don't update certain data as often for aggregators as they do for their own mobile apps; some do it only once a day, Plaid said, but having continuous access to this data is needed for personal finance tools and budget tracking.

When banks limit updates to this data, for example to once a day, the data in fintech apps is "outdated" for any spending or deposits made after that point in the day. "[T]his can result in consumers making spending choices based upon inaccurate information presented in their third-party applications," Pitts said.

This is also a competitive issue, Pitts said, because "limiting updates can make third-party services ineffective for consumers, and at the very least inferior to the data holder's own services, leading to diminished competitiveness among these providers."

The Bank Policy Institute, a group representing the banking industry, said that industry groups should set technical standards for accessing this financial data, which would ensure "innovation and competition." "The CFPB should encourage market-driven solutions and avoid engaging in specific technical standard setting for consumer data sharing," BPI wrote in its comments.

In its comments, the American Bankers Association argued against the CFPB defining what data fields should and shouldn't be regulated. "A more prescriptive approach is not only unnecessary but may undermine the progress that has already taken place and risks leaving consumers exposed if undertaken too narrowly," the ABA wrote.

Entertainment

The (gaming) clones never stopped attacking

Clones keep getting through app review despite App Store rules about copying. It's a sign of the weaknesses in mobile app stores — and the weakness in Big Tech’s after-the-fact moderation approach.

Clones aren't always illegal, but they are widely despised.

Image: Disney

Two of the most fundamental tenets of the mobile gaming market:

  1. Free always wins.
  2. No good gaming idea is safe from copycats.

In combination, these two rules help produce what the industry calls a clone. Most often, clones are low-effort, ripped-off versions of popular games that monetize in not-so-savory fashion while drawing in players with a price tag of zero.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Sponsored Content

A CCO’s viewpoint on top enterprise priorities in 2022

The 2022 non-predictions guide to what your enterprise is working on starting this week

As Honeywell’s global chief commercial officer, I am privileged to have the vantage point of seeing the demands, challenges and dynamics that customers across the many sectors we cater to are experiencing and sharing.

This past year has brought upon all businesses and enterprises an unparalleled change and challenge. This was the case at Honeywell, for example, a company with a legacy in innovation and technology for over a century. When I joined the company just months before the pandemic hit we were already in the midst of an intense transformation under the leadership of CEO Darius Adamczyk. This transformation spanned our portfolio and business units. We were already actively working on products and solutions in advanced phases of rollouts that the world has shown a need and demand for pre-pandemic. Those included solutions in edge intelligence, remote operations, quantum computing, warehouse automation, building technologies, safety and health monitoring and of course ESG and climate tech which was based on our exceptional success over the previous decade.

Keep Reading Show less
Jeff Kimbell
Jeff Kimbell is Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer at Honeywell. In this role, he has broad responsibilities to drive organic growth by enhancing global sales and marketing capabilities. Jeff has nearly three decades of leadership experience. Prior to joining Honeywell in 2019, Jeff served as a Partner in the Transformation Practice at McKinsey & Company, where he worked with companies facing operational and financial challenges and undergoing “good to great” transformations. Before that, he was an Operating Partner at Silver Lake Partners, a global leader in technology and held a similar position at Cerberus Capital LP. Jeff started his career as a Manufacturing Team Manager and Engineering Project Manager at Procter & Gamble before becoming a strategy consultant at Bain & Company and holding executive roles at Dell EMC and Transamerica Corporation. Jeff earned a B.S. in electrical engineering at Kansas State University and an M.B.A. at Dartmouth College.
Entertainment

Beat Saber, Bored Apes and more: What to do this weekend

Don't know what to do this weekend? We've got you covered.

Images: Ross Belot/Flickr; IGBD; BAYC

This week we’re listening to “Harvest Moon” on repeat; burning some calories playing Beat Saber; and learning all about the artist behind the goofy ape pics that everyone (including Gwyneth Paltrow?) is talking about.

Neil Young: Off Spotify? No problem.

Neil Young removed his music from Spotify this week, but countless recordings are still available on YouTube, including this 1971 video of him performing “Heart of Gold” in front of a live studio audience, complete with some charming impromptu banter. And while you’re there, scroll down and read a few of the top-rated comments. I promise you won’t be disappointed.

'Archive 81': Not based on a book, but on a podcast!

Netflix’s latest hit show is a supernatural mystery horror mini-series, and I have to admit that I was on the fence about it many times, in part because the plot just often didn’t add up. But then the main character, Dan the film buff and archivist, would put on his gloves, get in the zone, and meticulously restore a severely damaged, decades old video tape, and proceed to look for some meaning beyond the images. That ritual, and the sentiment that we produce, consume and collect media for something more than meets the eye, ultimately saved the show, despite some shortcomings.

'Secrets of Sulphur Springs': Season 2 is out now

If you’re looking for a mystery that's a little more family-friendly, give this show about a haunted hotel, time travel, and kids growing up in a world that their parents don’t fully understand a try. Season 2 dropped on Disney+ this month, and it not only includes a lot more time travel mysteries, but even uses the show’s time machine to tackle subjects as serious as reparations.

The artist behind those Bored Apes

Remember how NFTs are supposed to generate royalties with every resale, and thus support artists better than any of their existing revenue streams? Seneca, the artist who was instrumental in creating those iconic apes for the Bored Ape Yacht Club, wasn’t able to share details about her compensation in this Rolling Stone profile, but it sure sounds like she is not getting her fair share.

Beat Saber: Update incoming

Years later, Beat Saber remains my favorite VR game, which is why I was very excited to see a teaser video for cascading blocks, which could be arriving any day now. Time to bust out the Quest for some practice time this weekend!

Correction: Story has been updated to correct the spelling of Gwyneth Paltrow's name. This story was updated Jan. 28, 2022.


Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.

Boost 2

Can Matt Mullenweg save the internet?

He's turning Automattic into a different kind of tech giant. But can he take on the trillion-dollar walled gardens and give the internet back to the people?

Matt Mullenweg, CEO of Automattic and founder of WordPress, poses for Protocol at his home in Houston, Texas.
Photo: Arturo Olmos for Protocol

In the early days of the pandemic, Matt Mullenweg didn't move to a compound in Hawaii, bug out to a bunker in New Zealand or head to Miami and start shilling for crypto. No, in the early days of the pandemic, Mullenweg bought an RV. He drove it all over the country, bouncing between Houston and San Francisco and Jackson Hole with plenty of stops in national parks. In between, he started doing some tinkering.

The tinkering is a part-time gig: Most of Mullenweg’s time is spent as CEO of Automattic, one of the web’s largest platforms. It’s best known as the company that runs WordPress.com, the hosted version of the blogging platform that powers about 43% of the websites on the internet. Since WordPress is open-source software, no company technically owns it, but Automattic provides tools and services and oversees most of the WordPress-powered internet. It’s also the owner of the booming ecommerce platform WooCommerce, Day One, the analytics tool Parse.ly and the podcast app Pocket Casts. Oh, and Tumblr. And Simplenote. And many others. That makes Mullenweg one of the most powerful CEOs in tech, and one of the most important voices in the debate over the future of the internet.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Workplace

Mental health at work is still taboo. Here's how to make it easier.

Tech leaders, HR experts and organizational psychologists share tips for how to destigmatize mental health at work.

How to de-stigmatize mental health at work, according to experts.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

When the pandemic started, HR software startup Phenom knew that its employees were going to need mental health support. So it started offering a meditation program, as well as a counselor available for therapy sessions.

To Chief People Officer Brad Goldoor’s surprise, utilization of these benefits was very low, starting at about a 10% take rate and eventually weaning off. His diagnosis: People still aren’t fully comfortable opening up about mental health, and they’re especially not comfortable engaging with their employer on the topic.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Fintech

Robinhood's regulatory troubles are just the tip of the iceberg

It’s easiest to blame Robinhood’s troubles on regulatory fallout, but its those troubles have obscured the larger issue: The company lacks an enduring competitive edge.

A crypto comeback might go a long way to help Robinhood’s revenue

Image: Olena Panasovska / Alex Muravev / Protocol

It’s been a full year since Robinhood weathered the memestock storm, and the company is now in much worse shape than many of us would have guessed back in January 2021. After announcing its Q4 earnings last night, Robinhood’s stock plunged into the single digits — just below $10 — down from a recent high of $70 in August 2021. That means Robinhood’s valuation dropped more than 84% in less than six months.

Investor confidence won’t be bolstered much by yesterday’s earnings results. Total net revenues dropped to $363 million from $365 million in the preceding quarter. In the quarter before that, Robinhood reported a much better $565 million in net revenue. Net losses were bad but not quite as bad as before: Robinhood reported a $423 million net loss in Q4, an improvement from the $1.3 billion net loss in Q3 2021. One of the most shocking data points: Average revenue per user dropped to $64, down from a recent high of $137 in Q1 2021. At the same time, Robinhood actually reported a decrease in monthly active users, from 18.9 million in Q3 2021 to 17.3 million in Q4 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at hchitkara@protocol.com.

Latest Stories
Bulletins