Apple, Banks Clash Over Open Banking Data Access Rules

Industry Giants Square Off Over Financial Data Access

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is facing a regulatory minefield as it tries to craft new open banking rules. Recent analysis of public comments reveals fundamental disagreements between banks, technology companies, and fintech firms about who should control consumer financial data and under what terms.

According to industry reports, the proposed regulation would require financial institutions to provide standardized access to consumer account information through secure interfaces. The goal, as described by proponents, is to let consumers more easily share their financial data with third-party services for payments, lending, and budgeting applications.

But the financial ecosystem appears deeply divided on implementation details. Sources indicate that nearly 14,000 comments poured into the agency, highlighting starkly different visions for how open banking should work in practice.

Tech Giants Seek Regulatory Carve-Outs

Apple has reportedly asked for explicit exemptions from the proposed rules. The technology giant argued that providers who don’t actually maintain consumer accounts shouldn’t be swept into the regulatory framework.

Industry analysts note that Apple positioned its Apple Wallet as essentially “a digital reproduction of a physical wallet” that allows consumers to view bank-issued cards without storing or verifying underlying account data. The company apparently emphasized that it processes data on users’ devices where even Apple cannot access it.

Meanwhile, Apple reportedly urged the CFPB to adopt a “liability follows the data” principle that would protect companies that securely transfer information from being held responsible if recipients experience data breaches. The tech giant pointed to the United Kingdom’s open banking framework as a potential model.

Banks Push Back on Costs and Security

On the other side of the debate, banking institutions are expressing serious concerns about fraud exposure and implementation costs. Axos Bank reportedly warned that mandated data sharing would force institutions to “open up more commission to outside parties, which makes us more vulnerable to fraud.”

Smaller financial institutions apparently fear they’ll bear disproportionate burdens. Sources suggest community and regional banks are pushing for the ability to charge reasonable fees to cover compliance and security upgrades. Without cost recovery, analysts say these institutions could struggle to meet new technology requirements and response timelines.

Suncoast Credit Union, serving over 1.3 million Florida members, reportedly supported open banking in principle but called for tighter security controls and phased implementation. The credit union apparently estimated compliance costs between $0.05 to $0.25 per data request.

Fintechs Champion Free Access

Fintech companies and data aggregators are taking a dramatically different position. The American FinTech Council reportedly argued that access to consumer data must remain free, warning that fees would “unduly favor large legacy institutions” that can afford proprietary channels.

Plaid, one of the largest data aggregators, apparently called for standardized APIs to replace outdated credential-sharing practices. Industry observers note the company framed open banking as “an API-driven trust infrastructure” that could enhance both security and innovation.

Interestingly, the fintech sector also pushed back against requirements for fiduciary duties and restrictions on secondary data use. Sources indicate they argued that responsible data analysis helps develop algorithms that can expand credit access to traditionally excluded individuals.

Regulatory Path Forward

The sheer volume of comments—nearly 14,000—suggests the CFPB faces a complex balancing act. Industry watchers note the agency must reconcile competing priorities: consumer data access versus security concerns, innovation versus stability, and large institution capabilities versus smaller player limitations.

What emerges from this regulatory process could shape the future of American financial services for years to come. The fundamental questions about who controls consumer financial data, who can access it, and who bears responsibility when things go wrong aren’t disappearing anytime soon.

Whether the final rules come from regulators, industry consortia, or market competition, they’ll need to address the core tensions laid bare across thousands of pages of commentary. The open banking revolution continues, but its American incarnation remains very much a work in progress.