
0
Hi Marketing Wranglers,
As the government shutdown drama threatens to muzzle financial watchdogs, Wall Street prepares to slow its reporting rhythm, and Oregon swings hard at hidden fees, marketers everywhere are being forced to rethink what “transparency” really means.
Add to that a fresh wave of AI-generated ad controversies, and you’ve got a week that perfectly sums up the tension between innovation and integrity.
🚨 In This Week’s Issue
🚨The Watchdog on a Leash: Looming government shutdown and CFPB budget cuts could weaken financial oversight
📉 Wall Street’s Rhythm Disrupted: Trump’s push to end quarterly reports may change how marketers keep investors engaged between updates.
🔎 Oregon’s Transparency Play: New laws outlaw hidden fees and force plain-language communication
🤖 The AI Ad Wave: From Guess to J.Crew, brands are quietly replacing photo shoots with AI-generated imagery, and consumers are starting to notice.
🎥Warrant Demo at FinovateFall 2025
We hit the stage at FinovateFall 2025, where our CEO Austin Carroll delivered a standout demo.
Discover how Warrant is reshaping marketing compliance, learn more here.
🚨The Watchdog on a Leash: The Slow Starvation of Financial Regulators

The government shutdown circus just added a new act, and this time, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is center stage. Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, floated the idea of furloughing CFPB employees despite the agency's track record of staying open when Washington goes dark. Rep. Maxine Waters wasn't having it. She fired back, warning that benching the bureau under shutdown cover wouldn't just violate its charter but would leave American consumers exposed.
The Fed Fund Difference
Here's what makes the CFPB unusual: it doesn't depend on Congress for money. The agency pulls its funding straight from the Federal Reserve, a setup deliberately designed to shield it from political football games. Waters pointed out that this structure has kept the lights on through previous shutdowns, so why should now be any different?
Budget Theater or Calculated Strike?
The real story isn't about the shutdown. It's about the money. President Trump signed a bill earlier this year that hacked 46% off the CFPB's funding cap, a move Republicans pitched as a $2 billion savings play. Waters sees something more calculated: using shutdown chaos as camouflage to gut the bureau. Her evidence? Reports that employees were told to resubmit resumes just days before the threatened furloughs. Coincidence rarely wears such obvious shoes.
Three Things Worth Knowing:
The enforcement slowdown is already here. Since Trump returned to office, the CFPB has pulled back on enforcement actions, abandoned lawsuits, and rolled back the guidance that once kept banks and fintech companies nervous. Deeper cuts would accelerate that retreat.
Other regulators are barely hanging on. If the shutdown persists, the SEC could furlough 90% of its staff, leaving a skeleton crew to babysit the markets. The CFTC expects to keep fewer than 6% of employees working, barely enough to watch for fraud, much less catch it.
The bill eventually comes due for consumers. When regulators go quiet, bad actors get loud. With the CFPB starved of resources and other watchdogs operating on fumes, the infrastructure meant to catch predatory lending, fraud, and financial abuse starts looking more like decoration than defense.
The FTC Isn’t Left Out of the Shutdown Shuffle
The CFPB may be center stage, but the FTC is feeling the fallout too. With half of its Bureau of Competition staff furloughed, the agency’s antitrust enforcement is moving at half speed. HSR filings are still being accepted, but reviews are delayed, early terminations are off the table, and non-merger investigations are mostly paused. The result is a weakened oversight landscape where fewer watchdogs are on duty and the deals that shape market power may face less scrutiny than ever.
The Existential Question
Strip away the budget rhetoric and shutdown theatrics, and you're left with a fundamental question: can a watchdog still bark when you've taken away its teeth and most of its food? For the CFPB, the answer will shape whether it remains a functioning regulator or becomes a cautionary tale. For consumers, the answer determines how thin that line of defense gets and whether anyone's left watching when the next financial predator comes prowling.
More details on Banking Dive.
📉 Wall Street’s Rhythm Disrupted: Trump’s Push for Semiannual Reports

The U.S. is gearing up for one of the most consequential shifts in corporate reporting in over 50 years. Paul Atkins, Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, revealed recently that the regulator is fast-tracking President Donald Trump’s push to end quarterly earnings reporting. Instead of four disclosures a year, listed companies would only need to report twice, once every six months.
The move marks a dramatic departure from the SEC’s long-standing framework, which has required quarterly results since 1970. It also revives a proposal Trump first floated back in 2018, when the idea gained attention but ultimately stalled. This time, the politics and power dynamics are different. With the White House exerting stronger influence over the SEC’s agenda, the change looks far more likely.
Why Scrap Quarterly Reporting?
Trump has argued that quarterly reporting fuels short-termism, encouraging companies to focus on meeting near-term earnings targets rather than investing in innovation and long-term growth. Cutting the number of reports in half, he says, would also reduce compliance costs and give management more breathing room to build sustainable businesses.
Atkins echoed those points, calling the President’s renewed push “timely” and suggesting a formal proposal could be released by the end of 2025 or early 2026. Once the draft is out, the SEC will open the door for public comment, but with leadership already leaning in, the momentum is clear.
The Transparency Debate
Investors and transparency advocates, however, are sounding alarms. Quarterly disclosures are one of the key reasons U.S. equities trade at a premium compared to global peers. The steady flow of data allows investors to make informed decisions, keeps markets relatively stable, and limits the ability of executives to bury bad news.
Scaling back reporting could introduce more volatility. With longer gaps between updates, rumors and speculation may have more room to drive stock prices. Companies could also time disclosures to soften the blow of underperformance, leaving investors and analysts with less visibility into financial health.
In short, what businesses save in compliance costs could cost the market in trust.
A Shift in Corporate Storytelling
If quarterly reports disappear, the pressure on corporate communications will only intensify. Instead of earnings calls every 90 days, companies will have fewer chances to formally update investors. That means alternative channels—press releases, CEO interviews, investor days, blogs, and even social media—will carry more weight in shaping public perception.
For marketing and IR teams, the challenge is twofold: maintaining consistent engagement during longer reporting gaps, and managing heightened market reactions when updates finally arrive. A strong communications strategy could become as important as financial performance itself.
Lessons From 2018
When regulators first flagged these issues, a few takeaways stood out:
Clarity beats confusion: Hiding the exit button or layering unnecessary steps doesn’t just frustrate users, it creates compliance risk.
Transparency is non-negotiable: Pricing, renewals, and cancellation terms must be front and center.
User-friendly is regulator-friendly: What makes life easier for customers usually keeps you out of trouble.
Ultimately, the proposal died on the table. But now, with a Republican-controlled budget agenda reshaping financial regulation more broadly, the political calculus has changed. The SEC appears more willing to align with Trump’s priorities, and Atkins has been vocal in the Financial Times and elsewhere about his support for the shift.
What This Means for Marketers and Communicators
For brands, this is more than a compliance issue, it’s a marketing one. The cadence of financial reporting has always dictated the rhythm of corporate storytelling. Every quarter brought a new narrative: growth or contraction, success or setback, investment or retrenchment. That steady drumbeat helped companies reinforce their positioning in the market and gave marketers clear opportunities to reframe or strengthen the brand story.
If reporting becomes semiannual, companies will have fewer natural touchpoints with the market. Marketers will need to be proactive, creating moments of visibility outside of official reporting cycles. Transparency and consistency will become competitive advantages. Those who retreat into silence risk leaving their brand narrative to analysts, competitors, and critics.
The Bigger Picture
Quarterly reporting has been a cornerstone of American financial markets for more than half a century. Rolling it back would fundamentally change the rhythm of Wall Street and the relationship between companies, investors, and consumers.
Supporters see it as a chance to cut red tape and encourage long-term thinking. Critics see it as a step backward for transparency at a time when investor trust is already fragile.
Either way, the SEC’s next move will mark a turning point. The companies that win in this new era will be those that treat communication as a strategic priority, filling the space left by fewer disclosures with authentic, value-driven engagement.
Head on to Reuters for more details.
🔎 Oregon’s Transparency Play: From Hidden Fees to Plain Language

On September 16, Oregon Governor Tina Kotek signed three consumer protection bills that don't just tweak the edges of how businesses operate. They take a sledgehammer to industries built on complexity, fine print, and fees that appear out of nowhere. Together, these laws make one thing crystal clear: transparency isn't a nice-to-have anymore. It's the price of entry.
Plain Language or Bust
House Bill 3178 goes straight after auto dealerships, a sector that's made an art form out of jargon-packed contracts and financing surprises that land at the worst possible moment. Starting in 2026, Oregon dealers will need to present disclosures in plain language and in the state's six most common languages. No more burying key terms in legal gibberish. No more selling trade-ins before the loan funding clears. No more making customers wait weeks to find out if the deal is real.
For marketers, this changes the entire sales narrative. You can't dangle shiny features up front and hide the catches in paragraph 47 anymore. The financing experience becomes part of your brand identity, not just paperwork someone in the back office handles.
The Death of Checkout Surprise Fees
If there's one law here that should make every marketer sit up, it's Senate Bill 430. Online sellers will soon be required to show the full price up front. No more adding mandatory fees at checkout. No more "service charges" that magically appear three clicks before purchase. No more drip pricing, period.
This isn't just about following the rules. It's about how your brand gets perceived. Consumers are already exhausted from airlines, ticketing sites, and e-commerce platforms that nickel and dime them to death. SB 430 doesn't just ban hidden fees. It forces companies to rethink how they communicate value. Will your brand feel like it's playing tricks, or will it win loyalty by showing the real price from the beginning?
The Medical Debt Shield
The third law, Senate Bill 605, bans reporting medical debt to credit agencies. While it's less directly tied to marketing, it fits the bigger picture: protecting consumers from systems that operate in the shadows. For healthcare providers and lenders, this will change how they talk about financial responsibility, patient care, and assistance programs. The conversation shifts from threats to support.
What Changes on the Ground
Oregon just turned honesty into a legal requirement, but the real impact cuts deeper than compliance:
Auto dealers now compete on actual value instead of contractual confusion, forcing a reset in how they pitch financing and trade-ins.
E-commerce brands lose their psychological pricing crutch, meaning the sticker price has to do the heavy lifting without checkout theatrics.
Healthcare providers need new scripts for money conversations that don't sound predatory or punitive.
The Strategic Opening
The companies that move fast won't be the ones checking boxes to meet minimum standards. They'll be the ones who see these laws as permission to stand out:
While competitors scramble to comply, early movers can build campaigns around radical transparency and own the contrast.
Brands that lead with full pricing and plain language can frame themselves as consumer champions, not reluctant reformers.
The gap between "legally compliant" and "genuinely trustworthy" becomes the new battleground for customer loyalty.
The Bottom Line
The age of fine print is ending. Oregon is leading, but others will follow. The brands that win in this environment will be the ones that stop treating transparency as a compliance headache and start using it as a marketing weapon. Show the real price. Use real language. Build real trust. Everything else is just noise.
Explore the full piece on Sheppard Mullin.
🤖 The AI Ad Wave: When Your Favorite Campaign Isn't Real

Here's the pattern: A major brand drops a gorgeous new campaign. The lighting is chef's kiss, the models impossibly perfect. Then someone on Twitter squints and asks: "Wait... is that AI?"
Cue the internet meltdown. A few thinkpieces. A vague brand statement. Then radio silence.
Rinse. Repeat. Next brand.
This month's contestants? Guess, J.Crew, and Skechers, all caught in the crosshairs for allegedly using AI-generated imagery in their ads. None of them confirmed it. But the silence? That confirmed everything.
The Cat's Already Out
"We're watching it happen in real time," says Jon Weidman, head of brand content at Wavelength. "Things that used to require a photo shoot (even stock imagery) are now being replaced by AI. Your feed is filling up with content that wouldn't exist without these tools. I don't see a world where the cat goes back in the bag."
He's right. A new Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) report found that 90% of digital ad buyers are either using or planning to use generative AI for video ads.
The shift isn't coming. It's here.
Follow the Money
Why the sudden comfort with synthetic models? Two words: budget cuts.
Marketing budgets have flatlined. A Gartner report showed zero growth this year, with many brands slashing production costs in half. That $750K photoshoot? Now it's $300K. Fewer scenes, smaller crews, and a lot of creative gaps AI can fill for pennies on the dollar.
"It's all about the budget," says Abigail Olivas, head of strategy at No Single Individual. "We're in a cultural swing where people are getting used to AI. Brands feel empowered. They see it as the future."
But it's not just about being cheap. It's about being fast.
"AI gives brands the ability to respond faster and connect quicker," explains Scott Thibodeaux, VP and creative director at Transmission. "You can produce more with the same resources."
The Authenticity Problem
Here's the tension: consumers still crave real. And many aren't ready for brands to blur the line between authentic and artificial, especially in fashion and beauty, where trust is everything. One AI misstep can feel like betrayal.
Even inside agencies, there's hesitation. "People are nervous," admits Jason Carmel, global creative data lead at VML. "We'll see drips and drabs, not a total replacement anytime soon."
The Quiet Normalization
Still, the trend is undeniable. AI-generated campaigns are moving from scandal to standard operating procedure. Marketers have stopped asking "Should we?" and started asking "How far can we go?"
Soon, the debate won't be whether a brand used AI, but how well they pulled it off.
Because in the race for relevance, the new competitive edge isn't authenticity versus automation, it's how convincingly you can blend the two.
Head on to Marketing Brew for more details.
💬 We’re launching a community for Marketing, Compliance, and Legal teams to stay up to date on regulatory changes—and help each other navigate them.