Regulators Looking Into Claims of Gender Discrimination in Apple Card Credit Decisions, Goldman Sachs Responds

[MacRumors]

Goldman Sachs and Apple have become involved in a controversy over credit decisions for Apple Card, amid complaints that those decisions appear in some cases to have been made in a discriminatory manner on the basis of gender, reports The New York Times.

The firestorm kicked off late last week when Ruby on Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson indicated on Twitter that his Apple Card credit limit was twenty times that offered to his wife, even though the couple has been married for many years, file joint tax returns, and live in a community property state where all income and assets acquired while married are considered jointly owned.

Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak also weighed in, reporting that his Apple Card credit limit was ten times that offered to his wife, with the Wozniaks in a similar financial situation where all assets are jointly owned.

In response, New York State Department of Financial Services Superintendent Linda Lacewell has announced that her office will be looking into the situation, and she offered additional information in a Medium post today.

I responded, announcing that the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) would examine whether the algorithm used to make these credit limit decisions violates state laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. For the rest of the day, numerous Twitter users responded to David's initial tweet, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak (who indicated his credit limit is ten times higher than that of his wife), describing similar instances where men received higher credit limits than women. Confounding this is the "black box" problem, in which consumers have little visibility into how a decision is made or why they have been rejected.

New York law prohibits discrimination against protected classes of individuals, which means an algorithm, as with any other method of determining creditworthiness, cannot result in disparate treatment for individuals based on age, creed, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, or other protected characteristics.

Goldman Sachs today responded to the controversy, maintaining that "factors like gender" are never used in credit decisions and explaining how members of a family could receive very different credit decisions. The statement did not, however, directly address Hansson's situation, which is understandable given financial privacy issues.

With Apple Card, your account is individual to you; your credit line is yours and you establish your own direct credit history. Customers do not share a credit line under the account of a family member or another person by getting a supplemental card.

As with any other individual credit card, your application is evaluated independently. We look at an individual's income and an individual's creditworthiness, which includes factors like personal credit scores, how much debt you have, and how that debt has been managed. Based on these factors, it is possible for two family members to receive significantly different credit decisions.

In all cases, we have not and will not make decisions based on factors like gender.

Goldman Sachs also noted that it is "looking to enable" the ability for users to share Apple Cards with other members of their families, although the company did not specify when that might occur.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Regulators Looking Into Claims of Gender Discrimination in Apple Card Credit Decisions, Goldman Sachs Responds

 

[AustinIllini]

If Goldman Sachs can publish their requirements this should all blow over.

 

[H.E. Pennypacker]

Gender discrimination with credit cards now?!? I’m convinced that quite a lot of people in this world love drama.

 

[macsrcool1234]

If Goldman Sachs can publish their requirements this should all blow over.

And tell people how to scam the system?

Nothing to see here, 99% of these are automated decisions made by a computer without any kind of gender code in them. People are just looking for attention and Wozniak is trying to become relevant again.

 

[JosephAW]

I was wondering if this story would show up here.

 

[Wanted797]

Did these people look at their income vs their partners?
Most these numbers are an algorithm spitting out a number.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

I always knew Apple was the company that would be on the wrong side of history regarding the cis-heteropatriarchy.

 

[RealKrS]

I'm sure I'm gonna get shot for that, but looks to me like Goldman Sachs got our back on that one.. 😏

 

[thisisnotmyname]

it's entirely possible for partners to have different credit scores, happens all the time.

 

[mariusignorello]

There are too many factors to consider as to why this happened, so it’s too soon to pull the gender card, unless of course GS is guilty of it.

Are they both working? How much income and debt do they both have? Both been paying bills on time, and how high are the balances?

Often times the wife opts to have the husband open the accounts because he has a deeper credit history and a better chance of getting the credit due to some of the factors above.

If she typically doesn’t have her name on most of the finances then it would make sense that she gets a lower limit. And this can go both ways for the couple as well.

 

[budselectjr]

Lines of credit are not assets so I don’t know they are droning on about being in a community property state. Don’t believe net worth weighs that heavily either. Income, card utilization, and payment history are much larger factors.

That ruby creator sounds pretty off the rails. Lol

 

[cmaier]

it's entirely possible for partners to have different credit scores, happens all the time.

Apparently in this case the wife had the higher credit score, though.

If I had to guess I’d assume that she has a lower income or higher debt, despite having the higher credit limit?

 

[adambadamh]

This entire story is asinine if you know anything about how credit cards work. Your credit score is just a tiny factor of determining what your CL will be (the reality is banks don’t really use your “score” they all have different algorithms based on the same underlying factors). Even if the spouses all entered the same financial information (ie income) as they are legally allowed, it does not mean that two people will have the same CL. There are umpteen other factors at play most notably how much other credit you currently have extended and the history of that credit. The reality is credit card history does not show up on your spouse’s credit report even if you are married and ultimately liable. If you or your spouse usually adds you as an authorized user you may still have a fine credit score but exceptionally minimal credit history or a smaller outstanding credit line. You can still have a fine credit score with these factors in play but it will impact the credit you are extended for a new card in ways that differ from your spouse.

 

[drinkingtea]

Some of these comments are very... predictable.

 

[chrono1081]

Gender discrimination with credit cards now?!? I’m convinced that quite a lot of people in this world love drama.

Reading that dudes Twitter rant will show he loves drama. He was freaking out and getting irate.

 

[Tapiture]

Apparently in this case the wife had the higher credit score, though.

If I had to guess I’d assume that she has a lower income or higher debt, despite having the higher credit limit?

Income field will be the exact same for married couples

 

[cmaier]

Income field will be the exact same for married couples

According to goldman Sachs, no it won’t, because the apple cards are issued to/associated with individuals and are not shared among couples.

 

[GregJohn]

This is just another thing for people to be “upset” over.

 

[cardfan]

Lines of credit are not assets so I don’t know they are droning on about being in a community property state. Don’t believe net worth weighs that heavily either. Income, card utilization, and payment history are much larger factors.

That ruby creator sounds pretty off the rails. Lol

His rant on Twitter seemed a bit extreme over a cc line and a jump to conclusions about gender bias. GS finally bumped it up and he’s still ranting out for blood.

It’s not about joint assets. Assets have nothing to do with it. It’s income, debts, credit margin, credit mix, etc. Perhaps the wife has more debt in name, higher credit margins, etc.

Often a couple has no clue. Others plan these things making one spouse hold the debt just in case. Everyone is different. I’d need more than just my experience with a cc company over one cc before accusing them of being biased though.

 

[gaximus]

This makes total since, My wife and I have been married for many years. everything is jointly owned. But all credit cards and loans we ever get go in my name. So if something happens to me, she won't have deal with the debt. But this means that she doesn't have much credit. She got the Apple Card on her own, and her credit line is less than mine. I'm sure there are also cases or the male getting less than the female.

 

[OriginalMacRat]

Tim will fix everything.

Even if it wasn't broke.

 

[lordofthereef]

Some of these comments are very... predictable.

I came here to say exactly this.

 

[budselectjr]

Some of these comments are very... predictable.

Awww. Are you upset the majority of people with a brain aren’t buying into this bs?

 

[pearvsapple]

Outrage culture strikes again LOL

 

[confessJason]

The signaling by this grown adult male is cringe beyond cringe. Grown-up thinking is simple. First, don't throw a tantrum, in public, on the Internet, at home. It makes you an infant. Second, include the scientific process into your deductions, notably falsifliability. This is hard, yes, but for a moment consider all the varying possibilities that you could be—could be—wrong! Starting with a conclusion first makes you a child.

Claiming gender discrimination without evidence is just a means to score social brownie points from the Internet and an attaboy from this moron's wife.