Earned Wage Access (EWA) lets employees access wages they've already earned, but haven't yet been paid, typically through an app or digital service. For workers, this can mean avoiding payday loans or overdraft fees. For fintechs, it's a rapidly growing market. But behind the sleek and convenient consumer interface is a maze of evolving state laws—and partnering with a bank doesn't mean you can skip it.
Historically, some EWA providers have been able to rely on employer integrations, bank partnerships, or "non-recourse" structures to avoid being treated as lenders. For some, that strategy may no longer be enough. In the past two years, at least nine states have enacted laws specifically regulating EWA services—and more are considering similar legislation.
Utah and Indiana: Some of the Newest Entrants
Two very recently enacted EWA laws—in Utah and Indiana—offer a clear signal: state lawmakers are formalizing EWA as a regulated financial service.
- Utah's Earned Wage Access Services Act, effective May 7, 2025, requires EWA providers to register, bans credit checks, prohibits debt collection, and mandates clear, up-front disclosures of fees or tipping.
- Indiana's Earned Wage Access Act, effective January 1, 2026, adopts similar consumer protections and requires registration with the state's Department of Financial Institutions.
Both laws will generally apply regardless of whether the EWA provider is working with a bank partner—a key point for fintechs relying on banking-as-a-service models.
The Nevada Model (and Who's Following It)
These new laws build on a foundation set by Nevada's SB 290, passed in 2023. Nevada's statute has become a de facto model law, and its core structure has been adopted by Missouri, Kansas, South Carolina, Wisconsin, and Arkansas.
Common features across these "model-aligned" states include:
- Registration or licensing for EWA providers
- Prohibition on credit checks
- Non-recourse advances (no collections allowed)
- Clear disclosure of fees and no mandatory tipping
- No impact on consumer credit
Not All States Are Alike
Not every state has followed the Nevada framework. Some—like Maryland—have taken a more restrictive view and built in elements that edge closer to traditional lending regulation. Others, like Connecticut (which is currently awaiting Governor Ned Lamont's signature), have scrutinized EWA providers through the lens of consumer lending laws, which increases the risk that some providers could be treated as lenders.
In states that haven't passed an EWA-specific law, providers may still face compliance obligations under money transmission or small loan licensing laws, depending on how funds move, how repayment is structured, and whether any fees or tips are collected.
California has taken an approach that is different from that of states following the Nevada model, creating its own regulatory framework for EWA services. In October 2024, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) finalized regulations under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL) that treat EWA products as loans and require providers to register with the DFPI by February 15, 2025.
What About the CFPB?
With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) being downsized, general consumer protection and state law is where the action is—and where the real compliance risk lies. Notably, the CFPB has stepped away from adopting a view on EWA products. In early 2025, the CFPB rescinded a 2020 advisory opinion that had determined that certain EWA products did not involve the offering or extension of credit, as defined by Regulation Z. Also, in July 2024, the CFPB proposed an interpretive rule that would have revised its 2020 position, declaring that EWA products are credit, as defined by Regulation Z and the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), and that costs associated with EWA products—like tips or expedited fund delivery fees—are finance charges. Currently, the CFPB does not appear to be prioritizing the finalization of the proposed interpretive rule (or, perhaps, any outstanding proposed rule), as the CFPB has not updated its regulatory agenda since fall 2024.
Private Enforcement Risk
Recent class actions have challenged EWA fee and tipping models under state usury laws and federal truth-in-lending statutes, arguing that so-called voluntary payments may, in practice, function as disguised interest. Even in the absence of federal regulatory action, these suits reflect growing scrutiny of how EWA products are structured—and how they're perceived by courts.
What Fintechs Need to Know
If you're a fintech building or scaling an EWA offering:
- State registration or licensing may be required, even with a bank partner
- At least ten states now regulate EWA with specificity, with more to potentially follow suit, and others potentially covering the product under existing law
- States without EWA laws may still require licenses under other statutes
- Federal enforcement risk has diminished, but the state and private lawsuit risk remains, and there's always the potential for regulatory snapback
* * * * * *
The EWA space is no longer an unregulated frontier. If you're offering early access to wages, be prepared to navigate a state-by-state compliance strategy—whether or not you're riding shotgun with a bank.
* * * * * *
Related Articles
State Attorney General Investigations: What Consumer Financial Services Companies Need to Know
A Primer on State Consumer Financial Regulation: What Businesses Need to Know Now
California DFPI's New Requirements for Debt Settlement, Education Finance, and Wage Access Providers
California Bill Would Expand DFPI's Power to Police Financial Services Misconduct
CFPB Narrows Supervision and Enforcement, Leaving Broader Focus to States
The Biden/Chopra CFPB's 2025 Guidance Compendium: A Last Gasp or Lasting Legacy?