Trump might cap Credit Card interest at 10%

[jerryskids 7,261]

Bad idea.  Banks will simply not provide CCs to the high-risk people, who are the ones Trump wants to help.  They'll then have to go to payday advance / "checks cashed here" places which will gorge them even more.  This is the kind of silly thing Lefties would do, once again paving their road to Hell with good intentions.

To the extent that Trump listens to anyone:  between this and the tariffs, he gets some pretty crappy advice on the economy.  He needs a change in that circle.

Quote

Bill Ackman did not mince words when giving his opinion of President Donald Trump's call for a temporary cap on credit card rates.

In a since-deleted X post, the hedge fund billionaire said late on Friday that Trump's call for a 10% cap on credit card interest for one year was a "mistake" that could lead to millions having their cards canceled.

"This is a mistake President," Ackman wrote. "Without being able to charge rates adequate enough to cover losses and to earn an adequate return on equity, credit card lenders will cancel cards for millions of consumers who will have to turn to loan sharks for credit at rates higher than and on terms inferior to what they previously paid."

Trump had taken to Truth Social earlier on Friday in a fresh effort to address the hot political issue of "affordability," saying his administration intended to target lenders charging interest rates of "20 to 30%."

"Please be informed that we will no longer let the American Public be 'ripped off,'" he said. "Effective January 20, 2026, I, as President of the United States, am calling for a one year cap on Credit Card Interest Rates of 10%."

Such a cap would likely require authorization by Congress. It is unclear what moves the president could make to bypass this.

In a new post on Saturday, Ackman, the CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, said Trump's "goal of reducing credit card interest rates" was a "worthy and important one," but he reiterated his concerns over a 10% cap.

"I have no investments in the credit card space so I am not the expert, but the market for credit cards appears highly competitive," Ackman continued. "The best way to bring down rates would be to make it more competitive by making the regulatory regime more conducive to new entrants and new technologies."

Trump, who pledged to "immediately bring prices down" in office, has recently honed in on the topic of affordability.

New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani swept to victory in November after running a campaign focused on voters' cost-of-living concerns.

Business Insider has contacted the White House for comment.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ackman-trump-call-cap-credit-card-interest-mistake-affordability-2026-1

[weepaws 3,480]

So this is another one of those not so good things to mention.   Socialism supported by those that voted for it.  Shame. 

[SaintsInDome2006 877]

5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Trump had taken to Truth Social earlier on Friday in a fresh effort to address the hot political issue of "affordability," saying his administration intended to target lenders charging interest rates of "20 to 30%."

"Please be informed that we will no longer let the American Public be 'ripped off,'" he said. "Effective January 20, 2026, I, as President of the United States, am calling for a one year cap on Credit Card Interest Rates of 10%."

No wonder Trump snatched Maduro, he needed his economic advice.

[MDC 8,241]

1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

No wonder Trump snatched Maduro, he needed his economic advice.

Already took his wardrobe advice.  

[thegeneral 3,820]

It will be against the law very soon to have rates over 10% he said

[Strike 6,126]

Definitely a horrible idea.  Does he even have the power to do that?  

[BufordT 445]

Someone in his clan must be racking up some serious CC debt. 

[jerryskids 7,261]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

Definitely a horrible idea.  Does he even have the power to do that?  

The article says "Such a cap would likely require authorization by Congress. It is unclear what moves the president could make to bypass this."

So... no, but

Financial stocks took a dive today.

[SaintsInDome2006 877]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

Definitely a horrible idea.  Does he even have the power to do that?  

Not legally. The nation’s leader has announced a control over the cost of borrowing on his private social media platform. All illegal.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,220]

Usery is forbidden in Islam.  The other guys approve of it. 

[Ron_Artest 2,733]

My guess is someone shorted cc and financial stocks before the announcement 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,220]

Just now, Ron_Artest said:

My guess is someone shorted cc and financial stocks before the announcement 

Pelosi? 

[HellToupee 2,372]

Just get in line people 

[Ron_Artest 2,733]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Pelosi? 

I don't think she's in the trump circle 

[HellToupee 2,372]

23 minutes ago, MDC said:

Already took his wardrobe advice.  

Donald is wearing Original hoodies?

[Ron_Artest 2,733]

Also the thread title says "might", he won't.  He can't.  He's just saying stuff so his base hears it and likes it.

[BrahmaBulls 1,016]

5 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

My guess is someone shorted cc and financial stocks before the announcement 

Speaking of short, Retard Ron is here

[Hardcore troubadour 16,220]

38 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

I don't think she's in the trump circle 

That’s right. You only care if it’s Trump ! Doing it. 

[Ron_Artest 2,733]

19 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

That’s right. You only care if it’s Trump ! Doing it. 

Wrong.  If pelosi engaged in insider information she should be prosecuted.  I don't give a fock about pelosi you dope.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,220]

Just now, Ron_Artest said:

Wrong.  If pelosi engaged in insider information she should be prosecuted.  I don't give a fock about pelosi you dope.

If? lol. 

[seafoam1 3,572]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

Banks will simply not provide CCs to the high-risk people.

Good. Great idea. 

[jerryskids 7,261]

12 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Good. Great idea. 

It's actually an interesting discussion, IMO.  One can make a solid argument that the people racking up debt on these high-interest cards would benefit from the tough love of removing them altogether.  That of course would have another unintended consequence of lowering our GDP, because who is going to buy those $300 sneakers?

My point was that the belief that you can come in and tell the financial industry to just NOT charge high interest rates, and believe that it won't have massive unintended consequences, is Leftist-level lack of reality.

[Engorgeous George 2,360]

Back in the 70's and early 80's some states had usury laws and limits on chargeable interest.  Those more or less went by the wayside.

 

Best thing to happen to lower income folks would be to stop paying substantial amounts of their limited income for financing.  It would take discipline and during the learning curve of proper budgeting there would be substantial hardship as they would have no emergency reserves, but it would be a good thing if billionaire money men where not siphoning off their meager resources.

 

I do not believe the President has this power.

[seafoam1 3,572]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

It's actually an interesting discussion, IMO.  One can make a solid argument that the people racking up debt on these high-interest cards would benefit from the tough love of removing them altogether.  That of course would have another unintended consequence of lowering our GDP, because who is going to buy those $300 sneakers?

My point was that the belief that you can come in and tell the financial industry to just NOT charge high interest rates, and believe that it won't have massive unintended consequences, is Leftist-level lack of reality.

I guess I just prefer that older people who never learned how to manage their money would be the last generation of people not knowing how to manage their money. Given anyarket situation. 

20 and 30 years olds living on credit cards, instead of intelligently using credit cards, is a sad state of affairs. And so many other scenarios to boot..

[dogcows 1,425]

The president of the U.S. doesn’t have power to levy tariffs either. Or shut down Congressionally-created and funded government agencies. Or strip citizenship from people born in the USA. Or target private law firms. Or punish private companies for DEI policies. Or withhold Congressionally mandated funds to “blue” states. Or use the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport people. Or takeover National Guard without proper justification. Or declare war without Congress…. And on and on.

The thing is, THIS president just does it and instead of the underlings saying “no we can’t, it’s illegal” - they do it. And then the court cases begin.

This is what 77 million people voted for. This is what I see cheerleading for every day. Well, you give a “mad king” too much power and it’s a double-edged sword.

This time you’re upset because you don’t agree with his actions. What you SHOULD be worried about is the unconstitutional consolidation of power in the Executive branch. We should all demand that Congress put on their big boy pants and take back things under their purview on behalf of We the People.

[seafoam1 3,572]

6 minutes ago, dogcows said:

The president of the U.S. doesn’t have power to levy tariffs either.