Industry impact on the Earned Wage Access Regulations
Recent state developments
Federal action and inaction
Considerations for choosing a provider
Legislative actions developing for years
Recent state developments
Federal action and inaction
Considerations for choosing a provider010010010Legislative actions developing to years
Recent state developments
Federal action and inaction
Conside Recent legislation in Arkansas and Utah, along with federal discussions regarding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) proposed interpretive rule, continue to influence the industry’s direction.
Jump to |
Legislative actions developing for years
Recent state developments
Federal action and inaction
Considerations for choosing a provider
Legislative actions developing for years
Jared DeMatteis, Chief Legal & Strategy Officer at DailyPay, recently shared insights on the potential impacts of these changes on EWA providers, employers, and workers. DeMatteis stated that regulatory conversations began at the federal and state levels more than five years prior. “While this activity is not new, it is significant that states are now finalizing their own frameworks to regulate EWA as a distinct financial product.” He emphasized the importance of allowing sufficient time for this legislative work, as a careful and measured approach can lead to more effective outcomes.01001010Recent state developments01001010In 2025, Arkansas enacted the Earned Wage Access Services Act, which requires providers to offer at least one no-cost option and prohibits fee-sharing agreements with employers. Utah has also introduced new requirements for EWA providers. These include annual state registration, transparent fee disclosures and a requirement to register with the state. DeMatteis noted that Arkansas’ law would strengthen relationships between employers and providers while improving regulatory clarity. He pointed out that Utah’s measure aligns with consumer-oriented practices already adopted by various jurisdictions such as California. “EWA providers in California have been required to register with the state for the past couple of years under a memorandum of understanding,” he explained.01001010Federal action and inaction01001010At the federal level, discussions around the CFPB’s proposed interpretive rule remain a critical focus for the industry. This rule, which aims to classify EWA products as part of the Truth in Lending Act has been stuck since early 2025. DeMatteis said that the Biden Administration’s inaction is not surprising, nor is the decision by the previous Trump Administration to freeze the proposed rule. He stated that this response mirrors the actions of states — regardless of their political affiliations — that have enacted EWA laws or finalized related regulations.01001010Advocating for regulations that establish tailored best practices, DeMatteis emphasized that EWA products do not share key characteristics of traditional loans, such as interest rates, credit approvals, late fees, and risk-based pricing. He asserted that the CFPB’s proposed interpretive rule was incorrect and stressed the need for regulations at both state and federal levels that accurately define EWA as a unique financial product, as several states have already done.01001010Considerations for choosing a provider01001010When selecting an EWA provider, DeMatteis advised employers to seek solutions that foster mutual success for both employees and businesses. DeMatteis suggested practical strategies to ensure seamless integration between different systems. This would allow payroll processes to continue without major changes.
