Potential Bias in AI Consumer Decision Tools Eyed by FTC, CFPB

Potential discrimination and bias resulting from consumer tools based on artificial intelligence and automated data will be an enforcement focus of regulators this year, Jenner & Block attorneys predict. Accuracy and transparency are also on the table, they say.

Given the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making tools in consumer-facing decisions, we expect federal regulators in 2022 to continue their recent track record of interest in potential discrimination and unfairness, as well as data accuracy and transparency.

Significant technological developments in these areas and the increasing use of data analytics to make automated decisions will likely result in further regulatory action this year in three key areas: (1) assessing whether AI and algorithms are excluding particular consumer groups in an unfair and discriminatory manner, whether intentionally or not; (2) evaluating whether collected data accurately reflects real-world facts and whether companies are giving consumers an opportunity to correct mistakes; and (3) assessing whether automated decisionmaking tools are being used in a transparent manner.

Over the last year, federal regulators with enforcement authority in the consumer space—the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)—have expressed their intention to continue enforcement efforts.

The FTC has identified “technology companies and digital platforms,” “bias in algorithms and biometrics,” and “deceptive and manipulative conduct on the Internet” as among its top enforcement priorities for the coming years, and directed staff to use compulsory processes to demand documents and testimony to investigate potential abuses in these areas.

The FTC and the CFPB have each initiated or continued investigations into practices involving the collection of consumer data and the use of data analytics in consumer decisions, including the use of AI and algorithms by financial institutions, digital payment platforms, and social media, and video streaming firms.

Both agencies have also made public statements that provide insight into the types of regulatory action that may be coming this year.

FTC Enforcement Areas

For example, the FTC published blog posts on its website outlining its thinking on AI-enforcement focus areas.

Discrimination and Unfairness

The FTC emphasized that Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive” practices, gives it jurisdiction over racially-biased algorithms. The FTC cautioned companies that regardless of how well-intentioned their algorithm is, they must still guard against discriminatory outcomes and disparate impact on protected classes of consumers.

Accuracy

The FTC stated that it planned to rely on its decades of experience enforcing the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when analyzing whether other types of consumer-related AI meet the requirements of this law.

The FTC also advised companies not to rely on “data set[s] missing information from particular populations” and advised companies to give “consumers access and an opportunity to correct information used to make decisions about them.”

Transparency

The FTC said that companies should “embrace transparency … by conducting and publishing the results of independent audits” and by disclosing to consumers the key factors used in algorithms to assign risk scores.

Companies should examine their data inputs, ask questions before they “use the algorithm,” and “validate” and “revalidate” their AI models so that they fully understand the implications of their use of these data tools.

CFPB Enforcement Focus

The CFPB has likewise highlighted its interest in the following areas.

Discrimination and Unfairness

In recent testimony before Congress, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra expressed a desire to reinvigorate “relationship banking,” explaining that it would counteract the “automation and algorithms [that] increasingly define the consumer financial services market” and may “unwittingly reinforce biases and discrimination, undermining racial equity.”

Accuracy

A November 2021 advisory opinion by the agency emphasizes the need for accuracy in relying on data tools to make consumer decisions.

The CFPB specifically advised that “matching consumer records solely through the matching of names” is not a “reasonable procedure to assure maximum possible accuracy” under the FCRA. The CFPB further encouraged the use of more sophisticated and reliable data analytics.

Transparency

In a March 2021 RFI to financial institutions seeking their views on governance, risk management, and compliance management in the “Use of Artificial Intelligence, including Machine Learning,” the CFPB stressed the importance of AI “explainability”—in other words, the need for companies to be able to ascertain and explain how their AI applications use data “inputs to produce outputs” in a conceptually sound manner.

The RFI also discussed the need for companies to monitor and validate algorithms that evolve on their own or dynamically update.

EEOC, DOJ Also Looking at AI

Other regulators have also indicated an interest in AI-related enforcement. For example, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has announced an initiative assessing the propriety of AI tools for hiring and other employment decisions.

In addition, the Department of Justice, along with the CFPB and the Office of the Comptroller of Currency, launched the an effort to combat discriminatory redlining by lenders; in his statement announcing this effort, Chopra said that they plan to focus on “new digital and algorithmic redlining” in addition to “old forms of redlining.”

In all, we expect these and other efforts by regulators will continue to focus on issues of discrimination and unfairness, and accuracy and transparency in the use of AI and consumer data. As the rules of the road continue to be written through regulatory activity in 2022, it is critical for companies to keep up to date with the latest developments.

Reproduced with permission. Published Feb.3, 2022. Copyright 2022 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. 800-372-1033. For further use, please visit http://www.bna.com/copyright-permission-request/

Related Capabilities

Related Locations

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Potential Bias in AI Consumer Decision Tools Eyed by FTC, CFPB

Potential discrimination and bias resulting from consumer tools based on artificial intelligence and automated data will be an enforcement focus of regulators this year, Jenner & Block attorneys predict. Accuracy and transparency are also on the table, they say.

Given the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making tools in consumer-facing decisions, we expect federal regulators in 2022 to continue their recent track record of interest in potential discrimination and unfairness, as well as data accuracy and transparency.

Significant technological developments in these areas and the increasing use of data analytics to make automated decisions will likely result in further regulatory action this year in three key areas: (1) assessing whether AI and algorithms are excluding particular consumer groups in an unfair and discriminatory manner, whether intentionally or not; (2) evaluating whether collected data accurately reflects real-world facts and whether companies are giving consumers an opportunity to correct mistakes; and (3) assessing whether automated decisionmaking tools are being used in a transparent manner.

Over the last year, federal regulators with enforcement authority in the consumer space—the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)—have expressed their intention to continue enforcement efforts.

The FTC has identified “technology companies and digital platforms,” “bias in algorithms and biometrics,” and “deceptive and manipulative conduct on the Internet” as among its top enforcement priorities for the coming years, and directed staff to use compulsory processes to demand documents and testimony to investigate potential abuses in these areas.

The FTC and the CFPB have each initiated or continued investigations into practices involving the collection of consumer data and the use of data analytics in consumer decisions, including the use of AI and algorithms by financial institutions, digital payment platforms, and social media, and video streaming firms.

Both agencies have also made public statements that provide insight into the types of regulatory action that may be coming this year.

FTC Enforcement Areas

For example, the FTC published blog posts on its website outlining its thinking on AI-enforcement focus areas.

Discrimination and Unfairness

The FTC emphasized that Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive” practices, gives it jurisdiction over racially-biased algorithms. The FTC cautioned companies that regardless of how well-intentioned their algorithm is, they must still guard against discriminatory outcomes and disparate impact on protected classes of consumers.

Accuracy

The FTC stated that it planned to rely on its decades of experience enforcing the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when analyzing whether other types of consumer-related AI meet the requirements of this law.

The FTC also advised companies not to rely on “data set[s] missing information from particular populations” and advised companies to give “consumers access and an opportunity to correct information used to make decisions about them.”

Transparency

The FTC said that companies should “embrace transparency … by conducting and publishing the results of independent audits” and by disclosing to consumers the key factors used in algorithms to assign risk scores.

Companies should examine their data inputs, ask questions before they “use the algorithm,” and “validate” and “revalidate” their AI models so that they fully understand the implications of their use of these data tools.

CFPB Enforcement Focus

The CFPB has likewise highlighted its interest in the following areas.

Discrimination and Unfairness

In recent testimony before Congress, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra expressed a desire to reinvigorate “relationship banking,” explaining that it would counteract the “automation and algorithms [that] increasingly define the consumer financial services market” and may “unwittingly reinforce biases and discrimination, undermining racial equity.”

Accuracy

A November 2021 advisory opinion by the agency emphasizes the need for accuracy in relying on data tools to make consumer decisions.

The CFPB specifically advised that “matching consumer records solely through the matching of names” is not a “reasonable procedure to assure maximum possible accuracy” under the FCRA. The CFPB further encouraged the use of more sophisticated and reliable data analytics.

Transparency

In a March 2021 RFI to financial institutions seeking their views on governance, risk management, and compliance management in the “Use of Artificial Intelligence, including Machine Learning,” the CFPB stressed the importance of AI “explainability”—in other words, the need for companies to be able to ascertain and explain how their AI applications use data “inputs to produce outputs” in a conceptually sound manner.

The RFI also discussed the need for companies to monitor and validate algorithms that evolve on their own or dynamically update.

EEOC, DOJ Also Looking at AI

Other regulators have also indicated an interest in AI-related enforcement. For example, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has announced an initiative assessing the propriety of AI tools for hiring and other employment decisions.

In addition, the Department of Justice, along with the CFPB and the Office of the Comptroller of Currency, launched the an effort to combat discriminatory redlining by lenders; in his statement announcing this effort, Chopra said that they plan to focus on “new digital and algorithmic redlining” in addition to “old forms of redlining.”

In all, we expect these and other efforts by regulators will continue to focus on issues of discrimination and unfairness, and accuracy and transparency in the use of AI and consumer data. As the rules of the road continue to be written through regulatory activity in 2022, it is critical for companies to keep up to date with the latest developments.

Reproduced with permission. Published Feb.3, 2022. Copyright 2022 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. 800-372-1033. For further use, please visit http://www.bna.com/copyright-permission-request/

Related Capabilities

Related Locations

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

News and Insights

Amanda Shafer Berman to Speak on Energy and Administrative Law at WEN-DC Webinar

As the Supreme Court's new Term begins, Jenner & Block Partner Amanda Shafer Berman will join a Women's Energy Network of Washington, DC (WEN-DC) webinar on how the Court's decisions are shaping the energy sector.

October 14, 2026

Publications

Partner Amanda Shafer Berman Quoted in Bloomberg Law on Senate Permitting Overhaul Bill

Partner Amanda Shafer Berman was quoted in an October 5 Bloomberg Law article, "Permitting Deal Gives Projects Defense Against Litigation Delays," on the Senate's new permitting overhaul package and its expected impact on litigation over federal permitting reversals.

October 2026

Event

Partner John Storino to Speak at Sandpiper Partners' “AI and Outside Counsel Guidelines Roundtable”

On October 8, Partner John Storino will serve as a panelist at the “AI and Outside Counsel Guidelines Roundtable,” hosted by Sandpiper Partners in Chicago.

October 8, 2026

Event

Partner Meghan Greenfield to Speak on Supreme Court Climate Case at Edison Electric Institute's Fall Legal Conference

On Wednesday, October 7, Partner Meghan Greenfield will speak on a panel titled "Boulder County v. Suncor Energy: What the Supreme Court's Climate Case Means for the Energy Industry" at the Edison Electric Institute's Fall Legal Conference in Salt Lake City, Utah.

October 7, 2026

Publications

The Form Rules Everything: A Seventh Circuit Ruling on ERISA's Substantial Compliance Doctrine

Partner Joseph Torres and Special Counsel Jennifer Beach authored an article for Employee Relations Law Journal examining the Seventh Circuit's decision in Packaging Corp. of America Thrift Plan for Hourly Employees v. Langdon, a ruling that addresses both the standard of review in ERISA interpleader actions and the continued viability of the substantial compliance doctrine for changing plan beneficiaries.

October 5, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Rises in American Lawyer Rankings for Summer Associate Experience

Jenner & Block ranked 14th nationally in The American Lawyer’s 2026 Summer Associate Satisfaction Survey, jumping 10 spots from last year. The annual survey measures summer associate satisfaction at US law firms based on ratings provided directly by summer associates across key firm qualities.

October 2, 2026