The U.S. consumer-finance watchdog has officially discontinued the Biden-era “bad actor” registry, signaling a significant regulatory shift. Under the previous administration, the registry was created to increase transparency and accountability among financial-services providers by flagging companies and individuals found guilty of misconduct. The move was meant to prevent such entities from re-entering the market unchecked.
Now, the U.S. Department of the Treasury-backed agency has opted to dismantle that tool, citing duplication with existing systems and unjustified compliance burdens for non-bank financial firms. The decision aligns with the current regulatory approach of reducing administrative layers and shifting toward lighter oversight of certain non-bank entities.
The implications are broad. On one hand, the elimination of the registry is expected to streamline compliance processes for many non-bank lenders, fintechs and service providers. On the other hand, consumer-advocacy groups warn that removing the registry could weaken visibility of repeat offenders and erode deterrence mechanisms in a sector where non-bank firms now account for a large portion of lending activity.
Industry trade associations and some state regulators have welcomed the change, calling the registry redundant and costly. Meanwhile, observers caution that with less formal tracking of misconduct, the field of non-bank finance may be exposed to increased risk — unless replaced with equally robust safeguards.
Looking ahead, regulatory focus will likely shift from public registries toward enforcement actions, risk-based audits, and perhaps new frameworks aimed at balancing oversight and innovation. For market participants — compliance officers, fintech startups, lenders — the removal of the registry means staying vigilant: the landscape is changing, and transparency may now depend more on firms’ voluntary disclosures and evolving enforcement incentives than on public lists of “bad actors.”
Summary
-
✅ The CFPB has formally scrapped the bad actor registry for non-bank financial companies that violated consumer laws.
-
✅ The registry was created under the prior administration to help track repeat offenders in non-bank financial services, including debt collectors, payday lenders and other firms.
-
✅ The agency said the registry largely duplicated an existing multi-state system and that discontinuing it would save roughly $360 per company in compliance costs.
-
✅ Industry groups and state regulators generally supported the decision, while at least one consumer‐advocacy organisation, Better Markets, warned that with non-banks now controlling a large portion of the lending market the move could reduce consumer protections.
-
✅ The announcement is very recent (dated October 28, 2025) — so the story is timely and reflects an up-to-date regulatory development.
What does the removal of the bad actor registry mean for consumers?
It could reduce the visibility of misconduct, potentially increasing risks for consumers, but might also lead to a more efficient regulatory environment.
How will financial firms adapt to the end of the registry?
Firms may need to strengthen internal compliance measures and focus on self-regulation to ensure they meet evolving standards and avoid misconduct.
What are the potential long-term impacts on financial regulation?
The deregulation could lead to a shift towards more market-driven oversight, possibly prompting legislative changes to fill gaps left by the registry’s removal.
