NCLC Advocate Applauds the Biden Administration Extension of the Pause on Federal Student Loan Payments, but More Needs to Be Done - National ...

NCLC Advocate Applauds the Biden
Administration Extension of the Pause on
Federal Student Loan Payments, but More
Needs to Be Done

December 22, 2021

In response to the Biden Administration extending the pause on federal student loans payment until
May 1, 2022, Abby Shafroth, interim director of the National Consumer Law Center’s
Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project, issued the following statement:

“Today’s announcement means that over the holidays, struggling student loan borrowers will not be
forced to choose between paying student loans and paying for rent, medicines, childcare, and other
necessities. Restarting federal student loan payments on February 1 would have been a disaster for
millions of low-income borrowers across the country, borrowers who are disproportionately women
and people of color. These borrowers have not yet recovered from the pandemic, and their future
looks even more uncertain as the impact of the Omicron variant and increasing inflation threatens to
further destabilize their finances. Today’s announcement means that these borrowers will not face
the devastating collection practices the U.S. Department of Education deploys after a borrower
defaults–including seizure of Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit payments in tax
refunds and siphoning money directly from paychecks and Social Security benefits on February 1,
2022. We hope that the Department and the remaining student loan servicers will take this
opportunity to take meaningful steps to fix the student loan system before it is turned back on.

“While we celebrate this announcement, there is still much work to be done in fixing the broken
federal student loan system. The Department should proceed with Operation Fresh Start and provide
immediate relief to borrowers in default by removing their accounts from default – providing a fresh
start to 7 million borrowers with loans in default across the country. In addition, we urge President
Biden to act now to cancel a portion of all federal student loan borrowers’ debt to prevent the
student loan crisis from continuing to balloon.”

Broad Coalition Urges CFPB To Examine
FINTECH Credit Products and Fee Models

December 21, 2021

79 Groups Ask CFPB to Provide Much Needed Oversight for Emerging Credit Products

The Consumer Federation of America, Center for Responsible Lending, National Consumer Law
Center, Student Borrower Protection Center, and 75 additional organizations called for Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra to carefully examine fintech credit
products and fee models that are evading consumer protection laws and creating debt traps for
consumers. The groups applauded the CFPB for its recent inquiry into five large buy now, pay later
providers, and they expressed that they remain alarmed by the explosion of new, underregulated
consumer credit products, including but not limited to buy now, pay later loans, income share
agreements, cash advances, “fintech” overdraft or overdraft avoidance products, and earned wage
access products or look-alike products. The groups argue that innovation should be consistent with
and enhance consumer protections, and it should not shield new products from consumer protection
laws and oversight. Last week, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and several members of the Senate
Banking Committee sent a letter to the CFPB about Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) products and
providers, calling for a review of these products to ensure transparency and oversight of this
growing market.

“Although innovation plays an important role in expanding access to financial services, regulators
must keep careful watch of rapidly growing products and fee models that share many similarities
with age-old predatory products,” said Rachel Gittleman, Financial Services Outreach
Manager of the Consumer Federation of America. “We should be especially wary of products
that claim to be promoting financial inclusion but, in reality, do quite the opposite.”

“Many fintechs are coming up with clever arguments about how they are not offering ‘credit’ subject
to consumer protection laws, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck,” said
Lauren Saunders, Associate Director of the National Consumer Law Center. “The CFPB
needs to act quickly to stamp out evasions of consumer protection laws before they spread.”

“Much of the fintech industry operates in an underregulated, Wild West environment. To stop
lenders from charging illegally high interest rates, targeting people of color with predatory products
or harming consumers in other ways, the CFPB must supply sufficient oversight and apply consumer
financial protection law to the fintech industry,” said Taylor Roberson, Federal Policy Counsel
of the Center for Responsible Lending.

“Today’s letter sends a clear message—regardless of industry hype or flashy marketing, companies
offering predatory products have to comply with the law. As new, tech-branded financial offerings
emerge, the same age-old risks to consumers persist. It’s critical that the CFPB continue to closely
monitor these companies and take action to protect the public,” said Ben Kaufman, Head of
Investigations and Senior Policy Advisor of the Student Borrower Protection Center.

The letter discusses various products and fee models that share similarities in how they operate and
how they use “innovation” to claim that they do not fit within the existing regulatory framework.
Some also use deceptive means to disguise the cost of credit. The groups argue that regardless of
their structure, each of these products is credit—they provide funding today and are repaid later.
Given that, these products should be subject to the host of state and federal consumer protection
laws that regulate credit products.

At a minimum, these products need to be covered by basic consumer protections and be examined
for unfair, deceptive or abusive practices and unlawful discrimination independently of compliance
with credit laws. Each of these products discussed in the letter should be regulated as the financial
services products that they are.

Oversight is especially urgent as these offerings continue to increase and infiltrate new market
areas. Allowing these products to escape coverage would lead to an undermining of consumer

protection laws, making the financial marketplace less fair and competitive.

CFPB Must Protect Consumers From Fraud
in Payment Systems

December 21, 2021

Today, 65 consumer, civil rights, faith, legal services, and community groups submitted comments to
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in response to its inquiry into certain business
practices of six large technology companies operating payments systems in the United States. The
groups urged the CFPB to require person-to-person (p2p) payment providers to protect consumers
from fraud and errors, and to work with the Federal Reserve Board to ensure protections are in
place before the Fed launches its new FedNow p2p service.

“Tech companies must take responsibility when their payment apps allow fraud and errors and they
give scammers a way to receive money. In today’s world of fintech and innovation, it is ironic that
the primary response to fraud and errors in p2p systems is to use old-fashioned disclosures and
warnings to consumers to ‘be careful,’” said Lauren Saunders, associate director of the
National Consumer Law Center.

The groups’ comment letter explained:

“The existing p2p payment systems of large technology companies and financial institutions simply
are not safe for consumers to use. Scams often take the last dollar from those least able to afford it,
and often target older adults, immigrants and other communities of color. These communities,
already denied or stripped of wealth through discrimination over the centuries to the present day,
can least afford to lose money to scams and errors.”

The letter explained that the lack of protection in p2p systems plagues not only the payment systems
of large technology companies but also p2p payment systems that operate through banks, like the
FedNow system that the Fed is about to launch. “The FedNow system should not be launched unless
and until consumers (and small businesses) are protected from fraud and errors,” the groups said.
The groups urged the CFPB to:

      Make clear that the existing obligation under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) to
      investigate and resolve errors applies in the case of consumer errors in p2p systems.

      Ensure that consumers using p2p services have protection from scammers, using the Bureau’s
      EFTA rulemaking authority to define additional “errors.”

      Work with the Federal Reserve Board to improve the proposed rules governing the FedNow
      system to add in protection against consumer errors and fraud.

Clarify the rules and protections when accounts are frozen.

      With respect to data sharing issues, make clear the application of existing federal data
      governance laws, including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

“Fast p2p payment systems, if properly designed, can provide broad benefits to consumers,”
Saunders added. “But those benefits will only be realized if the systems are safe to use.”

Related Materials:

      Press release: Fed Must Do More to Protect Consumers From Fraud and Mistakes in New P2P
      Payment System, Sept. 9, 2021

Statement of NCLC’s Persis Yu re: extension
of student loan payment pause until 2022

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 6, 2021
National Consumer Law Center contacts: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org) or Stephen Rouzer
(sourzer@nclc.org)

Statement of Persis Yu, the director of National Consumer Law Center’s Student Loan
Borrower Assistance Project, in response to announcement that the student loan payment
suspension has been extended until January 31, 2022.

Washington, D.C. – “Borrowers are collectively taking a huge sigh of relief at the news that the
federal student loan payment pause has been extended once again. The student loan system is not
ready to resume repayment on October 1 and President Biden has made the right decision to
postpone repayment.

With the recent exit of the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (AKA “FedLoan
Servicing”) and the New Hampshire Higher Education Loan Corporation (AKA “Granite State
Management & Resources”), there are too many moving parts to successfully start federal student
loan repayment. By extending the payment suspension, President Biden is preserving the wages and
social security benefits of millions of borrowers in default. While the payment suspension is still in
place, the President must take meaningful steps to improve the student loan system. This should
include using his authority to provide borrowers with widespread student debt cancellation, and
removing student loan accounts from default so that millions of borrowers in financial distress do
not face seizure of their wages, social security benefits, and vital tax credits–including the Earned
Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit–when the payment pause ends.”

Free Webinar for Thousands of Students
Impacted by Sudden Closure of Online
Schools
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 3, 2021
Contacts: Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Sara Williams, sjwilliams@lafla.org or
(562) 400-8754
National Consumer Law Center, Jan Kruse, jkruse@nclc.org
Washington, D.C. — This week, four large, national college chains are closing, stranding
more than 7,000 students, most of whom are online: Independence University,
CollegeAmerica, Stevens-Henager College, and California College San Diego. Now the
school’s owner, the Center for Excellence in Higher Education (CEHE), is aggressively
pushing impacted students to immediately enroll in for-profit schools without providing
them information about their rights regarding closed school discharges. This is especially
concerning given CEHE’s history of operating low-quality schools while engaging in
predatory practices and fraud.
In August 2020, a Colorado court ordered Stevens-Henager and CollegeAmerica, as well as
their owner, to pay $3 million in civil penalties for illegally luring students into high-priced,
low-quality programs with misleading claims of high-earning potential and inflated job
placement rates post-graduation. In April 2021, the schools’ accreditor revoked all four
schools’ accreditation (the schools have since appealed). In order to protect taxpayers and
students from further harm, the U.S. Department of Education placed restrictions on the
schools’ receipt of federal financial aid. In response, CEHE decided to close the schools.
The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles and National Consumer Law Center are offering a
free webinar this Wednesday, August 4 to ensure that impacted students have accurate
information about their rights.
“As students navigate their school’s closure, they should take time to consider all their
options,” said Robyn Smith, a senior attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los
Angeles and of counsel with the National Consumer Law Center. “Students are
eligible for a complete cancellation of their federal student loans and restoration of their
Pell Grants and G.I. Bill benefits. They don’t have to start repaying their federal loans for at
least six months. They should not rush into enrolling in any other schools that are pushing
them to enroll right away. Aggressive recruitment is a red flag that a school is more
interested in generating revenue than helping students do what is in their best interest.”
Although their school may pressure them to complete their program via a “teach-out” or
transferring to a new school, students who do so will not be able to obtain a closed school
discharge. “Student loan borrowers should carefully consider whether completing their
program is worth the debt they will need to repay to do so,” said Kyra Taylor, a staff
attorney with the National Consumer Law Center. “Given the misconduct and
misrepresentations that were revealed by the Colorado Attorney General’s lawsuit against
CEHE, students should be especially skeptical if their schools are pressuring them to forgo
the complete cancellation they are entitled to and enroll in the same program elsewhere.”
The webinar will be presented on Wednesday, August 4 from 3-4 p.m. EDT / 12-1 p.m.
PDT, and will provide students with information about student loan discharges and other
rights and options, with respect to the closure of the CEHE-owned schools. Borrowers and
advocates are encouraged to register. The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles has also
posted information about borrower options.
The Webinar is FREE and will be made available for access following the live broadcast.

​NCLC ​Advocates Applaud 36% National Rate
 Cap Bill to Curb High-Cost, Predatory Loans
 Across the Nation

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 29, 2021
National Consumer Law Center contact: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org)

Washington, D.C. – Attorneys at the National Consumer Law Center praised the introduction
yesterday of the Veterans and Consumers Fair Credit Act in the U.S. Senate, led by U.S. Senators
Jack Reed (D-RI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), along
with seven other original co-sponsors.

“Interest rate limits are the simplest, most effective way to stop predatory lending and to ensure that
lenders make responsible loans that people can afford to repay without getting caught in a debt
trap,” said National Consumer Law Center Associate Director Lauren Saunders. “A national
36% interest rate cap that covers all lenders, including banks, and all borrowers, including veterans
and other consumers, will prevent predatory lenders from evading state interest rate limits and give
everyone the same protections that our active military families already enjoy. The 36% interest rate
limit is the broadly accepted dividing line between responsible lending and destructive credit that
harms lives and destroys financial inclusion.”

The Veterans and Consumers Fair Credit Act would eliminate high-cost, predatory payday loans,
auto-title loans, and similar forms of toxic credit across the nation by:

      Establishing a simple, common sense limit that is broadly supported by the public on a
      bipartisan basis.
      Preventing hidden fees and loopholes.
      Simplifying compliance by adopting a standard that lenders already understand and use.
      Upholding the ability of states to adopt stronger protections as needed, such as lower rates for
      larger loans.

The Veterans and Consumers Fair Credit Act extends the federal Military Lending Act’s (MLA) 36%
interest rate cap on consumer loans to all Americans, including veterans and Gold Star Families

Polling data show that voters across the political spectrum strongly support interest rate limits.
Many states already have a reasonable rate cap. For example, in November 2020, 83% of Nebraska
voters approved a 36% interest rate limit. Similar strong bipartisan majorities of voters or
legislatures in recent years have approved 36% or lower rate caps in many other states, including
Arkansas, Arizona, Illinois, Colorado, Montana, and Ohio, but some lenders are evading those laws
through rent-a-bank schemes. Currently, 32 states and the District of Columbia impose an interest
rate limit of 36% or less on a $2,000, 2-year installment loan, though some have loopholes for short-
term payday loans or other types of loans.

Related NCLC Resources
> Why 36%? The History, Use, and Purpose of the 36% Interest Rate Cap, April 2013
> State Rate Caps for $500 and $2,000 Loans, March 2021
> After Payday Loans: How Do Consumers Fare When States Restrict High Cost Loans?, October
2018

Bipartisan Legislation in Congress Would
Ban Forced Arbitration Clauses that Protect
Sexual Predators

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 15, 2021
National Consumer Law Center contacts: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org) or Lauren Saunders
(lsaunders@nclc.org)

Washington, D.C. – Advocates at the National Consumer Law Center applauded bipartisan and
bicameral legislation announced yesterday by U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Senator
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Dick Durbin (D-IL), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with
U.S. Representatives Cheri Bustos (D-IL), Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). The
legislation would restore access to justice and help prevent sexual harassment and assault in the
workplace, at nursing homes, and in other settings. The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual
Harassment Act would void forced arbitration provisions as they apply to sexual assault and
harassment survivors, allowing survivors to seek justice, discuss their cases publicly, and eliminate
institutional protection for harassers.

“We applaud this bipartisan effort to ban forced arbitration clauses that protect sexual predators
and shield them from justice. Forced arbitration is a get-out-of-jail card for sexual predators and
others that denies survivors’ right to their day in court,” said National Consumer Law Center
Associate Director Lauren Saunders.

“Sexual harassment of former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson and widespread sexual
harassment of Kay Jewelers employees show how forced arbitration clauses help companies hide
illegal conduct and avoid accountability for their wrongdoing,” explained Saunders. “Much of the
evidence of apparent rampant sexual abuse of female Kay Jewelers employees was kept from the
public, and even other victims, through the gag orders imposed in forced arbitration.”

New D.C. Study Shows How Arrearage
Management Programs Are a Win-Win for
Companies and Customers Alike

COVID and Utility Arrearages

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought into sharp focus the fact that millions of Americans cannot
afford the bills for utility service that keep the lights on, the food in the refrigerator cold, the air
conditioning running in the summer, and the heating system running in the winter. In order to

protect public health, states around the country passed moratoriums on utility terminations.
According to the National Energy Directors Association, about three dozen states had mandatory
termination moratoriums for at least some period of time in 2020. Those moratoriums varied in
their duration and the types of utility service covered (e.g., electricity, gas, water), but all of them
implicitly recognized a truth noted in 1978 by the Supreme Court of the United States: “Utility
service is a necessity of modern life; indeed, the discontinuance of water or heating for even short
periods of time may threaten health and safety.” (Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div. v. Craft, 436
U.S. 1, 18).

As the pandemic approaches the 18-month mark, only a small handful of states still have a
mandatory moratorium in place. For example, on June 24, California extended its moratorium on
electricity and gas terminations through September 30, 2021. Other states with moratoriums that
extend beyond the end of July include Arizona (October 15), Maryland (November 1), New Mexico
(August 12), New Jersey (December 31), and Washington (September 30). But the underlying
problem remains: far too many families cannot afford essential utility service and will face service
termination unless other policies are in place to protect them.

Policies to Help Financially Struggling Customers

There are a variety of existing policies that states have adopted to minimize the likelihood that
vulnerable households will lose utility service simply because those bills are unaffordable, including:

► Many states require their utilities to invest in energy efficiency measures, often with a
focus on serving lower income customers, in order to reduce consumption, make the bills more
affordable, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

► Many states also have adopted discounted rates for low-income customers —which can be
offered as a flat discount for all income-eligible customers, or as tiered discounts which provide
sliding discounts that increase as income decreases — and Percentage of Income Payment Plans,
under which the amount the customer pays is set at an affordable percentage of the customer’s
income, e.g., 6%.

►Yet another approach is for a utility to offer financially struggling customers an Arrearage
Management Program, or AMP. The basic AMP model requires the customer in arrears simply to
pay the ongoing bills as they come due, with the amount in arrears held in abeyance. The company
rewards the customer for each timely monthly payment by reducing the arrearage by a specified
amount, usually 1/12 of the full arrearage amount. Thus, a customer on an AMP can reduce the
arrearage to zero by making 12 timely payments of monthly bills. (See NCLC’s report on AMPs).

AMPs, which are offered in about 10 states, recently expanded to two new jurisdictions, California
and the District of Columbia. A recent report on the D.C. program demonstrates how AMPs can not
only help struggling customers avoid termination of their utility service but also help companies
successfully collect revenues in a more humane way.

D.C. AMP Reports Good Results for Customer and Company Alike

In June 2017, the D.C. Public Service Commission approved the adoption of an AMP that NCLC had
first advocated in Commission proceedings regarding the merger of utility companies Pepco and
Exelon. D.C. PSC Order No. 18799 in Formal Case 1119. After protracted multi-party discussions
over program design, Pepco began enrolling recipients in October 2019; by May 2020, 107
participants were enrolled. Before the program launched, Pepco retained the nonprofit research
institute APPRISE to carefully monitor implementation and prepare periodic evaluations. The first

evaluation report was filed with the Commission on May 24, 2021.

The APPRISE evaluation considers the AMP to be a success and recommends that it continue and be
expanded to more customers. While the AMP participants had exceedingly low household income —
$15,653 on average — 90% of the participants noted that they were trying harder to pay their bills,
83% said that the AMP made it easier to pay their bills, and the data showed that these customers
measurably increased their “bill coverage ratio” (the percent of billed amounts actually paid)
compared to a control group of equally poor customers. Twenty-six percent (26%) of those who
enrolled in the AMP had been shut-off at the time they enrolled, yet 93% of those enrollees were still
in the program as of August 2020. Thus, the AMP program took a cohort of very low-income
customers who struggled to afford their utility bills, including many who had service terminated, and
supported the customers’ efforts to make more consistent payments and stay connected to their
utilities. Moreover, the very structure of the AMP — where the company reduces the arrearage
balance every time a monthly bill is promptly paid — resulted in participants significantly reducing
their arrearages. APPRISE’s twelve-month review showed that while AMP participants started with
an average arrearage of $1,451, they reduced that by $897 over the course of 12 months, ending
with an average arrearage of $554.

As Penni Conner, a senior vice-president at Eversource (a major electric and gas utility in the
Northeast) and a strong AMP supporter, noted in an article promoting AMPs, they are a “win-win”
for customers and companies alike. Participating customers avoid termination and see their
arrearages decline; other ratepayers benefit from more frequent payments by the participating
customers; and companies have a new, more humane and effective tool in working with payment-
troubled customers.

The National Consumer Law Center will gladly work with any advocates who are interested in
seeking to have an AMP adopted in their state. Contact Charlie Harak at charak@nclc.org.

Statement on PHEAA Not Extending its
Servicer Contract with Dept. of Education

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 8, 2021
National Consumer Law Center contacts: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org) or Persis Yu
(pyu@nclc.org)

Boston – Statement by Persis Yu, director of the National Consumer Law Center’s Student
Loan Borrower Assistance Project in response to the announcement that PHEAA (FedLoan
Servicing) will not be extending its federal contract in December.

“Lawsuits by borrowers and the Massachusetts Attorney General have charged PHEAA (FedLoan
Servicing) with a long history of abusive practices that have harmed student loan borrowers and
prevented them from accessing critical relief. Today’s announcement will ensure that those
borrowers can no longer be harmed by PHEAA’s abusive practices. However, more needs to be done
to protect the millions of borrowers whose loans are currently serviced by PHEAA. In addition, this
sudden and massive transfer of loans will also have a huge ripple effect on the entire federal student
loan portfolio and could negatively impact all borrowers within the portfolio. Unless the

administration extends the current student loan payment suspension and provides widespread debt
cancellation, it is setting millions of borrowers up to fail.”

National Consumer Law Center Advocates
Praise U.S. House Vote to Repeal National
Banking Regulator’s Predatory Lending Rule

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 24, 202
National Consumer Law Center contact: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org)

OCC Rule Protects High-Cost Lenders that use Rent-a-Bank Schemes to Evade State
Interest Rate Laws

Washington, D.C. – Advocates at the National Consumer Law Center applaud the U.S. House vote to
overturn the OCC’s “fake lender” rule, which allows predatory lenders to evade state interest rate
laws by putting a federally-chartered bank’s name on the paperwork. The House vote was 218-208
with one Republican, Rep. Grothman (R-WI), joining all Democrats to overturn the rule H.J. Res. 35,
a resolution under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), was introduced by Rep. “Chuy” García (D-
IL). The U.S. Senate passed a parallel resolution, S.J. Res. 15, on May 11. The resolution now needs
only President Biden’s signature, which is expected.

Advocates applauded the vote to repeal the fake lender rule, which protects predatory rent-a-bank
schemes that harm small businesses, veterans, and consumers across the nation and undermines the
power of states to enforce their interest rate laws and to stop predatory lending. Currently, 45 states
have interest rate caps on installment loans, depending on the size of the loan. For a $2,000, two-
year loan, 42 states and the District of Columbia limit rates, at a median APR rate of 32%. However,
banks are largely exempt from state rate caps, and predatory lenders have been laundering their
loans through a few rogue banks in order to evade state law.

“Congress’s vote to repeal the OCC fake lender rule is critical because predatory rent-a-bank
schemes are destroying small businesses, homes, and lives,” said National Consumer Law
Center Associate Director Lauren Saunders. “We urge President Biden to swiftly sign the
resolution.”

But Saunders warned that more action was needed to stop predatory rent-a-bank lenders from
evading state interest rate laws. “The OCC and especially the FDIC must crack down on the banks
that are helping predatory lenders evade state laws so that they can charge rates up to 200% APR.
Congress also must pass a national 36% interest rate limit that covers all lenders, including banks,
so that rent-a-bank schemes cannot be used by high-cost lenders to evade state laws.”

Predatory small business lenders are currently using the fake lender rule to defend a 268% APR rate
on loans totaling $67,000 to a restaurant owner in New York, where the criminal usury rate is 25%,
secured by property in New Jersey, where the legal limit is 30%. OppLoans (aka OppFi), an online
lender offering 160% APR loans in 26 states that prohibit triple-digit rate loans, cited the OCC’s fake
lender rule in defense of its loan to a disabled veteran in California, where the legal rate on the loan

is 24%. OppLoans is evading state rate cap laws supported by broad majorities of voters in Arizona,
Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota; and also laws approved by legislatures in Maine, Ohio, and
other states.

A broad, bipartisan cross-section of experts, officials, and community groups across the nation called
on Congress to repeal the fake lender rule. They included more than 400 community organizations
from all 50 states, including faith, civil rights, consumer, small business, and disability rights groups;
and a bipartisan group of 25 state attorneys general concerned about rent-a-bank lenders that are
evading their state usury laws. The Conference of State Bank Supervisors, National Association of
Consumer Credit Administrators, National Association of Federally Insured Credit Unions, and many
other groups also supported Congress overturning the fake rule.

Resource: Predatory Rent-a-Bank Watch List with maps showing the states in which predatory
lenders are evading state interest rate caps.