AUTHORSHIP
22 July 2026
New York proposal shows how states can lead on open banking amid federal rollback
Proposed New York legislation shows how state governments can lead on putting consumers in control of their financial data
.avif)
Attribution: SumUp (Unsplash)
I. Introduction
ISSUE AREAS
CONSUMER PROTECTION
FINANCIAL REGULATION
Despite wide public mistrust of big banks, rooted in concerns over abuse of consumer data and junk fees, large financial institutions continue to post historic earnings amid wider market volatility. By controlling and limiting users’ financial data portability, big banks have been able to make switching banks an arduous process for consumers. As a result, large banks, including those that offer worse rates and general quality of service versus upstart competitors, are able to retain their dominant positions. Passed in 2010, Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act was intended to rectify these issues and encourage open banking. However, an extensive lobbying effort over the next decade and a half prevented meaningful progress. Under the Biden administration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) director Rohit Chopra made Section 1033 rulemaking a priority alongside other pro-consumer measures.
In October 2024, the CFPB announced a historic final rulemaking proposal on Section 1033, one both welcomed by consumer advocates and criticized by financial industry lobbying groups. The rule mandated that banks be made to provide consumers with no-cost access to their own financial data. These provisions encompassed consumers’ personal checking accounts and credit cards; crucially, they also applied to, among other things, digital wallets and payment applications, a reflection of CFPB leadership’s understanding of how consumers’ financial lives have changed in the digital era. The CFPB proposal also required that any third party actors seeking access to the data receive express consent, alongside additional safeguards to prevent the misuse of sensitive financial data.
The promise of the CFPB’s rulemaking on Personal Financial Data Rights would be undercut by the election of Donald Trump the following month. Trump, who had already shown hostility towards the CFPB’s functions in his first term, would put ‘Project 2025’ architect Russell Vought at the helm of the agency in an acting capacity. Under Vought, the CFPB would stop defending the rule in court, with Judge Danny Reeves blocking enforcement in October 2025. Congressional Democrats and consumer advocates alike have pushed back against Vought’s undermining of open banking rules, and legislators in New York have introduced a proposal to empower users’ financial data rights. As the federal government retreats from consumer protection efforts more generally, it is important that state leaders take the mantle on safeguarding users’ sensitive data from corporate misuse.
II. Outlook for Open Banking
NEW YORK’S PROPOSED FINANCIAL DATA RIGHTS ACT
The proposed New York Financial Data Rights Act (Senate Bill S9483 and Assembly Bill A10640) would establish first-in-the-nation financial data access rules at the state level. Under the proposed law, financial institutions would allow both consumers and small businesses to access financial data upon request. Big banks have long pushed back on open banking rules over supposed security concerns; in recognition of this, the proposal requires that financial data be made accessible in secure machine-readable formats. Though many banking regulations at the state level only encompass institutions chartered in a particular state, the proposal explicitly extends to any financial institution used by consumers in the state.
The proposal’s purview is more expansive than the CFPB’s 2024 Final Rule given that, among other things, extends affirmative data access to also encompass small businesses. Additionally, the proposal contains explicit prohibitions on fee requirements for accessing financial data. Fee access rules have long been a major driver of opposition to open banking proposals, from lobbying groups such as the Bank Policy Institute. To ensure compliance, the proposed law directs the state’s Department of Financial Services to fine offenders as much as $10,000 per violation.
PROSPECTS OF PASSAGE AND POTENTIAL IMPACT
Many state-level proposals designed to fill policy gaps amid federal uncertainty are dismissed as symbolic gestures. Far from this, the Financial Data Rights Act is a substantive proposal to advance the cause of open banking that is coupled with strong enforcement mechanisms. There is no certainty that the legislation will advance, and the fact that it is a durable proposal means it is more likely than not to see strong opposition in the state home to the nation’s financial capital. Groups like the New York Banking Association (NYBA) wield significant policy sway in Albany, with the NYBA’s standing in opposition to proposed financial regulations “that deviate from standards applicable to national banks” per its 2026 “Albany Agenda”. Similarly, as in federal policy battles over open banking, the proposed law is likely to receive support from consumer interest groups and the state’s fintech community should it stand to advance. Groups like the Financial Technology Association (FTA) have already lent their support to the proposal over its data access provisions.
In the second Trump administration, states have shown they can take the lead on issues like fighting unlawful monopolies amid a recession of federal antitrust enforcement. In the unlikely event that the legislation advances through the legislature and makes it into law this session, it would be a signal to other states that they, too, can lead on protecting consumers’ financial rights. Moreover, in conjunction with other data regulations proposals such as the Delete Act, the state has an opportunity to position itself as a national leader on protecting user privacy amid federal inaction.
REAL-WORLD IMPACT OF OPEN BANKING RULES
Individuals should own and control their personal financial data, and banks being allowed to charge a fee to access said data, including for the third party actors an individual expressly authorizes, stands in direct contrast to this principle. Big banks have long fought to undermine open banking proposals over unsubstantiated claims that doing so would create security risks. This claim is undermined by big banks’ record of mishandling and profiting off of the very same user financial data. Given their track record, it is difficult to reconcile big banks’ opposition to open banking rules as being rooted in a desire to protect users’ privacy as opposed to an effort to maintain their ability to limit data portability. JPMorgan, among the major banks who have worked to undermine CFPB open banking rules, moved to impose data access rates in July 2025 amid uncertainty over the 2024 Final Rule’s fate in court.
Big banks have long depicted themselves as institutions whose scale allows them to provide superior products versus smaller competitors. However, it is the very scale (and subsequent power) of big banks that ultimately limit consumers’ banking options. Unilateral control of consumers' financial data, such as a users’ full transaction history, gives these institutions an effectively insurmountable advantage over would-be competitors capable of offering better rates or services. Citing the CFPB’s own analysis, economist Hal Singer noted in an article in The Sling that consumers could reap some $677 million a year in a world where strong open banking rules are enacted and give way to a more competitive banking landscape.
Additionally, it’s worth noting that, despite their size and structural market advantage, big banks often offer comparatively poor financial products. APY rates for savings accounts at large banks such as Bank of America (BoA) or Chase are significantly lower than many competitors, something that many consumers already locked into their longtime choice of bank may be unaware of. As Rohit Chopra himself noted, big banks are aware that it is “more difficult to change your direct deposit or to change your automatic payments”, leading many people who remain with a bank for an extended period of time “earning rates that are actually way lower on their deposit accounts and are paying higher [rates] on their credit cards.” As a result, big banks embroiled in controversy over misuse of consumer data and implementing excessive junk fees on their customers do not feel compelled to improve their products or services.
III. Conclusion
Characterized as among the most ‘low-simmering’ yet ‘fiercest’ financial policy battles by Politico, the average American is likely to be unfamiliar with Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act and the sustained lobbying effort that has surrounded it for almost two decades. It is safe to say, however, that most consumers are aware of the difficulty of switching banks and that big banks profit off of their sensitive financial data. Polling released in May 2026 by the Americans for Financial Reform and the Center for Responsible Lending found broad public support for consumer protection efforts. The survey found 80% support among respondents across party lines for the CFPB’s functions, with 90% indicating support for laws preventing banks from profiting off of user data.
Amid sustained pressure, the Vought-led CFPB has more recently expressed support for the principle of open banking, a claim seriously undermined by the agency’s record on the issue under his leadership. Despite recent promises that the CFPB will announce a new proposal on open banking, reporting suggests that any new proposal will be seriously limited in scope, with consumers likely to be forced to pay for accessing data “once requests exceed certain thresholds.” Similarly, reporting that indicates that fintechs will be required to pay access fees means that any incoming proposal is unlikely to challenge big banks’ structural dominance and therefore fail to advance the cause of open banking. The CFPB should pursue financial data rules that will give Americans more and better banking options; if the agency under the Trump administration is unwilling to do so, it is important that New York and other states take the lead on open banking.
Aidan Smith
Founder, Labyrinth Insights

