Latest action: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 132.
Bill is filed in its originating chamber and assigned a number.
Sponsor
Andy Barr (R-KY)
Filed in the House.
Next: In Committee
Members of the committee(s) the bill was referred to
Adjusts banking regulations to fit different sizes of financial institutions.
The problem
Current banking rules apply the same way to all banks, regardless of size or risk level. Smaller banks say these rules are too costly and burden their operations unfairly.
The proposal
The bill tailors federal banking regulations based on institution size, complexity, and risk profile. It allows regulators to apply different rules to different types of banks.
The impact
Banks of all sizes are affected. Large banks may face fewer changes, while smaller banks could get relief from certain requirements. Customers and borrowers may see different lending practices.
Community and regional banks spend significant money complying with rules designed for large institutions. Tailored regulations could lower their compliance costs and free up money for lending and operations.
Smaller banks could use money saved on compliance to offer more loans to local businesses and homebuyers. This supports community economic growth.
The bill maintains federal banking supervision. Tailoring doesn't eliminate rules—it adjusts them based on actual risk levels at different institutions.
Complex regulations created for mega-banks may not fit smaller institutions. This allows more practical rule-making that reflects real differences between banks.
If smaller banks face fewer rules, some customer protections might decrease. People banking at these institutions could have less safety oversight on their deposits and accounts.
Reducing regulations on smaller banks might lower safety standards. Without proper oversight, some banks could take bigger risks and potentially fail, harming customers and the economy.
Different rules for different banks might create confusion and unfair advantages. Large banks could exploit differences, and regulators would manage multiple rule systems.
Tailored regulations could mean some banks face weaker capital requirements or less stress testing. This might make the banking system riskier during economic downturns.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
S 5639
Portal for Appraisal Licensing Act of 2026
S 1564
Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act
HR 1190
Expanding Access to Capital for Rural Job Creators Act
HR 7730
Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.