Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to "Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01: Unlawful Negative Option Marketing Practices".
H.J. Res. 183 is a congressional disapproval resolution under the Congressional Review Act. It would overturn a rule issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection that withdrew Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023-01, which addressed unlawful negative option marketing practices. If adopted, the resolution would nullify the withdrawal rule and leave it with no force or effect.
The measure does not create a new regulatory framework; instead, it targets an existing CFPB action in the Federal Register and seeks to restore the prior circular’s status. The underlying subject matter involves negative option marketing, a business practice commonly associated with subscriptions, automatic renewals, trial offers, and other arrangements where consumers are charged unless they take affirmative action to cancel or decline.
If enacted, the resolution would invalidate the CFPB’s withdrawal of Circular 2023-01 and preserve the agency’s earlier guidance on unlawful negative option marketing practices. The practical effect would be to influence how consumer finance and marketing rules are interpreted and enforced, particularly for companies using subscription-based or auto-renewal sales models. It would not amend the U.S. Code directly, but it would alter the legal effect of the CFPB’s rulemaking action and could affect compliance expectations for covered businesses and consumer protection enforcement.
Based on the text and available context, the bill appears to be framed as a consumer-protection measure, with supporters likely viewing it as a way to prevent deceptive billing and cancellation practices. No vote data or committee debate is available, so there is no recorded bipartisan or partisan sentiment in the provided materials. The resolution’s subject matter suggests a generally pro-consumer rationale, but the absence of transcripts means the broader political reception cannot be assessed from the record provided.
The main point of contention is likely whether Congress should use the Congressional Review Act to override the CFPB’s decision to withdraw its own circular. Supporters would likely argue that the agency should retain guidance against deceptive negative option marketing, while opponents may view the resolution as an unnecessary congressional intrusion into agency discretion or a reversal of a regulatory withdrawal. Another possible dispute is the scope of CFPB authority over subscription and auto-renewal practices, especially for businesses that rely on recurring billing models.