Most of the affected staff were on probationary status — meaning they were in a trial period after starting a new government position — and several had already accepted federal buyout offers, CNBC reported Wednesday (Feb. 12), citing unnamed sources.
The CFPB did not immediately reply to PYMNTS’ request for comment.
There may be layoffs coming across government agencies, as the Office of Personnel Management sought lists of all recently hired workers because they are easiest to terminate, the report said.
The CFPB’s headquarters remained closed Wednesday after acting CFPB director Russell Vought told employees to stop working, according to the report.
Before the job cuts, the agency had about 1,700 employees, per the report.
Advertisement: Scroll to Continue
While the agency faces an uncertain future, President Donald Trump named a new CFPB director Wednesday.
According to multiple published reports, Trump’s pick for the role is Jonathan McKernan, who was until Monday (Feb. 10) a director on the board of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC).
See also: Who Are Trump’s Picks to Lead Financial Regulators?
McKernan said in a Monday post on social platform X that he stepped down from his position on the FDIC board because his term expired and, with the new acting comptroller, there would have been more Republicans on the board than permitted by law.
Vought, who was appointed acting director of the CFPB Friday (Feb. 7) and is also head of the Office of Management and Budget, delivered his message telling CFPB employees to stay out of the office and not perform any work tasks Monday.
These events left the financial services industry trying to figure out what to do next, PYMNTS reported Monday.
“If nobody’s home, you have financial services entities just trying to make their best guess,” said former President Barack Obama administration Assistant Treasury Secretary Amias Gerety in his weekly discussion with PYMNTS CEO Karen Webster.
FinTechs navigating this uncertainty should maintain their compliance policies and procedures, he said. Noncompliance is risky, as state enforcement authorities and private rights of action continue regardless of federal enforcement.
