July 2016 SDADA Column

In late June, I attended the seventh annual year executive forum sponsored by NADA and the
American Financial Services Association (AFSA) where we discussed legislative, regulatory and operational challenges facing auto dealers and finance sources.

Executives from virtually every major finance company and major bank in the nation engaged in indirect auto financing attended the forum along with a dozen or so dealers from the NADA board. There were representatives from the American International Automobile Dealers Association, National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers, and Automotive Trade Association Executives in attendance as well.

While there were several presentations and discussions during the event, it was Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray's comments to the group that stuck me.

As he reviewed the bureau’s activities in the area of vehicle financing, he insisted on calling our retail discounting of interest rates a "dealer markup" and suggested several times that some type of "flat rate" compensation to dealers was a preferred model. While it was not a surprise to hear this, it was frustrating to see and hear how narrow-minded he still was on this issue.

A survey of those in attendance revealed that top concerns for finance sources include exams and enforcement actions, cybersecurity, compliance, changes in vehicle values and hiring, training and retaining employees.

Dealers are most concerned with new regulations from the FTC and CFPB, existing regulations and compliance, and hiring, training and retaining employees. New opportunities focused on technology improvements and mobile financing options for lenders, and leasing and e-contracting for dealers.


House Again Rebukes CFPB Over Its Flawed Auto Finance Guidance 

By a bipartisan vote of 260-162, the House of Representatives passed an amendment offered by Rep. Frank Guinta (R-N.H.) that would nullify the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) flawed auto finance guidance by preventing the CFPB from spending any funds to enforce the guidance. The amendment was added to the fiscal year 2017 Financial Services appropriations bill (H.R. 5485) on the House floor. This House action is another rebuke of the CFPB's auto finance guidance, which threatens a consumer's ability to receive a discounted auto loan from a dealer. This is the first time Congress has used the appropriations process to rein in the CFPB. Nineteen Democrats and 241 Republicans voted for the amendment.

Last November, the House passed Rep. Guinta's bill, H.R. 1737, by a bipartisan vote of 332-96. This bill would nullify the CFPB's 2013 auto finance guidance and establish a transparent process with public participation to determine future auto finance guidance. In contrast, the CFPB issued the flawed 2013 guidance without any public comment or transparency, and the agency admitted it has failed to study the impact of its guidance on consumers.

Economic Analysis Reaffirms That State Franchise Laws Lower Prices, Benefit Consumers 

Retail prices for new cars are lower for consumers because of state franchise laws, according to a new economic analysis from the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal and Economic Public Policy Studies.

The analysis, “State Automobile Franchise Laws: Public or Private Interests?” found that state franchise laws serve to foster intense competition among franchised new-car dealers, which “demonstrably lowers prices for consumers” and “alter[s] the way consumers buy cars and service in a positive way.”

“Franchise laws do not limit competition or lead to higher prices,” said study co-author and Phoenix Center Senior Fellow Professor T. Randolph Beard. “In fact, all the evidence suggests that there is intense competition leading to very low margins on new car sales.”

The Phoenix Center study came in response to recent scrutiny of state franchise laws by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and others, and the suggestion that these laws are outdated. The study concluded, however, that state franchise laws are indeed still very beneficial to consumers.

“When selling an automobile-service bundle, our analysis indicates that franchised auto dealers have a better incentive with respect to consumer desires than car manufacturers,” said study co-author and Phoenix Center Chief Economist Dr. George S. Ford. “As such, it is not unreasonable for state legislatures to choose a market design that best serves their constituents in the form of local auto franchise laws.”