Finance

Fast Money Podcast
Full Episodes

Wall Street forecaster Jim Bianco expects Treasury yields to go a lot higher — and possibly overshoot through 5% in the next couple of weeks.
“I don’t think we’re near the end of this move in the bond market,” the Bianco Research president told CNBC’s “Fast Money” on Tuesday.

If the Federal Reserve hints about ending interest rate hikes while investors still sense inflation, Bianco warns they won’t buy bonds.
“That’s what I think has been killing the bond market,” he said. “The more the Fed talks about being done, waiting [and] assessing all the rate hikes they’ve done — the more that they’re making it worse.”
Yields on the 5-year and 10-year Treasury notes, as well as the 30-year Treasury bond, hit their highest levels since 2007. The 10-year Treasury yield reached 4.8% on Tuesday. Bianco sees 4.5% as fair value.
“We’re just a little bit above fair value right now. I think what you see in the bond market is a capitulation,” noted Bianco. “Most of the year bond investors [and] bond managers have been long. They’ve been trying to argue why we’re going to have a recession. Why there’s going to be a rally. And, they’ve been getting their brains beat in, and they can’t take it anymore.”
The volatility in the bond market is extending to stocks. The Dow Jones Industrial Average saw its worst daily performance since March and is now negative for the year. The S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite also closed the day more than 1% lower.

The latest jitters over surging yields come a day after CNBC on-air editor Rick Santelli delivered a warning to investors on “Fast Money.”
“We have a lot of potential room to run to the upside,” Santelli said on Monday. “If somebody asked me and held a gun to my head and said ‘listen, [in] the worst-case scenario, where are Treasury rates going to go? 10-year?’ I’d say in the next seven years, you should be able to see 13.5%, 14%.”
Bianco considers yields that high an extreme situation. “13%? That would take something bad to happen — a lot worse than I anticipate,” he said.
Disclaimer More

Bill Gross, Portfolio Manager, Janus Capital Group
Lucy Nicholson | Reuters

Widely followed investor Bill Gross believes Treasury yields have the potential to shoot even higher in the short run.
“I think we’re gonna go to five [percent],” Gross said on CNBC’s “Last Call” on Tuesday, referring to the 10-year Treasury yield. “The market certainly is oversold at the moment in anticipation of Treasury supplies, in anticipation of higher for longer in terms of the Fed.”

The stock market suffered a severe sell-off Tuesday as surging bond yields rattled Wall Street. The S&P 500 dropped 1.4%, touching its lowest level since June during the day as the 10-year Treasury yield reached its highest point in 16 years.
The benchmark yield has surged in the past month to touch 4.8% as the Federal Reserve pledged to keep interest rates at a higher level for longer. The 30-year Treasury yield hit 4.9% Tuesday, also the highest since 2007.

Stock chart icon

10-year Treasury yield

“I think maybe 5% caps it for the near term. It depends, of course, on inflation, depends on economic growth,” the former chief investment officer and co-founder of Pimco said.
Billionaire investor Ray Dalio also said Tuesday that the surging 10-year rate could test 5% as he sees hotter inflation for longer.
Gross, once known as the bond king, believes that the Fed’s aggressive rate hikes undertaken since March 2022 have had a significant effect on the yield curve. The central bank has taken interest rates to the highest level since early 2001.

Gross said investors are now grappling with the negative impact that comes from a deepening Treasury deficit.
“What we’re seeing is a recognition of the Treasury deficit that is $2 trillion-plus, and that’s affecting the long end, as is, I think, in the last few days, the selling of ETFs, which basically own long bonds as opposed to short bonds,” Gross said. More

The job market looks a lot like one that preceded the Covid-19 pandemic: one characterized by low unemployment and good job opportunities, economists said.
Workers’ confidence has deteriorated, though.
That’s partly because of financial stress amid higher interest rates and inflation, economists said.

Hinterhaus Productions | The Image Bank | Getty Images

The job market remains strong despite gradual cooling from pandemic-era highs, according to labor economists — but workers don’t seem to share that outlook.
Employee confidence fell last month to its lowest level since 2016, according to Glassdoor data. About 46% of workers reported a positive six-month outlook for their employers, down from 54% from a year ago.

Meanwhile, the ZipRecruiter Job Seeker Confidence Index was down six points in the second quarter to its lowest point since the beginning of 2022.
More from Personal Finance:Supreme Court case may gut the CFPBStudent loan bills resume for 40 million AmericansHere are the top 10 highest-paying college majors
The juxtaposition of a resilient labor market but deteriorating sentiment is likely due to financial stress among workers and the fact that the recent baseline was a scorching-hot job market in 2021 and 2022, economists said.
“Overall, workers still have more leverage and more job security than before the pandemic,” said Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter.
“I think job seekers comparing this environment to 2021 and 2022 do feel worse off,” she added. “It’s taking more effort to find a job, and jobseekers are searching under greater financial strain now.”

The job market is stable but not ‘gangbusters’

Several metrics — including job openings, quits, layoffs and the unemployment rate — suggest the labor market is healthy, economists said.
Daniel Zhao, lead economist at Glassdoor, said it is “softer but steady.”
“If you look at these indicators in aggregate, they point to a labor market that isn’t necessarily going gangbusters, but in a fairly stable state,” Zhao said.
Broadly, the indicators are largely in line or even stronger than pre-pandemic, a time when unemployment was low, people were joining the labor force and gender and racial employment gaps were narrowing, Pollak said.

I think a lot of folks are comparing the labor market today to a year or two ago when things were hot. But of course, there were also problems with the economy of 2021 and 2022.

Daniel Zhao
lead economist at Glassdoor

“That’s a very good thing,” she said.
The quits rate — a barometer of workers’ willingness or ability to leave a job — was 2.3% in August, the same as February 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor reported Tuesday.
It was unchanged from July, though down from a 3% peak in April 2022 when a record number of workers were quitting, in what became known as the great resignation.
Likewise, the hiring rate is slightly below but roughly similar to its level in February 2020.
Layoffs are still 15% lower than before the Covid-19 pandemic and job openings — a gauge of employers’ demand for workers — are 37% higher, according to Labor Department data.

The problems with the 2021, 2022 job markets

In fact, job openings rose significantly, by 690,000, to 9.6 million in August, the Labor Department reported Tuesday.
However, there are reasons to think that increase is anomalous, economists said. For one, the data series is generally volatile, subject to big ups and downs from month to month. The broader trend is clear: Job openings, along with quits and hires, have cooled from their pandemic-era peaks, economists said.
“I think a lot of folks are comparing the labor market today to a year or two ago when things were hot,” Zhao said. “But of course, there were also problems with the economy of 2021 and 2022.”

Among the problems: Inflation touched its highest level since 1981, eroding the big raises workers had been getting due to lost purchasing power. Also, certain sectors such as technology hired overzealously, Zhao said, leading big tech firms to lay off tens of thousands of people.
A labor market that runs too hot is unsustainable, as job turnover and wage growth get so high that they feed into inflation, Zhao said. It’s unclear the extent to which this may have occurred in the recent inflationary bout.
“The labor market that we’re getting today is in a healthier spot, even though for many workers, it isn’t quite as easy to find a job or get a raise,” Zhao said.
Of course, it’s unclear if — and the extent to which — the labor market will continue cooling, economists said. In addition to higher interest rates, there are economic headwinds such as continued strikes by auto workers, high oil prices and another government shutdown threat looming in November, Zhao said. More

McCormick spices are displayed on a shelf at a supermarket in San Anselmo, California, on March 28, 2023.
Justin Sullivan | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Check out the companies making headlines in midday trading.
Warby Parker — The eyewear maker popped 3.4% after Evercore ISI upgraded shares to outperform from in line. The firm said 2024 should be a “fundamental inflection year” for Warby Parker.

Trex — Shares of the wood-alternative decking manufacturer declined 3.8% even after Goldman Sachs initiated Trex with a buy rating. The bank said the company is “well-positioned” to drive growth and profitability.
Eli Lilly, Point Biopharma — Eli Lilly shares slumped 2.4% after the pharmaceutical giant announced plans to purchase cancer therapy developer Point Biopharma for $12.50 a share in cash, or about $1.4 billion. Point Biopharma shares surged nearly 85%.
Rivian Automotive — Shares of the electric vehicle maker lost 8.3%, even though Rivian’s deliveries topped estimates and showed sustained demand. Morgan Stanley earlier reiterated the company as overweight, saying Rivian’s FY23 production guide of 52,000 units supports the firm’s delivery forecast of 48,000 units. Concerns remain about softening demand for EVs in the U.S. due to higher borrowing costs.
Airbnb — The short-term vacation rental company fell 6.5% after KeyBanc downgraded the stock to sector weight from overweight. KeyBanc said Airbnb’s margins will be squeezed as post-pandemic travel demand eases.
McCormick — Shares of the spice maker slipped 8.5% after McCormick reported earnings of 65 cents per share, excluding items, for the recent quarter, on revenue of $1.68 billion. That came roughly in line with earnings per share of 65 cents and $1.7 billion in revenue expected by analysts polled by StreetAccount.

Meta — Shares of the social media behemoth slipped more than 1.9% following news that the company is considering charging European Union Facebook and Instagram users a $14 monthly fee to access both platforms without ads.
Fiverr International — Shares gained 0.5% after Roth MKM upgraded the company to buy from neutral. The Wall Street firm is “incremental positive” on the stock, citing a freelancer survey that supports Fiverr’s leading position among gig workers.
Ally Financial — The home and auto company lost 3.2%. Earlier in the day, Evercore ISI added a tactical outperform rating on the stock, noting it appears oversold near term. However, Evercore ISI reiterated a long-term in-line rating on Ally and trimmed its 12-month price target.
— CNBC’s Alex Harring, Brian Evans, Samantha Subin and Jesse Pound contributed reporting. More

In the first half of the year Saudi Arabia and its allies in the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (opec) appeared to be digging themselves into an ever-deeper hole. Crude prices, which exceeded $125 a barrel for much of June last year, languished below $85. To arrest the slide, which had been caused by falling demand owing to weak growth in China and rising interest rates elsewhere, opec kept extending the output cuts they had first announced last October. Then prices fell to $72 in June. The cartel was selling less and less oil, for less and less money.But opec’s run of bad luck came to an end in July, when Saudi Arabia decided on an extra output cut of 1m barrels a day (b/d)—equivalent to 1% of global demand—and said it would extend the cut into August. Since then, Saudi Arabia and Russia have extended cuts to the end of the year, a course they are likely to stay on at an opec meeting on October 4th. At the same time, investors, who had expected the global economy to enter recession this year, took heart from signs that inflation in America had slowed, forecasting the end of rising rates and maybe even an economic “soft landing”. The combination has pushed up oil prices by 30%, to more than $90 a barrel.What happens next? Traders are blowing hot and cold. Last week prices passed $97; now they are under $92. Amid such volatility, pundits are debating if the rally is just starting or petering out. The bears predict a level below $90 by Christmas. The bulls foresee triple digits before then. The stakes are high, and not just for opec: dearer oil will push up inflation, which may force central banks to keep policy tight, and deal a blow to the global economy.image: The EconomistThe bulls base their case on the surprising resilience of oil demand. Economic and literal headwinds, in the form of a mighty typhoon, did not deter Chinese tourists and businessfolk from travelling a record amount this summer, boosting demand for petrol and jet fuel. American travel, which peaks on the Labour Day weekend in early September, has remained strong. Overall, it seems the latest price rise is not dampening oil consumption. Jorge León of Rystad Energy, a consultancy, estimates that such demand destruction would only happen at $110-115 a barrel.Bulls also see that supply cuts are filling producers’ pockets, opening the possibility they may be extended again. Despite lower export volumes, Saudi Arabia’s revenues could be $30m a day higher this quarter than last, a jump of 6%, reckons Energy Aspects, a consultancy. Russia’s revenues are also up. Both can take comfort from the fact that, unlike in the late 2010s, when opec and Russia first teamed up to cut supply, American shale drillers are not filling the gap. Production is rising for the moment, but they are shutting wells, squeezed by higher costs. Rig numbers are down 20% from last November.This week’s price decline reflects “profit-taking” by traders, bulls argue. They point to a forecast 1.5-2m b/d supply deficit for the year as whole, most of which is due to materialise in the last quarter, as record production by non-opec countries, such as Brazil and Guyana, is finally outpaced by the cartel’s cuts. This will force users to dig further into stocks. Inventories at Cushing, a crucial oil hub in Oklahoma, have declined to their lowest levels in 14 months.Yet the bears see things differently. They believe that the recovery in China’s oil demand has already happened, even if that of the economy at large is far from complete, since lockdowns had an outsize effect on activities, such as those involving transport, that are thirsty for oil. JPMorgan Chase, a bank, projects that Chinese demand will be flat for the rest of the year. Moreover, China imported record volumes of crude in the first eight months of the year, a lot of which it stockpiled to be refined later. History suggests that it will pause purchases if prices rise further.Worrying signs are also emerging from America. Pressure from high oil prices is reaching “core” inflation, which excludes food and energy costs, as firms in other sectors, starting with transport, raise prices to compensate. The Cleveland branch of the Federal Reserve’s “Nowcast”, which uses oil and petrol prices as inputs, projects it will edge up to 4.19% year on year this month, from 4.17% in September. Analysts expect it to remain sticky at 3% in the longer run. Thus the Fed is more likely to keep rates higher for longer, dampening America’s economy and pushing up the dollar, which makes oil dearer for everyone else.Bears also dismiss the depletion of stocks at Cushing, pointing out that, as America became an exporter of crude in the 2010s, storage activity shifted to the Gulf Coast instead. Crude inventories elsewhere have not diminished as fast. Global stocks remain above the five-year average. Although bears agree that these stocks will be drawn down in the forthcoming quarter, they expect the market deficit to shrink fast next year, when non-opec production growth should cover most of the rise in demand. Kpler, a data firm, projects a surplus for the first few months of 2024.The bulls look to have a case in the short run, but the bears will have the upper hand by next year. The market is likely to be tight until January. Surprise economic data could cause swings of $5-10 a barrel, buoying prices above $100. Yet in 2024 the lagging impact of high rates will subdue demand as new production arrives, calming prices. A gradual descent may follow.There is still an unknown. Although Saudi Arabia has given hints that it is worried about the economic prospects of its Asian and European customers, lower benchmark prices may nonetheless push it to bigger production cuts. If there is a glut of supply, such cuts may not be enough to push up prices. Yet they will prevent the rebuilding of stocks, which normally happens during downturns. That would set the stage for the next oil-price thriller. ■ More

This year Saudi Arabia and its allies in the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (opec) have been trying to climb what seems like a particularly slippery slope. Despite production cuts, crude-oil prices, which exceeded $115 a barrel for much of June 2022, languished below $80 a year later. Then the cartel appeared to regain control after Saudi Arabia decided on an extra output cut of 1m barrels a day (b/d)—equivalent to 1% of global demand—which it has since extended until the end of the year. Signs that the global economy might avoid a recession after all also helped. On September 27th oil prices neared $97 a barrel.But this week OPEC and its allies, including Russia, succumbed to the slope once again. On October 4th, the very day the group confirmed its cuts until the end of the year at a meeting in Vienna, oil prices dropped by more than 5%, to $86 a barrel. Amid such volatility, pundits are debating where prices will go next. The bears reckon that crude will stay at this level until Christmas, or maybe even fall further. Meanwhile, bulls predict a rebound before too long; some still foresee triple digits before the festive season. The stakes are high, and not just for opec. Dearer oil would push up inflation, which could force central banks to keep policy tighter than they would otherwise like, and would also deal a heavy blow to the global economy.image: The EconomistUnexpectedly resilient demand for oil is at the heart of the bulls’ case. Economic and literal headwinds, in the form of a mighty typhoon, failed to deter Chinese tourists and businessfolk from travelling a record amount this summer, boosting demand for petrol and kerosene. Growth in global demand for “mobility fuels”, at nearly 1.6m b/d, has remained unchanged in the year to date. Around the world, daily flights in the week ending September 29th averaged 96% of levels in 2019, their highest share since mid-July. Diesel demand growth has also remained robust, in part because of frantic trucking in Asia.Bulls also see that supply cuts are filling producers’ pockets, raising the possibility that they may be extended into 2024. Despite lower export volumes, Saudi Arabia’s revenues could be $30m a day higher this quarter than last, a jump of 6%, reckons Energy Aspects, a consultancy. Russia’s revenues are also up. Both can take comfort from the fact that, unlike in the late 2010s, when opec and Russia first teamed up to cut supply, American shale drillers are not filling the gap. Production is rising for the moment, but they are shutting wells, squeezed by higher costs. Rig numbers are down 20% from last November.This week’s decline also reflects “profit-taking” by traders, bulls argue. They point to a forecast 1.5m-2m b/d supply deficit for the year as whole, most of which is due to materialise in the last quarter, as record production by non-opec countries, such as Brazil and Guyana, is finally outpaced by the cartel’s cuts. This will force users to dig deeper into their reserves. America’s crude stocks fell by 2.2m barrels to 414m barrels in the week to September 29th; a decline that may accelerate as refineries seek more crude after their maintenance season, which runs through October.The bears reckon all these inflationary signals will be blown away by the economic gale heading the world’s way. The Fed has said it is ready to keep interest rates higher for longer which, together with a slowdown in hiring and jumpy bond yields inflating the cost of debt, will dampen growth. This “very unsettled picture” is being made murkier still by political chaos, says Adi Imsirovic, a former oil-trading chief at Gazprom, an energy giant, with America’s House of Representatives, on which all federal spending decisions depend, ousting its speaker on October 3rd.Signs of demand destruction caused by the recent price spikes are becoming visible, with American gasoline use falling to its lowest seasonal level since 2001. Pressure from raised oil prices is also feeding through to “core” inflation, which excludes food and energy costs, as firms in other sectors, starting with transport, raise their prices to compensate. The Cleveland branch of the Federal Reserve’s “Nowcast”, which uses oil and petrol prices as inputs, projects it will edge up to 4.19% year on year this month, from 4.17% in September. On top of all this, higher interest rates in America push up the dollar’s value, making oil more expensive for everyone else.The bears have the upper hand, then, but the question is how long the situation will hold. Saudi Arabia’s enduring cuts mean the market remains extremely tight. Jorge León, a former OPEC analyst, now at Rystad Energy, a consultancy, reckons that prices will soon return to somewhere in the low $90s. Surprising economic data could cause swings of as much as $5-10 a barrel; several surprises could even push prices briefly into the triple digits.Yet any victory for the bulls will be a short-lived one. Beyond Christmas, bears look likely to gain a durable advantage. Non-opec production growth should cover most of the rise in demand, which will anyway be subdued by the lagging impact of high rates. Kpler, a data firm, projects a solid surplus for the first few months of 2024.There is still an unknown. Although Saudi Arabia has given hints that it is worried about the economic prospects of its Asian and European customers, lower benchmark prices may nonetheless push it to bigger production cuts. If there is a glut of supply, such cuts may not be enough to push up prices. But they will prevent the rebuilding of stocks, which normally happens during downturns. That would set the stage for the next oil-price thriller. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. More

The U.S. fell to fourth place worldwide in a study of “financial inclusion” in 42 markets.
Financial inclusion means having access to useful and affordable financial products.
Consumer sentiment in the U.S. is down across financial systems and employers.

“Financial inclusion,” defined as individuals and businesses having access to useful and affordable financial products, has declined in the U.S., according to new industry research.
The U.S. fell to fourth place, from second, this year in the second annual Global Financial Inclusion Index compiled by the Centre for Economics and Business Research in London and Des Moines, Iowa-based Principal Financial Group. Singapore continued to hold the top spot.

Singapore is followed by Hong Kong, Switzerland, the U.S. and Sweden in the 2023 rankings, according to the research, which examined 42 markets worldwide. Singapore’s small size, with a population of just six million people, helps it in the ranking, but it is also boosted by its commitment to financial literacy, financial technology adoption and employer support. 
More from Personal Finance:Consumer watchdog future may be on the line at Supreme CourtSocial Security’s trust funds are running dry. 4 things to knowHow student loan bills resuming for 40 million impacts economy
A country’s employers, financial systems and governments are the pillars for what makes a system inclusive, which, in turn, affects consumer sentiment.
Consumer sentiment in the U.S. is down across financial systems and employers but is especially pronounced when it comes to the government. The percentage of people who feel the government acts in a way that helps them feel financially included declined to 50% in 2023, from 72% in 2022. Political polarization, evident in developments such as the recent threat of a federal shutdown, make matters worse. 
“It creates uncertainty and causes people to delay decisions that they might otherwise make about purchase around savings, and you don’t want to paralyze people’s decision-making around financial security,” Dan Houston, Principal Financial Group Chair and CEO, told CNBC in an exclusive interview.  More

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Tuesday in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America.
The plaintiff alleges CFPB funding is unconstitutional because it’s not subject to annual appropriations from Congress.
Depending on how the court rules, past rules issued by the CFPB may be deemed illegal. Funding mechanisms of agencies like the Federal Reserve and government programs like Social Security might also be thrown into doubt.

Visitors walk across the U.S. Supreme Court plaza on the first day of the court’s new session on Oct. 2, 2023.
Bill Clark | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments Tuesday in a case with the potential to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a watchdog agency created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The case — CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association of America — hinges on the constitutionality of the agency’s funding. If the High Court sides with CFSA, a trade group representing payday lenders, its ruling could have broad and significant impacts for consumers, according to legal experts and consumer advocates.  

For example, any rules the CFPB has issued in the past 12 years — whether about credit cards, mortgages, payday loans or debt collection, for example — could be nullified, experts said. Some regulators like the Federal Reserve and government programs like Social Security share a similar funding model to the CFPB’s; they may also be called into question.
More from Personal Finance:Biden ESG rule survives challenge in courtIRS to target ‘unscrupulous’ tax preparers amid new crackdownWhite House moves ahead with new plan to cancel student debt
“[The CFPB’s] future is on the line before the Court,” Better Markets, a consumer advocacy group, wrote Monday.
A ruling could come as late as June 2024.

Why the CFPB’s funding may be unconstitutional

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau headquarters in Washington.
Samuel Corum/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The CFPB was established in 2011 by the Dodd-Frank financial-reform law in the wake of the Great Recession.

Lawmakers created the federal agency to protect consumers from predatory financial practices. To date, it has collected $17.5 billion in financial relief for about 200 million eligible people, according to agency data.
The recent case isn’t the first to pose a threat to CFPB operations. The Supreme Court ruled against the agency in a 2020 case, Seila Law v. CFPB, finding part of its structure to be unconstitutional but ultimately keeping the agency intact.
In the current case, the CFSA trade group sued the CFPB in 2018, seeking to invalidate a 2017 rule that cracked down on payday lenders.

[The CFPB’s] future is on the line before the Court.

Better Markets

The case was ultimately heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which ruled in October 2022 that the CFPB’s funding mechanism violated the Constitution’s appropriations clause.
The agency isn’t subject to annual appropriations, the budget process whereby Congress allocates funding to various parts of the federal government. (A breakdown of this process is what almost led to a government shutdown on Sunday.)   
Instead, the CFPB’s funding isn’t authorized by Congress each year. It has an independent funding structure sourced through the Federal Reserve — an attempt to shield the agency from political pressures, experts said. Its director requests those funds each year, capped at 12% of the Federal Reserve System’s total operating expenses.

The Fifth Circuit ruled this structure was unconstitutional, and that the payday rule was therefore illegal.
Such a ruling appears to be unprecedented, the Congressional Research Service said.
“The Fifth Circuit’s decision is significant as the first appellate decision — and perhaps the first court decision ever — to conclude that congressional action, as opposed to executive or judicial action, can violate the Appropriations Clause,” it wrote.

Why the Supreme Court may gut the CFPB

If the Supreme Court were to agree, it could pose an “existential” threat to the agency, said John Coleman, partner at the law firm Orrick and former deputy general counsel for litigation at the CFPB from 2016 to 2021.
For one, it’s possible that the agency would exist only as a shell of its former self.
“It would still exist as a creation of Congress,” Coleman said. “But if its funding stream is deemed unconstitutional, it cannot spend those funds, which calls into question how it pays its employees.
“Without employees, an agency can’t do anything.”

Rohit Chopra, director of the CFPB, testifies during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on June 14, 2023.
Tom Williams | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

Additionally, such a ruling would call into question the agency’s past and future rulemakings, experts said.
“[It] could cast legal doubt over every substantive action that the CFPB has taken since at least July 21, 2011, when the Bureau’s authorities went into full effect, if not since its inception a year earlier, as well as any future Bureau action,” the Congressional Research Service said.
“This would include myriad regulatory actions, such as dozens of rulemakings, enforcement actions, and examinations the Bureau has conducted over the past 12 years,” it added.
Such a ruling would have a “devastating” impact on the real estate industry, including the destabilization of the mortgage market, for example, according to a court filing made by industry groups including the Mortgage Bankers Association, the National Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors.

Numerous other government agencies and programs are funded outside the annual appropriations process, said Rachel Gittleman, financial services outreach manager at the Consumer Federation of America.
They include, among others: the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Housing Finance Agency, National Credit Union Administration, Farm Credit Administration, Farm Credit Insurance Corporation, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Affordable Care Act and unemployment benefits, she said.
Such an outcome is unlikely, however, Coleman said. If it were to rule against the CFPB, the High Court would likely preserve the validity of CFPB’s past rulemakings and give Congress some time to determine an alternative funding mechanism, he said. (Of course, the latter might be difficult in a divided Congress during an election year, he said.)
“We’ll know a lot more on Tuesday after we hear from the justices,” Coleman said. More