The SEC dismissed its case and allegations against crypto influencer Ian Balina. The SEC has surrendered to the crypto industry.

The CFPB seeks to pause yet another enforcement action as it “reconsiders” the case, signaling a possible reversal in the case.

Prioritizing crypto and fintech firms’ profits over depositor and bank protections, the FDIC said the rule “would have significantly disrupted many aspects of the banking landscape”—that is true because it would have closed dangerous loopholes that allowed banks to accept hot money deposits, which increases risks and vulnerabilities to bank stability.

Read Better Markets’ statement here.

FDIC stopped a rulemaking to reduce the dangers created by excessive and high-risk incentive-based compensation schemes, which was intended to prevent bank executives from putting their interests in pocketing big bonuses at the expense of the bank’s stability and depositors’ savings.

Read Better Markets’ statement here.

FDIC stopped a rulemaking that would have increased bank board and management accountability. The FDIC said the rule “would have created . . . overly prescriptive and process-oriented expectations” for bank boards and management, but actually, it would have implemented necessary and very long overdue guardrails for the boards and management at the largest banks in the country.

Read Better Markets’ statement here.

FDIC stopped a rulemaking that would have implemented necessary checks and balances for bank changes in control. This rule would have allowed the FDIC to protect depositors and the deposit insurance fund when other bank regulators considered changes in control transactions for the largest banks, which have consumer protection and financial stability risk, including those involving large investment fund managers.