- Source
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Decided
- October 28, 2025
- Bottom line
- State laws keeping medical debt and other items off credit reports now face a federal agency position that they are preempted, though courts will decide.
Background
The FCRA has always preempted state laws that are inconsistent with it. In 1996, Congress added a broader clause, 15 U.S.C. § 1681t(b)(1), providing that “[n]o requirement or prohibition may be imposed under the laws of any State” with respect to any subject matter regulated under listed FCRA provisions. Those include § 1681c (information contained in consumer reports) and § 1681s-2 (responsibilities of furnishers). Congress made that clause permanent in 2003.
In July 2022, the CFPB issued an interpretive rule reading § 1681t(b)(1) narrowly. It said the clause preempts only state laws addressing the specific topics regulated in each listed FCRA section, and that states could, for example, restrict reporting of medical debt, rental information, or arrest records. A number of states have since adopted medical debt reporting restrictions; one law firm count put the number at sixteen by late 2025. The CFPB withdrew the 2022 rule in its May 2025 guidance withdrawal.
What changed
On October 28, 2025, the CFPB, under Acting Director Russell Vought, published a new interpretive rule. It confirms the withdrawal of the 2022 rule and states that the FCRA “generally preempts State laws that touch on broad areas of credit reporting.”
The rule makes several points:
- The 2022 rule was unnecessary and did not reduce compliance burdens; the Bureau said it instead created a “patchwork” of federal and state law. Citing Loper Bright, the Bureau said courts are the final arbiters of statutory meaning and that the FCRA does not delegate preemption authority to the Bureau.
- The “subject matter regulated under” language in § 1681t(b)(1) refers to the general subject described in each subparagraph, such as “information contained in consumer reports,” not just the specific rules in the cross-referenced section.
- Even under the 2022 rule’s own approach, states cannot ban categories of information such as medical debt or arrest records from consumer reports, because whether information may appear at all and how long it may remain are “two points on the same continuum.”
The rule states that it “does not have the force or effect of law.” The CFPB also said that withdrawal of the 2022 rule “will have no effect on the legal status of any State law,” and that parties can litigate preemption questions in court.
Our take
This rule is the CFPB’s opinion about preemption, and by its own terms it binds no one. Whether a given state law is preempted is a question for the courts, which after Loper Bright and the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic v. McKesson give agency views respect, not deference. We expect credit bureaus and furnishers to cite the rule in challenges to state medical debt laws, and we expect states to defend those laws on the statutory text.
On the merits, we think the question is genuinely contested. The 1996 and 2003 amendments were meant to create national standards in specified areas, but Congress chose to list specific provisions rather than preempt all state credit reporting law, and it expressly preserved some state laws. The new rule reads the listed subjects broadly; the 2022 rule read them narrowly. Courts that have considered related questions have not been uniform.
One practical point: state laws that regulate what creditors, landlords, or employers may consider, rather than what bureaus may report, may stand on different footing, since the preemption analysis depends on which FCRA subject matter a law touches.
What it means if your report is wrong
If you live in a state that restricts medical debt reporting, those protections remain on the books unless a court holds them preempted. If a medical debt appears on your report in apparent violation of state law, dispute it and keep records. Separately, federal law and the national bureaus’ policies still matter: paid medical collections and those under $500 should not appear on reports from the three national bureaus under their current voluntary policies, and inaccurate medical debts can be disputed under the FCRA regardless of state law.
A free case review can assess how this rule affects a claim, and there is no fee unless we win.
Sources
Primary
Commentary we reviewed
- Commentary: CFPB issues rule that FCRA preempts state measures barring medical debt (Goodwin)
- Commentary: CFPB issues interpretive rule asserting federal preemption over state medical debt credit reporting laws (JD Supra)
- News: Trump administration undercuts state bans on medical debt in consumer credit reports (Fierce Healthcare)
Updated November 1, 2026. "Our take" is the firm's opinion. This page is general information, not legal advice, and later decisions may change the law.