Trump plans to set the credit card interest rate cap at 10%, the US financial system may face policy turbulence

President Trump of the United States has once again voiced strong opinions on financial policy. He publicly stated that if major U.S. credit card companies do not reduce their annual interest rates to 10% by January 20, 2026, the government will consider taking strict legal action. This statement quickly drew significant attention from markets and the banking industry and has become a focal point in current discussions on U.S. financial policy.

From the content of his statement, Trump characterized annual credit card interest rates of 20% to 30% as “systematic exploitation of ordinary families,” and framed setting a cap on interest rates as a consumer protection measure. He emphasized that prolonged high interest rates are the core reason for the ongoing increase in debt burdens among U.S. residents, and that intervention through administrative and legal means is necessary.

Overall, this remark clearly carries populist overtones. Trump depicts banks and credit card institutions as vested interests, while ordinary consumers are portrayed as victims within a high-interest-rate system. Against the backdrop of inflationary pressures and declining real purchasing power, such narratives resonate with some voters.

However, opposition from the banking sector is also strong. Several large financial institutions warned that imposing a mandatory cap on credit card interest rates could lead to a contraction in the U.S. credit system. They believe that high-risk borrowers would find it more difficult to obtain credit, and some costs might be transferred into higher fees or other hidden charges. At the same time, the legal basis and enforcement mechanisms for such policies remain unclear.

Looking at the current context, although the scale of U.S. credit card debt remains high, the average annual interest rate has long been above 20%. In the short term, if the interest rate cap policy is implemented, it could indeed ease some households’ revolving debt pressures. However, overall, this appears more as a political signal rather than a mature structural reform plan.

Regardless of whether the proposal is ultimately legislated, it has reignited broad discussions on high-interest lending regulation, consumer financial protection, and the U.S. credit pricing model, and may continue to influence market sentiment and policy directions through 2026.