A Democratic bill with 10 Democratic cosponsors · See all 10 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, the Judiciary, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This legislation is known as the Stop Wall Street Looting Act. It aims to hold private investment funds responsible for the financial debts, legal penalties, and labor violations of the companies they buy and control. The bill places strict limits on the money these funds can take out of acquired companies through dividends, buybacks, and asset sales. It also provides stronger legal protections and bankruptcy priorities for workers who lose jobs, wages, or benefits due to corporate takeovers. Additionally, the legislation increases transparency by requiring private funds to publicly disclose their fees, returns, and political spending. Finally, it changes tax laws to treat certain investment management profits as ordinary income rather than capital gains.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +8
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Title V requires private funds to publicly disclose fees, debt levels, fund performance, and political spending.
- Scored +8
Would union members be better off under this?
Section 209 protects striking workers, and Title III prioritizes unpaid wages, severance, and pension obligations in bankruptcy.
- Scored +7
Does this raise taxes on the highest earners?
Title IV changes tax laws to treat certain investment management profits and carried interest as ordinary income rather than capital gains.
The opposite· 3 of 7
- Scored -8
Would billionaires be better off under this?
The legislation directly targets Wall Street private equity billionaires by eliminating tax loopholes and imposing strict joint and several liability.
- Scored -7
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Higher tax burdens and stricter transparency and fiduciary rules negatively affect private equity fund managers and wealthy investors.
- Scored -7
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
Private fund managers and ultra-high-net-worth individuals face significantly higher taxes on carried interest and strict liability rules.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Better Bankruptcy Pay for Workers: Section 301 increases the priority amount for unpaid wages and severance pay to $20,000 in bankruptcy cases, helping everyday workers get what they are owed before other creditors take the money.
-
Protection Against Worker Layoffs and Outsourcing: Section 201 stops target firms from ordering mass layoffs and relocating jobs outside the United States for a period of 4 years after a private equity fund takes control.
-
Safeguarding Gift Cards: Section 310 ensures that everyday consumers who hold gift cards for a company that goes bankrupt receive priority status for their unredeemed funds up to $1,800, protecting people from losing their hard-earned money.
-
Greater Financial Transparency: Section 501 requires private funds to publicly disclose their fees, debt levels, and fund performance, which gives investors and the public a clear look at how these firms operate.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Borrowing Costs for Businesses: Section 204 limits the tax deduction for business interest for certain companies owned by private funds if their debt-to-equity ratio exceeds 1, which could make it harder or more expensive for these businesses to secure loans for growth.
-
Higher Tax Burdens on Investment Managers: Title IV changes how investment management profits are taxed by treating them as ordinary income, which could discourage private investment in local businesses and communities that rely on these funds for capital.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise taxes on the highest earners? — Title IV changes tax laws to treat certain investment management profits and carried interest as ordinary income rather than capital gains. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Section 310 ensures that gift card purchasers receive priority status for unredeemed funds up to $1,800 in bankruptcy cases. Does this raise the taxes companies pay? — Section 204 limits the tax deduction for business interest for certain companies owned by private funds. Is this likely to create jobs? — Increased regulatory and tax burdens on private investment funds could discourage private investment in local businesses and capital formation. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — New borrowing costs and restrictions on private funds could reduce the availability of capital for certain small and mid-sized businesses.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — The bill places guardrails and liabilities on private equity takeovers of entities serving vulnerable populations, including affordable housing developments. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Enhanced protections for workers and consumers in bankruptcy help mitigate poverty risks associated with corporate failures.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Title V requires private funds to publicly disclose fees, debt levels, fund performance, and political spending.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would union members be better off under this? — Section 209 protects striking workers, and Title III prioritizes unpaid wages, severance, and pension obligations in bankruptcy. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Protections for workers and consumers against predatory corporate looting benefit low-income households and vulnerable populations. Would retired people be better off under this? — Stronger protections for pension plans and stricter oversight of private funds help safeguard retirement savings. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Stronger protections against private equity looting in healthcare and assisted living facilities benefit individuals with disabilities. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Increased oversight and restrictions on private equity ownership of nursing homes and medical providers help protect elderly residents. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Protections against corporate takeovers and bankruptcies help safeguard jobs and benefits for workers, including veterans. Would billionaires be better off under this? — The legislation directly targets Wall Street private equity billionaires by eliminating tax loopholes and imposing strict joint and several liability. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Higher tax burdens and stricter transparency and fiduciary rules negatively affect private equity fund managers and wealthy investors. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Private fund managers and ultra-high-net-worth individuals face significantly higher taxes on carried interest and strict liability rules. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Title IV recharacterizes carried interest and investment management profits as ordinary income, increasing tax burdens on high earners. Would business owners be better off under this? — Restrictions on dividends, capital distributions, and increased liabilities may constrain business operations for portfolio companies.
- 11/10/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/29/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/24/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, the Judiciary, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 8 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
7 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Ro KhannaDemocrat · California
Greg LandsmanDemocrat · Ohio
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Alexandria Ocasio-CortezDemocrat · New York
Ilhan OmarDemocrat · Minnesota
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan