NEW YORK (AP) — Bringing back a previously stated campaign promise, President Donald Trump aims to implement a one-year, 10% cap on credit card interest rates, a move that could potentially save American consumers upwards of $100 billion annually. However, the announcement has been met with immediate opposition from financial sectors that have historically supported him.
In a recent social media post, Trump did not clarify whether such a cap would be enacted through executive action or new legislation. Nonetheless, Republican Senator Roger Marshall indicated he had discussed the matter with Trump and plans to work on a legislative proposal with his endorsement.
The president voiced strong rhetoric against high credit card interest rates, pointing out that many are often between 20% to 30%. We will no longer let the American Public be ripped off by Credit Card Companies, Trump asserted on his Truth Social platform.
While researchers have highlighted that credit card companies would suffer under a rate cap, they assert that these companies would remain profitable, albeit with scaled-back rewards and incentives for consumers.
Current averages show credit card interest rates hover between 19.65% and 21.5%, reflecting a slight decline due to lowered federal rates this past year. However, these rates are among the highest since tracking began in the mid-1990s.
The banking sector, through a joint statement from the American Bankers Association, expressed firm opposition, warning that a cap could drive consumers toward less regulated and more financially burdensome options. This has raised questions about the White House's consultations with credit card companies regarding the proposal.
In a political twist, Senator Bernie Sanders and his ally, Republican Josh Hawley, introduced a bill earlier this year seeking a similar interest rate cap, aiming to capitalize on Trump's pledge to gather legislative momentum.
Despite Trump's new focus on credit card interest rates, critics have pointed out his administration's previous deregulation measures that allowed banks to impose higher fees.
As debates continue, the question of consumer protection versus industry interests remains at the forefront of this unfolding narrative.






















