Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection Launches New Program Inviting Industry and the Public to Identify Problems with FTC Rules

By John L. Culhane, Jr. & Alan S. Kaplinsky on September 15, 2026
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On September 10, 2026, the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection (BCP or Bureau) announced a new BCP Rule Guidance Program (Program) that gives businesses, trade associations, and other stakeholders a new mechanism for bringing problems with FTC rules directly to the Bureau’s attention. The program invites submissions identifying genuine ambiguities in FTC rules, substantive conflicts between an FTC rule and an existing statute or another FTC rule, and other significant problems with the FTC rules. If the Bureau determines that an issue warrants attention, it may issue guidance that will be made public.

The initiative is notable because it invites regulated parties to identify potential defects in the regulations themselves, rather than simply asking how to comply with them. The Bureau expressly says that it values input that can help identify rules that are unnecessary or confusing or that do not benefit consumers or the marketplace.

Although not described as such, the program seems somewhat like an informal staff advisory-opinion process. The Bureau may or may not answer any questions submitted to it. The Bureau will not answer questions that can be resolved by reading the rule, existing FTC plain-language guidance, or an existing formal FTC advisory opinion. Nor will the Bureau answer a question that seems to be asking it to take over a business’s own legal or compliance responsibilities. Guidance issued under the program will not be binding on the FTC or the public.

The program also raises some important questions for businesses considering whether to use it. The Bureau has made clear that the guidance it issues will be made public, but it has not said that every submission to the program will automatically be made public. Nor has it said that submissions that result in guidance being issued will automatically be made public as would apparently be the case under FTC Rule 1.4, 16 C.F.R. 1.4, with a submission requesting a formal advisory opinion that is issued by the FTC or its staff. That does not mean, however, that a submission will automatically be confidential. Because the FTC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act, a prospective submitter should consider carefully what information it provides and what confidentiality protections, if any, may apply. In particular, it should take a close look at FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 C.F.R. 4.9(c), the FTC’s general confidentiality rule.

The FTC’s program therefore presents both an opportunity and a potential risk. It could become a valuable way for industry to obtain clarification of problematic regulations and bring outdated, ambiguous, or potentially unlawful requirements to the Bureau’s attention. But a company should consider carefully whether explaining a regulatory problem to the FTC could expose its own compliance practices, produce an unfavorable public interpretation, or alert the Bureau to an issue it had not previously considered.

For more detailed information about the new FTC Program, click HERE.

  • Posted in:
    Administrative and Regulatory, Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    Consumer Finance Monitor
  • Organization:
    Ballard Spahr LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo