The CFPB now takes the position that states generally cannot add their own limits on what goes into your credit report, though courts make the final call.
The CFPB interprets the FCRA's preemption provisions, including 15 U.S.C. 1681t(b)(1)(E), to preempt state laws that touch broad areas of credit reporting, such as state laws barring categories of information like medical debt from consumer reports. The rule replaces a July 2022 interpretive rule, withdrawn in May 2025, that had read preemption narrowly.
- Citation
- 90 Fed. Reg. 48710 (Oct. 28, 2025)
- Court or agency
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Date
- October 28, 2025
- Law
- FCRA
Summary
In July 2022 the CFPB said states could regulate many aspects of credit reporting, including whether medical debt or similar information can appear on reports. The CFPB withdrew that interpretation in May 2025 and, on October 28, 2025, issued a new interpretive rule saying the FCRA generally preempts state laws in this area. Interpretive rules are not binding on courts.
Background
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) contains several provisions that preempt state law, meaning they override state laws on the same subjects. Courts and regulators have long disagreed about how far those provisions reach.
In July 2022 the CFPB issued an interpretive rule, “The Fair Credit Reporting Act’s Limited Preemption of State Laws” (87 Fed. Reg. 41042). It read preemption narrowly and said states could regulate several areas, including whether medical debt, rental information or arrest records may appear on credit reports.
The CFPB withdrew the 2022 rule on May 12, 2025, as part of a withdrawal of 67 guidance documents.
What changed
On October 28, 2025, the CFPB published a new interpretive rule, signed by Acting Director Russell Vought. It concludes that the FCRA “generally preempts State laws that touch on broad areas of credit reporting,” consistent with Congress’s intent to create national standards.
The rule says the 2022 interpretation wrongly read section 1681t(b)(1)(E), which preempts state laws “with respect to any subject matter regulated under” section 1681c on information in consumer reports. In the CFPB’s new view, whether an item can appear on a report and how long it can stay are “two points on the same continuum.” So a state law banning medical debt from reports would be preempted just as a state law shortening the seven-year reporting period would be.
Our take
This rule reflects the CFPB’s view, not a court ruling. Interpretive rules can persuade a judge, but they do not bind courts. Whether a particular state credit-reporting law is preempted will be decided case by case. In the Cornerstone case in July 2025, a federal court in Texas also stated that a state law prohibiting the reporting of properly coded medical debt would be preempted.
For consumers, the federal FCRA remains the main source of protection. It still requires accuracy and lets consumers dispute errors with both the credit bureau and the company that reported the information.
What it means if you’re sued in Texas
A credit report entry and a lawsuit are separate, but they often involve the same debt. If a collector or debt buyer is reporting a debt you are disputing in court, the FCRA requires it to note that the debt is disputed once you dispute it with the furnisher, and to investigate disputes forwarded by the credit bureaus.
Keep copies of every dispute you send. Inaccurate reporting can support a separate federal claim. If a debt is being reported inaccurately or you have been sued over it, a free case review is available.
Takeaway
Federal FCRA protections, including the right to dispute inaccurate items and to sue for willful or negligent violations, are unaffected and remain the main tools for fixing a credit report.
Sources
Primary authority
- Interpretive rule (Federal Register, 90 Fed. Reg. 48710)
- Withdrawal of 2022 interpretive rule among others (Federal Register, 90 Fed. Reg. 20084)
Secondary sources
This summary and analysis are general information, not legal advice. Later decisions, amendments or agency actions may change the law; check the current status before relying on it.