CUNA Launches New Tool to Fight Regulatory Burden

CUNA last week launched a new tool to gather the real-life stories of how growing regulatory burden results in reduced service for members or increased costs to credit unions. These stories will show the Senate Banking Committee — and others — the costs associated with overbearing regulations.

At a recent Senate Banking Committee hearing Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) asked credit unions and community banks to submit concrete examples of how regulations negatively affect service to consumers. Several other senators echoed the Senate Banking Committee chair’s request for more information. 

CUNA believes that the committee’s interest in learning more about regulatory environment signals a serious and welcome attempt to roll back some of the tide of regulatory and compliance burden that credit unions have been subjected to over the past decade. 

“Credit unions face numerous regulatory barriers and burdens that are unjustifiable,” said John Trull, the NWCUA’s director of regulatory advocacy. “For example, neither the statutory cap on lending to small businesses or the regulatory requirements for personal guarantees makes sense, and similar restrictions are not in place for similarly-sized community banks. Other anticompetitive barriers include excessive restrictions on field of membership expansion which negatively impact consumers who can’t take advantage of better rates offered by credit unions. And the archaic restrictions on secondary capital actually cause regulators concern that credit unions do not have a necessary tool that would help insulate them in a rising rate environment.”

It is vital that the Senate receives real examples of the negative consequences of unnecessary regulation, and CUNA requests that credit unions use the form to provide examples of how the regulatory burden has caused the credit union to: 

  • Decide to not offer a new service;
  • Terminate an existing service;
  • Offer a service to fewer members;
  • Offer a service at a less attractive price; or
  • Generally to offer a service in a less beneficial way to members because of a rule or regulation.     

CUNA will collect all submitted examples and forward them to the Senate Banking Committee. Although the form asks credit unions to identify themselves so CUNA can follow up if necessary, a credit union can choose to not be identified in the information provided to the Senate. Questions can be directed to      
CUNA also last week announced a groundbreaking initiative to identify true dollar costs of the “creeping crisis of regulatory complexity.” In a Tuesday Senate Banking Committee hearing also investigating small financial institution regulatory burden, the panel pressed federal and state regulators for costs associated with regulatory requirements. 

During Thursday’s testimony, CUNA stepped forward to announce that it has been building and will soon launch a comprehensive study and fact-based analysis of the actual compliance costs credit unions face due to regulatory burden.

Questions about this story? Contact James Pearson: 206.340.4790,

Posted in Advocacy News, Compliance News, CUNA.