Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

fintechfintechauthorTomio GeronNoneGet access to the Protocol | Fintech newsletter, research, news alerts and events.f6ea366a38
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
Protocol | 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.

Protocol | China

China’s edtech crackdown isn’t what you think. Here’s why.

It's part of an attempt to fix education inequality and address a looming demographic crisis.

In the past decade, China's private tutoring market has expanded rapidly as it's been digitized and bolstered by capital.

Photo: Getty Images

Beijing's strike against the private tutoring and ed tech industry has rattled the market and led observers to try to answer one big question: What is Beijing trying to achieve?

Sweeping policy guidelines issued by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party on July 24 and the State Council now mandate that existing private tutoring companies register as nonprofit organizations. Extracurricular tutoring companies will be banned from going public. Online tutoring agencies will be subject to regulatory approval.

Keep Reading Show less
Shen Lu

Shen Lu is a reporter with Protocol | China. She has spent six years covering China from inside and outside its borders. Previously, she was a fellow at Asia Society's ChinaFile and a Beijing-based producer for CNN. Her writing has appeared in Foreign Policy, The New York Times and POLITICO, among other publications. Shen Lu is a founding member of Chinese Storytellers, a community serving and elevating Chinese professionals in the global media industry.

After a year and a half of living and working through a pandemic, it's no surprise that employees are sending out stress signals at record rates. According to a 2021 study by Indeed, 52% of employees today say they feel burnt out. Over half of employees report working longer hours, and a quarter say they're unable to unplug from work.

The continued swell of reported burnout is a concerning trend for employers everywhere. Not only does it harm mental health and well-being, but it can also impact absenteeism, employee retention and — between the drain on morale and high turnover — your company culture.

Crisis management is one thing, but how do you permanently lower the temperature so your teams can recover sustainably? Companies around the world are now taking larger steps to curb burnout, with industry leaders like LinkedIn, Hootsuite and Bumble shutting down their offices for a full week to allow all employees extra time off. The CEO of Okta, worried about burnout, asked all employees to email him their vacation plans in 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Stella Garber
Stella Garber is Trello's Head of Marketing. Stella has led Marketing at Trello for the last seven years from early stage startup all the way through its acquisition by Atlassian in 2017 and beyond. Stella was an early champion of remote work, having led remote teams for the last decade plus.

It’s soul-destroying and it uses DRM, therefore Peloton is tech

"I mean, the pedals go around if you turn off all the tech, but Peloton isn't selling a pedaling product."

Is this tech? Or is it just a bike with a screen?

Image: Peloton and Protocol

One of the breakout hits from the pandemic, besides Taylor Swift's "Folklore," has been Peloton. With upwards of 5.4 million members as of March and nearly $1.3 billion in revenue that quarter, a lot of people are turning in their gym memberships for a bike or a treadmill and a slick-looking app.

But here at Protocol, it's that slick-looking app, plus all the tech that goes into it, that matters. And that's where things got really heated during our chat this week. Is Peloton tech? Or is it just a bike with a giant tablet on it? Can all bikes be tech with a little elbow grease?

Keep Reading Show less
Karyne Levy

Karyne Levy ( @karynelevy) is the West Coast editor at Protocol. Before joining Protocol, Karyne was a senior producer at Scribd, helping to create the original content program. Prior to that she was an assigning editor at NerdWallet, a senior tech editor at Business Insider, and the assistant managing editor at CNET, where she also hosted Rumor Has It for CNET TV. She lives outside San Francisco with her wife, son and lots of pets.

Protocol | Workplace

In Silicon Valley, it’s February 2020 all over again

"We'll reopen when it's right, but right now the world is changing too much."

Tech companies are handling the delta variant in differing ways.

Photo: alvarez/Getty Images

It's still 2021, right? Because frankly, it's starting to feel like March 2020 all over again.

Google, Apple, Uber and Lyft have now all told employees they won't have to come back to the office before October as COVID-19 case counts continue to tick back up. Facebook, Google and Uber are now requiring workers to get vaccinated before coming to the office, and Twitter — also requiring vaccines — went so far as to shut down its reopened offices on Wednesday, and put future office reopenings on hold.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Protocol | China

Livestreaming ecommerce next battleground for China’s nationalists

Vendors for Nike and even Chinese brands were harassed for not donating enough to Henan.

Nationalists were trolling in the comment sections of livestream sessions selling products by Li-Ning, Adidas and other brands.

Collage: Weibo, Bilibili

The No. 1 rule of sales: Don't praise your competitor's product. Rule No. 2: When you are put to a loyalty test by nationalist trolls, forget the first rule.

While China continues to respond to the catastrophic flooding that has killed 99 and displaced 1.4 million people in the central province of Henan, a large group of trolls was busy doing something else: harassing ordinary sportswear sellers on China's livestream ecommerce platforms. Why? Because they determined that the brands being sold had donated too little, or too late, to the people impacted by floods.

Keep Reading Show less
Zeyi Yang
Zeyi Yang is a reporter with Protocol | China. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow for the digital magazine Rest of World, covering the intersection of technology and culture in China and neighboring countries. He has also contributed to the South China Morning Post, Nikkei Asia, Columbia Journalism Review, among other publications. In his spare time, Zeyi co-founded a Mandarin podcast that tells LGBTQ stories in China. He has been playing Pokemon for 14 years and has a weird favorite pick.
Latest Stories