Locked In or Free to Choose? The Fight for Consumer Data Rights in a Digital World

In our rapidly evolving digital economy, data is more than just numbers on a screen; it’s the story of our lives.

Data is more than numbers on a screen.

From how we save, spend, and invest, to where we shop and what we value, our data paints an intimate portrait of who we are. This is why I’ve always believed that data is personal, not simply a commodity for corporate balance sheets.

Yet today, we’re seeing troubling signals that threaten to undermine this principle. In the United States, what was once promising progress under Section 1033, intended to secure consumers’ rights to access and share their financial data, is no longer moving forward as originally envisioned. In fact, this regulatory approach is now being removed or replaced, creating deep uncertainty about the future of consumer data rights in one of the world’s largest economies.

At the same time, we’re witnessing a major shift by industry giants that could have equally far-reaching impacts. JPMorgan Chase is now moving to reshape how consumer financial data flows in the U.S. by charging new fees to data aggregators like Plaid and MX. Bloomberg recently reported that JPMorgan has already sent detailed pricing sheets outlining these charges, which could dramatically raise costs for fintechs that rely on bank data to power everything from payments to account verification and balance checks.

These aggregators are the critical pipes that connect banks to fintech apps like Venmo, Robinhood, and Coinbase, enabling seamless money movement and real-time data syncing that consumers have come to expect. Under this new model:

• Fees will vary by use case, with the highest charges imposed on payment-related activity.

• In some cases, the costs could exceed 1,000% of the revenue per transaction, threatening the very economics that underpin popular fintech services.
  

This isn’t simply about pricing. As Panagiotis from FinTech Futures rightly pointed out, “It’s about who controls the digital rails of consumer finance in the U.S.” By charging for what was effectively a free resource—consumer-permissioned bank data—banks are pushing to tip the balance of power back toward traditional institutions.

This raises an urgent question: Will these fees spread to charge access for other banks and credit unions as well? Are we moving back to an era of trapping consumers or adding mass friction that keeps them locked to their current bank, undermining the very freedom of choice that open banking was supposed to enable?

With market-led open banking in the U.S., it’s estimated that over 100 million consumers already use open banking services. This ecosystem, built around secure APIs through aggregators, has not only helped consumers access their data safely, but it’s also reduced fraud, increased competition, and enabled the kind of seamless onboarding experiences that people now take for granted.

Globally, the momentum is undeniable: around 95 countries have implemented or are developing open banking frameworks, with over 40 advancing toward open finance, and a growing number beginning to explore full open data economies as the next stage of empowering consumer data rights. Canada is just starting its journey toward open banking, but without a clear consumer data right or even a portability law to guarantee that consumers can truly own and move their data.

It reminds me of when I worked in telecom. Back then, your phone number was owned by the company, not you. If you wanted to switch providers, you had to give up your number. Consumers felt stuck. It wasn’t until governments stepped in and mandated number portability that real choice emerged and competition finally flourished.

We need to apply the same thinking to our financial data. Consumers should be the ultimate owners of their data. That means the right to access it whenever they want, to move it freely across providers to unlock better rates, smarter tools, and personalized advice, to understand and control how it’s used, and to share in the value it creates. These can’t just be marketing slogans; they need to be enshrined as a consumer data right (rooted in the fundamental idea of human data rights).

When financial institutions decide to charge for what should be your own, customer-consented data, it sets a dangerous precedent. It creates barriers to innovation. It means fewer apps, fewer tools, and less competition. If only large companies can afford to access your data, your ability to shop around and find the services that best fit your life shrinks dramatically. It also erodes trust. When access to your financial story becomes a revenue stream for someone else, it risks undermining confidence in the entire system.

We’re at a global crossroads. While Europe’s GDPR, Australia’s Consumer Data Right, the UK’s Smart Data Bill, and Brazil’s Open Finance ecosystem all work to put control back into consumers’ hands, the weakening of regulatory initiatives in the U.S. and moves by major banks to monetize data access stand in stark contrast. Without clear protections, there’s a real risk that consumer-consented data could become locked behind paywalls, accessible only to those with the deepest pockets.

At its core, this is about dignity and agency. In a truly digital economy that works for everyone, data should empower people, not trap them behind gates or toll booths. That means we must prioritize and protect consumer data right now, before it’s whittled away by short-term corporate interests.

This shift in the U.S. could have major consequences, from increased fraud to reduced consumer choice to slowing down innovation and financial inclusion. With an administration now moving away from Section 1033, who is going to stand up for the consumer? And what could this mean for the 100 million Americans who already rely on open banking to access, share, and control their financial data every day?

I recognize there is a cost for banks to enable secure, reliable data sharing, and they should be able to maintain these critical systems. But moving from essentially no cost to imposing high fees on all data access risks tipping the balance too far. It’s consumers who will pay the price through higher costs, fewer choices, and less innovation.

As Huw Davies of Ozone API rightly pointed out, the core principle of open banking must remain clear: “I don't think the right answer is to try and monetise everything. Basic account information such as balances and transactions is a utility and in many of the regulations, a right. Even where charging is allowed I don't see it being the most meaningful long term revenue stream. I think the value creation strategy for banks should come from two clear drivers”

As an industry, we have a choice. Do we build a system where people control their data and the value it creates, or do we stand by as access becomes a privilege dictated by those with the deepest pockets?

I believe consumer data rights are the foundation of the digital economy and should be an afterthought. Michelle Beyo

President, OFNC