Published on PYMNTS.com
Click here to read the entire article
Digital bank customers are turning the mobile wallet from a convenience into their default way to pay.
That shift stands out in “Pay by Bank Deep Dive: Digital Bank Users Are Ready to Switch,” a PYMNTS Intelligence report with Trustly based on a survey of 2,071 U.S. bank customers. The research found that digital bank users are younger, more mobile-focused and far more likely than other consumers to prefer digital wallets. That familiarity could also make them receptive to Pay by Bank, which lets shoppers authorize payments directly from a bank account through a digital flow.
Key Points:
- 44.6% of digital bank customers prefer digital wallets, compared with 22.7% of consumers overall.
- 40.9% of digital bank users prefer wallets for retail purchases, while 29.5% favor debit cards and 18.9% prefer credit cards.
- 51.9% use wallets for rideshare payments, while 43% prefer them for subscriptions and 37.7% choose them for groceries.
- The findings show that digital wallet use among digital bank customers extends well beyond one or two mobile-first categories. Wallets lead for retail, subscriptions, rideshare, gambling and account-to-account payments. Debit still holds an edge for groceries and bills, though wallets remain a significant choice in both categories.
That broad use gives banks, merchants and payment providers a clearer path to introduce new payment options. Digital bank users already understand login-based checkout and tokenized credentials. Moving them toward Pay by Bank may feel less like teaching someone a new language and more like adding a familiar word to the conversation.
The report also found that incentives could accelerate adoption. Digital bank users said they would shift as much as 35.4% of account-to-account transactions to Pay by Bank when discounts and buyer protection are included. They could also move 32% of bill payments, 28.8% of gambling transactions and 27.3% of rideshare purchases.
Immediate cash benefits ranked as the leading incentive among 43.1% of digital bank users, while 16.9% cited buyer protection. More broadly, 69% of digital bank customers already view Pay by Bank as a debit substitute or would do so with rewards, buyer protection or both.
For banks and merchants, the opportunity is encouraging. Consumers who already organize much of their financial lives through phones appear open to another digital payment option, provided the experience stays simple, protections remain clear and the financial value is easy to see. The wallet may serve as the bridge between familiar card payments and a broader range of direct bank transactions.
Click here to read the entire article.
By Jeffrey Young, Principal Research Scientist, Partnership for an Advanced Computing Environment, Georgia Institute of Technology, Published in The Conversation
Click here to read the entire article
You’ve probably heard artificial intelligence models described as “open” or “closed.” These are not descriptions of the model’s personality. Large language model AIs like the one under the hood of ChatGPT don’t have actual personalities, despite appearances.
The labels refer to whether all of the information about how an AI model works is publicly available and the model can be modified, or whether the model’s developer keeps its inner workings secret and the model itself private property.
Open-source software
The concept of open-source software originated in the free software movement of the 1980s and ’90s. The movement’s founders believed that software creators and users had the right to “four freedoms” – to run the program, to study and modify it, to distribute copies of the original, and to distribute copies of subsequently modified versions. The fundamental requirement was that the source code – the basic instructions – for a program should be made available.
In the late 1990s, software developers associated with projects such as the Netscape web browser and the Linux operating system coined and promoted the term “open source” to refer to these ideals.
As part of the evolving movement, certain organizations developed open-source licenses that specified how a particular piece of source code could be used and distributed, including the Gnu General Public License, Apache License, MIT License and the Berkeley Software Distribution. Each type of license also specified any potential restrictions on how software patents applied to the source code.
Open source or open weight?
The open-source idea has risen to prominence again in the past several years as artificial intelligence large language models have surged, notably OpenAI’s ChatGPT, released in 2022. Developers first train new models on large datasets, then deploy the models for use by other people.
Meta was one of the first large companies to release an open-source large language model, called LLaMa. The company released LLaMa on Feb. 24, 2023, and made available the “inference” source code – the instructions that run the model. And it released the so-called weights, the encoded knowledge the model learned during training. However, open-source organizations such as the Open Source Initiative have stated that the LLaMa licensing guidelines prohibit commercial reuse, which the initiative maintains is not truly open source.
Other companies have released “open weight” models, such as DeepSeek from DeepSeek AI and Qwen from Alibaba. The models have less restrictive terms for reuse, and the AI community has adopted them rapidly. Still, many developers believe that a true open-source AI model must not only include the source code and weights but also the data that is used to train the model.
A lot to open up
The Open Source Initiative’s definition of a fully open-source AI model includes the training data as a key element. Some developers wonder, however, how feasible it is to distribute the enormous datasets required.
Click here to continue reading.
By Carter Pape, American Banker
Click here to read the entire article
Scam victims report to their bank, not the government.
When Americans reported a scam last year, most went to a bank, credit union or payment app. Federal agencies such as the FTC and the FBI learned of only a small share, leaving the government with a fraction of the full picture.
Americans told the federal government they lost about $16 billion to scams in 2025. They actually lost closer to $68 billion, a new survey estimates, and most of the people who reported a scam took it to a bank or a payment app, not to the government.
That gap is the central finding of “United States of Scams,” a report Gallup and the nonprofit Stop Scams Alliance released last month. It draws on a survey of 5,173 U.S. adults. The money scammers stole last year, it estimates, runs several times higher than Washington’s tally.
Victims reported only 13% of scams to federal law enforcement or the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, the survey found. Respondents took 55% of their scam reports to a bank, credit union or other financial institution, and 25% reported them to a payment app.
About seven in eight scams never reached a federal agency at all. That makes banks and payment companies the first place most scam losses surface and the closest thing the country has to a national scam-reporting system.
The catch is that almost nothing a bank sees travels any further. The reports that land at a bank rarely reach the national systems law enforcement uses to track scams.
The findings feed a fight in Washington over whether banks should get legal cover to share the data they see about scams and whether banks need to cover more of what customers lose to these scams.
What the FTC counts
The FTC’s estimate of $16 billion in total losses to scams comes from consumer complaints. In 2025, consumers filed 3 million fraud reports with the agency and said they lost $15.9 billion, up from about $12 billion the year before, according to March testimony by FTC leadership before a congressional committee.
Consumers reported more than 1 million imposter scams, making it the most commonly reported category of scam. Investment scams took $7.9 billion, making it the most costly.
Click here to continue reading.
By Steve Koinm, CU Insight
Click here to read the entire article.
For years, credit unions have navigated steady waves of technological change: online banking, mobile platforms, real-time payments. Each shift brought complexity, but also a clear path forward: adapt, implement, move on.
What’s coming next is different.
Quantum computing is not an incremental step in computing power. It represents a fundamental shift in how problems are solved and, more importantly, how risk is introduced into the financial system.
For credit union executives, the real challenge is not understanding the science. It is recognizing how quickly this shift could compress timelines around cybersecurity, compliance, and strategic planning.
The question is no longer if this will matter. It is whether your organization will be ready when it does.
A break from predictable technology cycles
Historically, technology evolution in financial services has been relatively linear. Systems improved, speeds increased, and capabilities expanded in ways institutions could plan for.
Quantum computing breaks that pattern.
It introduces non-linear change, where certain problems that are unsolvable today could become solvable almost overnight.
Why this matters more than it appears
Cybersecurity will be the first place credit unions feel the impact.
Today’s financial ecosystem depends on encryption standards that are secure because they are computationally difficult to break.
Quantum computing changes that reality.
As capabilities advance, encryption methods could become vulnerable. There is also a growing risk of ‘harvest now, decrypt later’—where data is collected today and unlocked in the future.
The timeline is closer than it sounds
One of the most common misconceptions is that quantum risk is still decades away. In reality, both regulators and the largest technology providers are accelerating timelines.
Several milestones highlight how compressed this window has become:
- 2029 target: Major technology leaders such as Google and Cloudflare have already pulled forward internal targets for achieving post-quantum security, signaling that large-scale adoption may arrive sooner than expected.
- December 31, 2030: U.S. federal agencies and contractors are required to transition high-value assets and high-impact systems to quantum-safe key establishment mechanisms.
- December 31, 2031: Agencies must implement post-quantum digital signature schemes to replace current cryptographic standards.
- Now through 2030: Private organizations holding highly sensitive, long-lived data are already beginning to replace traditional encryption models to mitigate the risk of future decryption.
For credit unions, these dates matter even if they are not directly regulated under federal mandates.
Click here to continue reading.
By Mike Nader, Payments Dive
Click here to read the entire article.
AI is making it easier for finance to connect the dots, but better forecasting still depends on people who understand the business, tech executive Mike Nader writes.
Ten years ago, it would have been unusual to see a data and analytics leader reporting to the CFO. Today, that is much more common. That is not an accident. It reflects how much the role of finance has changed.
Finance is still responsible for explaining what happened. That part has not gone away. But, increasingly, finance is also being asked to explain why it happened, what changed and what the business should do next. The last point in particular represents a fundamental shift for finance, which historically has focused on reporting past performance with limited visibility into real-time business signals that could reshape the outlook.
Consider this example: At a manufacturing plant in Peoria, Illinois, a supplier misses a shipment of tubing needed for a packaging line. Production keeps running, but not at the rate the plan assumed. Throughput falls to 80% of forecast. The operational problem is obvious inside the plant; the financial impact may not be obvious for weeks.
Finance will eventually see it. Revenue will come in lighter than expected. The forecast will miss. Someone at corporate will ask what happened.
The answer was sitting inside the business the entire time.
Finance has spent years getting very good at producing accurate, repeatable reporting. That work still matters. But the real value is no longer in producing another version of the same report. The value is in understanding what the numbers are telling you and how the business should respond.
Era of rapid change
Today, the need to recognize operational signals quickly is more critical than ever. Tariffs are changing cost structures. Supply disruptions are altering production plans. Shifting demand patterns are making the task of financial forecasting more difficult. A forecast that looked reasonable two weeks ago can become stale before the month is over.
The current environment gives finance a chance to rethink processes that were built for a time when every new question required another extract, another spreadsheet, another reconciliation, or another meeting. Many of those processes made sense when the cost of getting to detail was high. The question is whether they still make sense now.
This is why I think much of the conversation around artificial intelligence in finance misses the point.
AI does not magically create business insights from thin air. What it can do is help finance arrive at answers faster. But that only works if the underlying information is accessible and trusted.
Click here to continue reading.
Eric Huffman, Yahoo Finance
Click here to read the entire article.
Your crypto wallet holds the keys that control your digital assets on a blockchain. But what happens when you lose access to your wallet, and how can you recover a crypto wallet? The answer depends on the situation, and we’ll cover several scenarios in this guide.
The good news is that your funds are still held on the blockchain. Your wallet is just a tool that lets you interact with those funds. When you recover a wallet, you’re proving that you have the right to control those funds again.
If you’ve forgotten a password, deleted a wallet app, or lost a hardware wallet device, recovery is often easier than you might think. You can be back in action in minutes. However, this assumes you have a seed phrase as backup.
The seed phrase is key to nearly every wallet recovery scenario. This phrase is a series of words, usually 12 or 24, that functions as a master key. Anyone who knows these words and their order can recover the wallet and control its funds. That’s why recovery efforts center on this phrase.
Why seed phrases matter
First, let’s discuss what a seed phrase is and why it matters in crypto wallet recovery. A seed phrase is a series of words used to generate your wallet’s private keys. These keys prove ownership of your crypto on a blockchain.
You’ll also see the seed phrase referred to as a mnemonic phrase or recovery phrase. When you initially create your wallet, it’s essential to back up this phrase and store it safely offline.
The words in your seed phrase will differ from this example:
- banana tornado keyboard elephant pizza sunset volcano sandwich laptop river chocolate potato
These words are then “hashed” to form a master key from which all of the wallet addresses and keys are derived. Hashing uses a formula to create a one-way “fingerprint.” Using this formula, the same input always creates the same output.
Restoring with your seed phrase
If you have your seed phrase, lost crypto wallet recovery becomes a simple task rather than a crisis. The process takes just a few minutes, and it works whether you’ve lost your device, deleted your wallet app, or are moving to a new wallet altogether.
How to restore a crypto wallet with a seed phrase
The steps to recover your wallet may vary depending on the wallet software, but the general process follows a similar pattern.
- Download the wallet app or extension. Use the official wallet provider website or app store. Verify the provider. Entering your seed phrase into an “imposter” app gives someone else the keys to your crypto.
- Select the restore or import option. Most wallets present this choice when you first open them. Look for language like “Restore wallet,” “Import wallet,” or “I already have a wallet.”
- Enter your seed phrase in order. Type each word in exact order. A single mistake, such as a wrong word, wrong order, or misspelling, will generate a completely different wallet (or not work at all). Most apps show you the words as you type, which helps you catch errors. Many wallet apps also flag errors if you enter a word that isn’t in the standardized list.
- Create a new password. This password protects the wallet on this specific device. It’s not the same as your seed phrase, and you can choose a new one if you’ve forgotten the old password. The seed phrase is what matters.
Click here to continue reading.
By Dave Kovaleski, Financial Regulation News
Click here to read the entire article.
A bill that encourages the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to use AI tools to detect tax fraud was passed by the House Ways and Means Committee on July 1.
The AI Tax Integrity Act of 2026 (H.R. 9501), sponsored by Reps. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) and Steven Horsford (D-NV), requires the Treasury Secretary to establish a pilot program within the IRS to use AI to identify potentially fraudulent tax returns. This includes those which are the result of identity theft, fraudulent claims for tax credits, deductions or refunds by individual or business taxpayers, and improperly prepared returns by third-party return preparers.
“Protecting American taxpayer dollars is one of our most important responsibilities in Congress, and we should be empowering the IRS to use modern, emerging technologies to ensure that all tax fraud is detected and that bad actors are held accountable,” Buchanan, vice chairman of the committee, said. “That’s why I’m proud to see my AI Tax Integrity Act with Rep. Horsford get successfully marked up and passed out of committee today. By evaluating how the IRS can harness emerging AI capabilities to strengthen fraud detection, we can ensure that it can conduct efficient, thorough investigations and improve recovery of taxpayer dollars.”
The bill also requires the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) to submit a report to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee evaluating the effectiveness and accuracy of using AI tools and capabilities to assist the IRS in detecting tax fraud.
The IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) identified $2.3 billion in tax fraud through 1,598 investigations, resulting in 945 prosecution recommendations and 593 sentencing actions. By 2024, the IRS-CI had launched 2,667 investigations, secured 1,571 convictions, uncovered more than $9.1 billion in tax and financial fraud. It also recovered nearly $3 billion through restitution and asset seizures.
Reps. Aaron Bean (R-FL) and David Schweikert (R-AZ) are cosponsors of the bill.
The bill now moves to the full House for a vote.
Published in TradingView.com
Click here to read the entire article.
Coinbase has received UK authorization to provide investment services, allowing the cryptocurrency exchange to expand beyond digital assets and offer traditional financial products in the country.
The company said the approval was granted to its UK entity, which already holds an e-money license and crypto registration.
The move follows Coinbase’s expansion into regulated derivatives in Europe. In March, the company launched over-the-counter crypto and equity-index derivatives across 26 European countries under its Cyprus MiFID II license. That marked its first regulated derivatives offering following the acquisition of BUX Cyprus.
Coinbase Adds Equities, Derivatives for UK Traders
According to Coinbase, the approval allows institutional and advanced traders to access derivatives, including crypto, equity and commodity perpetual futures. Retail customers in the UK will also be able to trade equities on the platform for the first time.
The company said the approval is more than a regulatory milestone because it “changes what UK users can do on Coinbase.”
Research by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority found that around seven million UK adults hold cryptoassets. It also found that a quarter of people who do not own crypto would be more likely to participate if the sector were properly regulated.
Expanding Toward Unified Finance Platform
Coinbase said it expects the UK’s broader crypto regulatory regime, scheduled to take effect in October 2027, to encourage wider adoption. However, it said the license allows UK customers to access traditional investment products before those rules come into force.
The company said it plans to bring multiple financial services together on one platform. Alongside crypto trading, it intends to offer equities, derivatives, stablecoin payments, savings, and borrowing products, with tokenized real-world assets planned for the future.
Coinbase has already introduced savings and borrowing products in the UK in recent months. It said the new authorization “unlocks the next chapter” of its expansion in the country.
Published by Bank Policy Institute
Click here to read the entire article.
Some crypto advocates argue that Congress must pass the Clarity Act to create an anti-money laundering framework for digital assets because in their view, Congress has not to date weighed in on the specific AML requirements that should apply to crypto. That’s not true.
That framework already exists: the Treasury Department has authority today to impose anti-money laundering requirements on much of the digital asset ecosystem. The question is whether Congress will strengthen the law to require such coverage of the current ecosystem or weaken it by carving out major parts of the crypto market from similar AML requirements to which banks are subject, leaving gaps in the ability to track and stop the flow of illicit finance.
Strengthen the Existing Foundation – Don’t Burn It Down
Congress does not need to start from scratch. The Bank Secrecy Act already gives federal regulators tools to oversee much of the crypto market, including centralized intermediaries. Many exchanges and custodians are already covered as money services businesses under the BSA and subject to its requirements, and the GENIUS Act extends AML coverage to permitted payment stablecoin issuers as a “financial institution” under the BSA. Treasury has authority today to require digital asset intermediaries that are not already subject to the BSA to comply with its obligations, although to date it has not done so.
The current Clarity Act fails to address the AML gaps that do exist:
- It does not require all digital asset service providers (DASPs) and other intermediaries, including DeFi entities, to comply with the BSA. This approach leaves significant openings for some custodians, exchanges, unhosted wallet providers and DeFi developers to operate outside the regulatory perimeter.
- It does not give Treasury clear authority to sanction mixers, tumblers and other tools used to launder money, finance terrorism and evade sanctions. Congressional action is critical to combat criminals’ ability to evade detection in the cryptosphere using these tools.
The risk: bad actors will go where the rules are weakest. A framework that covers only part of the market and exempts others will push illicit finance to these unregulated corners of the ecosystem. Clarity as currently written would not plug AML gaps; it would exacerbate the problem.
Right now, Treasury has the legal authority to close current AML and sanctions gaps. Treasury could clarify when secondary market actors should be treated as financial institutions under the BSA or subject to other anti-money laundering obligations.
Congress can help, but it should do so effectively.
- Clarity should not exempt entities operating in the crypto ecosystem and should in fact require that all such entities be subject to AML/CFT requirements similar to what banks are subject to.
- Congress should give Treasury clear authority to sanction mixers, tumblers and other blockchain applications that facilitate illicit finance.
Bottom Line: If policymakers want to ensure crypto is subject to robust AML requirements, they should reinforce the AML framework authorized by existing law rather than weakening those requirements as the current legislation does. A comprehensive crypto anti-illicit finance framework depends on regulators exercising their current authority, which could be further strengthened by targeted legislative fixes. Rewriting the law in a way that exacerbates the existing regulatory gaps would enable criminals to continue to exploit the system.
Published in CUToday
Click here to read the entire article.
Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is pressing NCUA Chairman Kyle Hauptman to turn over the legal analysis behind the agency’s position that one board member can constitute a quorum, warning the agency’s deregulation project could weaken the credit union system, American Banker reported.
In a Monday letter, Warren said NCUA’s effort to repeal or scale back 31 rules raises “serious questions” because Hauptman has been acting as the agency’s sole board member since President Trump removed Todd Harper and Tanya Otsuka in 2025, American Banker reported. NCUA has said it has “precedent and standing delegations of authority” to operate with one board member and cited former Chairman Dennis Dollar’s solo actions in 2001-2002, according to a previous NCUA staff message.
Warren said the deregulatory moves could threaten the stability of the broader credit union system, particularly because a large credit union failure could strain the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund, American Banker reported.
The legal question remains separate from the ousted board members’ removal fight. American Banker reported the Supreme Court’s Monday decision in Trump v. Slaughter weakened Harper and Otsuka’s reinstatement arguments, but did not resolve whether NCUA can legally finalize policy with only one board member.
Meanwhile, John Crews, nominated to replace Hauptman, testified before the Senate Banking Committee last week and is expected to face a full committee vote next month. Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) said the hearing was about getting qualified leaders in place, while Warren said credit unions need a stable regulator during a period of AI, crypto and board-independence questions, according to Senate Banking Committee statements.
Washington credit union advocate John McKechnie commented on Warren’s letter.
“Senator Warren voicing displeasure at any regulatory relief in the financial sector is no surprise,” stated McKechnie. “I suspect she wouldn’t have liked the proposals that came out of NCUA whether they emanated from a one-person board, a three-person board, or a 23-person board. I’m not trying to be disrespectful, but her philosophy is very well known.”
Brandy Bruyere, partner at Honigman, LLP, believes NCUA is aware of possible legal challenges from operating as a single-member board, given the “somewhat technical nature” of much of its deregulatory agenda that has rolled out over the past year.
Click here to continue reading.
By Ken McCarthy, Tyfone/Published in the Financial Brand
Click here to read the entire article.
For decades, community banks and credit unions could rely on a simple advantage: they were the primary window into a customer’s financial life.
That advantage is disappearing.
In a five-part white paper series, Siva Narendra, CEO of Tyfone, argues that a combination of data aggregation, artificial intelligence and emerging payment technologies is steadily eroding many of the traditional strengths community financial institutions have long viewed as defensible. The result, he contends, is not a single competitive threat but a broader restructuring of how consumers interact with financial services.
The papers, written for bank and credit union boards and executive teams, describe a future in which institutions risk becoming increasingly disconnected from the information, relationships and transactions that once anchored customer loyalty.
“The information advantage your institution was built on is gone,” Narendra writes in the opening paper. “The sooner a board accepts that, the sooner it can stop defending the wrong hill.”
At the center of the argument is a shift that has been building for years. Consumers no longer keep most of their financial lives within a single institution. Checking accounts, credit cards, mortgages, retirement accounts and investments are often spread across multiple providers, creating a fragmented financial landscape that no individual institution can fully see.
Data aggregators such as Plaid have accelerated that trend by allowing consumers to connect accounts from thousands of institutions into a single interface. Narendra argues that this has fundamentally changed the value of financial information itself.
What was once a competitive asset has become widely available.
To illustrate the point, Narendra describes connecting 28 accounts across eight financial institutions to an AI-powered platform through Plaid. The process, he writes, took roughly 30 minutes and produced a consolidated view of his finances that was more comprehensive than anything available from any single institution holding his accounts.
The broader implication, according to the paper, is that customers can increasingly obtain a clearer picture of their finances from third-party platforms than from the institutions that actually hold their money.
That shift, Narendra argues, creates what he calls an “aggregation trap.” Institutions that freely share data may accelerate their own commoditization, while those that restrict access risk frustrating customers and falling behind market expectations.
Either way, he suggests, ownership of information is becoming less valuable than the ability to interpret it.
Click here to continue reading.
By Frank Diekmann, CU Daily
Click here to read the entire article.
Auto lending remains the bread and butter of many credit unions, but U.S. auto sales could decline significantly over the next 15 years as demographic shifts, rising vehicle costs and changing consumer behavior reduce the number of people buying new cars, according to a new analysis.
CNBC reported that consulting firm Bain & Company projects annual U.S. light-vehicle sales could fall by more than 2 million units by 2040, creating a more competitive environment for automakers.
The U.S. market last reached a record 17.6 million vehicle sales in 2016. Some forecasts now suggest sales may never return to that level.
“The competition in the U.S. is going to be ferocious,” Bain partner Mark Gottfredson told CNBC. “There’s too many automakers and too many brands competing for the consumers. The market is going to have to consolidate.”
Demographics Drive Changes
According to CNBC, Bain attributes much of the expected decline to slowing population growth. Key factors cited include:
- The U.S. fertility rate fell to about 1.6 births per woman in 2025, below the replacement rate of 2.1, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
- Bain expects restrictive immigration policies to cut historical net migration roughly in half over the next 15 years.
- The consulting firm said the combination would reduce the number of future vehicle buyers.
- “The population numbers…are baked in,” Gottfredson told CNBC, noting the number of future driving-age Americans is already largely determined by current birth rates.
Younger Buyers Purchase Fewer Cars
CNBC reported younger Americans are delaying or forgoing vehicle purchases. Among the trends:
- About 50% of 16-year-olds now have driver’s licenses, down from nearly 70% between 1966 and 1984, according to Bain.
- S&P Global Mobility found new vehicle registrations among consumers ages 18 to 34 declined from 12% in the first quarter of 2021 to less than 10% by mid-2025.
- Buyers 55 and older now account for nearly half of all new vehicle registrations and have held the largest share for eight consecutive quarters.
- “The engine behind it is affordability,” Craig Daitch, founder and president of automotive research firm Telemetry, told CNBC, noting monthly payments on new vehicles have climbed about 30% over the past four years and nearly one in five new vehicles now carries a monthly payment exceeding $1,000.
Robotaxis & Longer Lasting Vehicles
CNBC reported Bain believes widespread adoption of autonomous ride-hailing services could further reduce vehicle ownership.