Banking and Business Monthly – March 2024

Steven A. Migala • March 12, 2024

The CFPB’s New Rule Regulating Credit Card Late Fees

A man in a suit and tie is writing in a notebook.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) announced a regulatory amendment on March 5, 2024, targeting credit card late fees, a significant move poised to alter the financial landscape for both consumers and credit card issuers. Under this new rule, the maximum allowable late fee chargeable by large credit card issuers is significantly reduced to $8. This decision follows a proposal released in March 2023 and will take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.


Who Does this Rule Apply to?


The rule differentiates between credit card issuers based on the size of their account holdings, specifically targeting large issuers while providing exemptions for smaller issuers. Entities with one million or more open accounts are the primary subjects of the new regulations. The CFFB estimates this group includes the largest 30 to 35 credit card issuers, which accounts for more than 95% of the credit card market’s total outstanding balances.


In contrast, issuers with fewer than one million open accounts are not subject to the $8 cap. The CFPB has indicated that applying the rule to these smaller entities would impose a disproportionate compliance burden. Smaller card issuers may still charge a higher safe harbor threshold for credit card late fees and automatically increase the safe harbor dollar amount based on the Consumer Price Index.


Key Provisions & Requirements


Reduction of Safe Harbor Late Fees: The rule substantially reduces the safe harbor late fee from the existing amounts of up to $30 for the first violation and $41 for subsequent violations within six billing cycles. The new amount is $8 for late payments, applicable to all subsequent late payment violations occurring within six months of the initial violation.


Requirement for Cost Analysis: For larger card issuers wishing to charge late fees above the $8 threshold, the rule mandates a rigorous cost analysis to demonstrate that such fees are necessary to cover the actual costs incurred from late payments. The rule clarifies that costs related to post-charge-off collections cannot be included in this analysis.


Inflation Adjustment Limitations: The rule modifies the approach to annual inflation adjustments for late fee safe harbor amounts. Unlike previous practices that allowed for automatic annual adjustments based on inflation, the CFPB will now monitor the market and make adjustments to the safe harbor amount as deemed necessary.


Rate and Fee Increases and Management Tools: The rule also acknowledges that issuers can deter late payments and manage associated risks through other means, such as increasing interest rates, raising annual and monthly fees, and adjusting credit lines. However, the rule stipulates that larger card issuers considering adjustments to their APRs must conduct a rate reevaluation under Section 1026.59 of Regulation Z.


Charges Up to Amount of Required Minimum Payment: The rule maintains the provision that allows card issuers to charge late fees up to the full amount of the required minimum payment due, provided such fees comply with the cost-analysis requirements established by Regulation Z.


Exclusion of Courtesy Period: The CFPB considered including a 15-day courtesy period requirement before a late fee could be assessed. However, the final rule did not implement any courtesy period for late fees. The CFPB indicated the potential benefits were outweighed by the burden it could cause regarding customer confusion.


What’s Next for Large Credit Card Issuers?


Policy Assessment and Adjustment: Large credit card issuers should conduct a thorough review of their current late fee policies to ensure alignment with the new rule, including evaluating whether to adopt the $8 safe harbor for late fees or undertake a detailed cost analysis.


Cost Analysis for Higher Fees: For issuers considering fees above the $8 limit, a comprehensive cost analysis becomes imperative. This analysis must demonstrate that the higher fees are necessary to cover the specific costs associated with the late payments, excluding post-charge-off collection costs.


Disclosure and Communication Updates: The new late fee provisions necessitate updates to a range of customer communications and disclosures. This includes changes to account-opening disclosures, periodic statements, and advertising materials to reflect the revised fee structure. Issuers will need to ensure that all relevant disclosures are clear, accurate, and in compliance with the requirements of Regulation Z.


The expertise and guidance of legal professionals can be useful in navigating the complexities of the CFPB's new rule on credit card late fees. For further inquiries or questions, please contact me at smigala@lavellelaw.com or at (847) 705-7555. Thanks go to Nathan Toy for his assistance with this month’s article.


More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

BOI reports with FinCEN no longer required for condo, HOAs, other associations, board members.
By Robyn K. Kish August 17, 2026
FinCEN update: Condo, HOAs, and other common interest community associations no longer have to file BOI reports with FinCEN. Volunteer board members are no longer required to report their personal information to the federal government simply because they sit on an association’s board of directors.
Tax-Smart Year-End Planning: Key 2026 Tax Changes & Strategies for Success
By Lavelle Law August 11, 2026
Discover the latest tax law updates and planning opportunities that can help you reduce taxes, protect wealth, and prepare for the future.
IRS Announces Guidance on the Expansion of Paid Family and Medical Leave
By Timothy M. Hughes August 10, 2026
On August 5, 2026, the Internal Revenue Service issued Notice 2026-28 providing guidance on the employer credit for paid family and medical leave (“PFML”) under the Working Families Tax Cuts (“WFTC”). The WFTC makes permanent and expands eligibility and coverage for employers offering PFML benefits to employees.
Federal Rule 68 Offers of Judgment: An Underutilized Tool for Defense Counsel
By Sarah J. Reusché August 7, 2026
Many litigators are familiar with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, but few fully appreciate its strategic value in the defense arsenal. Rule 68 can be a powerful tool for influencing settlement negotiations, and in some cases, limiting a plaintiff’s ability to recover post-offer attorneys’ fees.
Judge Says “You’re Out!” to Stalker Ex  - a Lavelle Law Success Story
By Family Law Practice Group July 28, 2026
A client came to us needing protection from an ex-boyfriend who wouldn’t take no for an answer. She broke up with him after he used her indoor pet camera to spy on her without her permission, then surveilled her at her home and chased her through a parking lot.
Type F Reorganization
By Frank J. Portera July 28, 2026
Thinking about selling your business? In this video, Lavelle Law attorney Frank Portera explains how a Type F Reorganization can create tax efficiencies and simplify the sale process by reducing the need for third-party consents.
6 reasons why you shouldn’t rely on AI for legal advice.
By Sarah J. Reusché and Shelley McCarthy July 17, 2026
Thinking about using AI to represent yourself in litigation? Think again. It is well-documented that pro se litigants are less likely to prevail compared to their represented counterparts. Regardless, AI has provided people with a false sense of security, tempting them to represent themselves regardless.
Representation and Warranties Insurance Democratization: A Game Changer for Many Deals
By Steven A. Migala July 13, 2026
Representations and warranties insurance (“RWI”) for mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”) is more accessible than ever due to increasing democratization in the market. Now, RWI can be a viable option for smaller, mid-market deals.
IRS Announces Simplified Penalty Relief
By Timothy M. Hughes July 10, 2026
On July 8, 2026, the Internal Revenue Service announced a new automatic process to provide penalty relief for taxpayers with a history of filing and paying on time, reducing the need for those taxpayers to request assistance in addressing penalty relief.
NDAs in the Spotlight: What Swift and Kelce’s Wedding Reveals About Protecting Your Privacy.
By Theodore M. McGinn June 30, 2026
High-profile couples like Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are taking strict steps to protect their privacy. Reports confirm that wedding guests must sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) before receiving event details. This highlights how NDAs help individuals and businesses safeguard sensitive information.
More Posts