The FDIC has issued FIL-14-2026 rescinding its guidance governing the re-presentment of the same transaction after raising questions about the Biden Administration’s prior guidance.

“Based on a review and assessment of the guidance in FIL-32-2023, the FDIC concludes that the guidance is overly broad in scope and has raised uncertainty regarding when, for instance, disclosures regarding re-presentments may result in ‘unfairness’ concerns under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act,” the FDIC said in announcing the rescission.

The agency continued, “Supervised institutions should ensure their disclosures to consumers accurately reflect their practices and are provided in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and other current legal requirements.”

The previous guidance in FIL-32-2023, issued during the Biden Administration, followed the FDIC’s identification during consumer compliance examinations of UDAP violations in connection with banks’ re-presentment practices. In the guidance, the FDIC addressed potential risks arising from multiple re-presentment NSF fees, risk mitigation practices, and the FDIC’s supervisory approach. 

The original guidance included a warning that charging multiple nonsufficient funds fees for the same transaction could constitute deceptive or unfair practices under the law.

“When exercising supervisory and enforcement responsibilities regarding multiple re-presentment, NSF fee practices, the FDIC will take appropriate action to address consumer harm and violations of law,” that guidance stated. “The FDIC’s supervisory response will focus on identifying re-presentment related issues and ensuring correction of deficiencies and remediation to harmed customers, when appropriate.”

The original guidance had been the subject of a lawsuit. The Minnesota Bankers Association and Lake Central Bank challenged the guidance, saying that it should have gone through the formal rulemaking process. That lawsuit was dismissed, with a district court saying the plaintiffs lacked standing and that that the guidance did not amount to a final rule. An appeals court upheld that dismissal.

The recission is the latest Biden Administration guidance to be voided by the Trump Administration, which has rescinded dozens of guidance documents.