Goldman Sachs will reevaluate Apple Card credit line limits after claims of gender bias

Responding to claims that a gender bias is instituted when processing Apple Card applications, Apple banking partner Goldman Sachs on Monday said it is prepared to reevaluate credit lines for customers who expected higher limits.

Goldman Sachs Bank CEO Carey Halio in a statement posted to Twitter reiterated the Apple Card application process, which is performed in partnership with a third party, does not factor gender or other introduced biases into a final determination.

"We have not and never will make decisions based on factors like gender," Halio said in statement reproduced on Goldman's @gsbanksupport account. "In fact, we do not know your gender or marital status during the Apple Card application process."

That said, the company is aware of customer discontent after claims of algorithmically institutionalized sexism surfaced over the weekend. Halio in the tweet instructs Apple Card holders to reach out if they received credit lines below expectations.

"If you believe that your credit line does not adequately reflect your credit history because you may be in a similar situation, we want to hear from you," Halio said. "Based on additional information that we request, we will re-evaluate your credit line."

An image of the statement was appended by text reading "We hear you #AppleCard." CNBC reported on the tweet earlier today.

On Saturday, developer and tech industry insider David Heinemeier Hansson accused both Apple and Goldman of gender bias after being granted a credit limit some 20 times higher than that of his wife. Hansson and his wife file joint tax returns. Others, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, reported similar outcomes in a lengthy Twitter thread.

Goldman attempted to clarify the situation in a statement on Sunday, explaining that Apple Card credit lines are evaluated independently.

On Saturday, the New York Department of Financial Services announced intent to open an investigation into matter.

50 Comments

Lara Croft 835 6 comments · 6 Years

About 5 years ago

Clarity after all the poking the finger at Apple. Cant believe this story has received so much traction considering if you have an issue with your bank you go directly to them and seek a review. Also about time Woz returned back to the pasture he came from.

revenant 610 comments · 15 Years

you mean apple will, right? because apple is the one being sexist here. it is their algorithm that they tailored to be sure to give women a subpar credit limit. all goldman sachs does is issue the card on apple's behalf, apple is the one doing all the work, they are a giant bank.

jungmark 6927 comments · 13 Years

“In fact, we do not know your gender or marital status during the Apple Card application process."

says it all right there. So DHH, what information did your wife give?

tundraboy 1913 comments · 18 Years

revenant said:

you mean apple will, right? because apple is the one being sexist here. it is their algorithm that they tailored to be sure to give women a subpar credit limit. all goldman sachs does is issue the card on apple's behalf, apple is the one doing all the work, they are a giant bank.

Are you kidding? You realize if someone defaults on their Apple Card balance, it's Goldman Sachs that eats the loss, not Apple, right? You really believe that Goldman Sachs, or any bank for that matter, would allow someone else to make the lending decision for them? Assessing creditworthiness is THE INDISPENSABLE, MOST IMPORTANT SKILL NEEDED to run a bank. You know, a bank --those companies that turn a profit by extending credit. If you have no ability to evaluate a loan applicant's creditworthiness, you have no business being in the banking business.

dewme 5739 comments · 10 Years

I do not believe for a millisecond that Apple or Goldman Sachs is being intentionally sexist here. I do know that algorithms that are fed with real world data that already has an inherent bias will produce biased results unless the raw results are intentionally post processed to compensate for the bias that’s been baked into the data,

Yeah it sucks that unbiased scientific algorithms that act on historical real world data have to post-compensate for the traditional biases that are baked into the historical data that is feeding the algorithms. But until the data that is feeding the algorithms is no longer tainted by bias the owners of the algorithms will have to resort to using compensation to remove the bias that passes through the algorithms.

In this case, the algorithms are totally free of bias but the biases that are in the data are leaking into the results produced by the algorithms.