This bill adds a statutory definition of “medical debt” to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and amends the FCRA to prevent consumer reporting agencies from including adverse information tied to medical debts on consumer reports. It also directs the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) to amend its regulations so creditors may not obtain or use medical-debt information when deciding whether to extend credit.
For compliance officers and risk teams, the practical result would be stripped medical-bill history in credit files and a regulatory prohibition on creditors’ use of that information — forcing data providers, lenders, and scoring firms to change models, update data flows, and face uncertainty about how to treat medically related judgments or mixed-purpose accounts.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill inserts a new definition of “medical debt” into FCRA section 603 and amends section 605(a) to exclude adverse information related to medical debt from consumer reports. It also requires the CFPB to revise 12 C.F.R. 1022.30 within one year to bar creditors from obtaining or using medical-debt information in credit decisions, using the Equal Credit Opportunity Act’s definitions of “credit” and “creditor.”
Who It Affects
National consumer reporting agencies, furnishers that report account-level data tied to medical care, creditors and underwriters who use consumer reports in lending decisions, medical debt collectors and healthcare providers that report or sell receivables, and the CFPB as the implementing regulator. Scoring vendors and mortgage, auto, and unsecured lenders will see the biggest operational impact.
Why It Matters
Removing medical-bill data from credit files changes the inputs that underwriting models and automated decisioning systems rely on, with downstream effects on pricing, approvals, and risk segmentation. The CFPB’s one-year rulemaking window creates a short implementation horizon that will require rapid vendor and data-architecture changes across the industry.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill rewrites parts of the Fair Credit Reporting Act to take medical bills off the ledger that consumer reporting agencies sell to lenders. It does that by defining “medical debt” broadly — any debt arising from receiving medical services, products, or devices — and then placing any adverse information related to such debts into the category of items that may not appear on a consumer report.
That prohibition explicitly covers medical debts placed for collection or charged off to profit or loss.
In parallel, the bill removes related carveouts in the statute that previously treated some medical-contact or medical-information exceptions, tightening the circle so that furnishers and users of consumer reports cannot lean on an exception to obtain medically related data. The practical consequence is that reporting agencies will need to stop accepting, suppress, or purge medical-debt furnisher feeds and lenders will lose that line of sight into a consumer’s medical-billing history.The measure also mandates a regulatory rewrite: the CFPB must amend the regulation implementing FCRA permissible purposes (12 C.F.R. 1022.30 or its successor) within one year of enactment to forbid creditors from acquiring or using medical-debt information for credit decisions.
The bill borrows the Equal Credit Opportunity Act’s definitions for “credit” and “creditor,” which anchors the prohibition to typical lending relationships but can reach a wide set of market participants.Notably, the statute does not include an explicit timetable for consumer reporting agencies to purge existing medical-debt records nor does it create a separate enforcement mechanism beyond the existing FCRA regime; those details will largely be resolved in CFPB rulemaking and litigation. Because the definition is broad and the statutory edits cover “adverse information,” practical questions remain about mixed accounts, judgments that arise from medical debts, and how furnishers should tag or stop reporting records that combine medical and non-medical charges.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds a new definition of “medical debt” to FCRA section 603 that covers debts arising from receipt of medical services, products, or devices.
It replaces FCRA section 605(a)(6) with language excluding any adverse information related to medical debt — explicitly including debts placed for collection or charged to profit or loss — from consumer reports.
The bill deletes statutory carveouts and technical references in FCRA section 604(g) that previously treated some medical-related reporting differently, tightening permissible-purpose language.
Section 3 requires the CFPB to amend 12 C.F.R. 1022.30 (or its successor) within one year to prohibit creditors from obtaining or using medical-debt information when making credit decisions.
The bill ties the scope of that creditor prohibition to the meanings of “credit” and “creditor” in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which can broaden the set of entities covered by the rule change.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title: Medical Debt Relief Act of 2025
A single line establishes the Act’s short title. This is a formal naming provision with no operational effect beyond labeling the measure for statutory citation.
Defines “medical debt” in the FCRA
This subsection inserts a new subsection (bb) into FCRA section 603 to create a statutory definition of “medical debt.” The definition is expansive: it sweeps in any debt that is related in whole or in part to transactions, accounts, or balances arising from receiving medical care, devices, or products. Practically, that broad phrasing will force furnishers and CRAs to create flagging logic to identify covered accounts and will be the touchstone for determining which records must be excluded from reports.
Bans adverse medical-debt information from consumer reports
This provision strikes the existing paragraph (6) of section 605(a) and replaces it with a prohibition on including any adverse information related to medical debt on a consumer report, explicitly naming debts placed for collection or charged to profit or loss. Because section 605(a) lists content that consumer reporting agencies may not report, this change operates as a statutory bar that CRAs and furnishers must respect when compiling and supplying consumer files.
Removes prior exceptions and tightens permissible-purpose language
The bill makes conforming edits to section 604(g), removing parenthetical language that had previously carved out certain medical-contact or medical-information treatment from the permitted-purpose text. In effect, the statutory permission structure is simplified so users of consumer reports cannot rely on prior medical exceptions; the change clarifies the reach of the ban and limits downstream arguments that medical-contact data remain permissible for specific uses.
CFPB rulemaking to prohibit creditors from using medical-debt information
This section directs the Director of the CFPB to revise the regulation at 12 C.F.R. 1022.30 — which governs permissible purposes and the use of consumer-report information by creditors — within one year of enactment. The provision defines “credit” and “creditor” by reference to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, meaning the CFPB’s implementing rule must target the statutory definition of lending relationships when barring the acquisition or use of medical-debt information. The one‑year deadline creates a near-term regulatory process that will determine compliance timelines, transitional protocols, and enforcement contours.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Consumers with medical bills: they will no longer have adverse medical-bill entries on their credit files, which can improve access to credit and reduce negative scoring impacts tied to healthcare expenses.
- Credit-inexperienced borrowers and thin-file consumers: removing medical-collection records can prevent single medical events from disproportionately damaging credit histories for people with otherwise limited credit activity.
- Consumer advocates and privacy groups: the measure limits a commercial use of sensitive health-related financial data, aligning reporting practice with privacy concerns and health-care access arguments.
- Renters and applicants for non-credit services that rely on consumer reports: fewer medical negatives in files may improve outcomes for housing and employment screening that use consumer-report data.
- Borrowers disputing medical billing errors: with medical data excluded from reports, disputes about billing accuracy become less likely to cascade into credit-report hits.
Who Bears the Cost
- Consumer reporting agencies and scoring vendors: they must change ingestion pipelines, suppress or purge medical-related furnishers’ data, and rework scoring algorithms and rationale documents.
- Creditors and underwriters (mortgage, auto, unsecured lenders): they lose a predictor variable used to assess risk and may face higher uncertainty in underwriting and pricing models.
- Healthcare providers and debt collectors that report accounts or sell receivables: diminished leverage from public-credit consequences could reduce collection yield and increase operational collection costs.
- CFPB and federal regulators: the Bureau must complete rulemaking within a year and address implementation details, oversight, and enforcement without additional staffing or funding specified in the bill.
- Small specialty lenders and alternative-data vendors: firms that underwrite based on nontraditional indicators will need to adjust models and may face compliance risk if they attempt to infer medical liability from proxy data.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is straightforward: protect consumers from the credit-market harms of medical bills by removing those records from credit files, or preserve lenders’ access to historically predictive information that supports risk-based pricing and credit availability. Eliminating medical-debt signals reduces one source of consumer harm but risks increasing information asymmetry for creditors, potentially tightening credit supply or shifting costs to other borrowers — a trade-off that regulation and market responses will ultimately determine.
The bill raises several implementation and legal questions that the CFPB’s rulemaking will have to confront. The statutory definition of “medical debt” is intentionally broad, which simplifies the policy goal but complicates operational tagging: many accounts blend medical and non‑medical charges, insurers’ adjustments affect balances, and some medical-related financing products (medical loans, payment plans) may not be easily identifiable in furnisher feeds.
The statute does not set a deadline for CRAs to purge existing medical-debt records or describe whether furnishers must proactively notify CRAs or consumers before stopping reporting; those timelines will be decided in regulation or left to industry practice and litigation.
There are potential conflicts with other legal data sources. Public records, such as civil judgments that stem from medical debts, are traditionally reportable; because the bill bans “any adverse information related to a medical debt,” CFPB and courts will need to reconcile whether medical-origin judgments remain excluded.
The bill also omits explicit enforcement mechanisms or new penalties specific to medical-debt reporting, meaning parties will rely on the existing FCRA enforcement architecture (private suits, FTC/CFPB actions) and any remedies the CFPB builds into its rule. Finally, lenders will likely seek substitute predictors of risk, raising concerns about disparate impacts if alternative data sources correlate with protected characteristics more strongly than the medical-debt signal did.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.