Andy Barr (R-KY)
Business Owners Protection Act of 2025
A Republican bill with 7 Republican cosponsors · See all 7 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 315.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Business Owners Protection Act of 2025," aims to end certain unused powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission. These powers were originally created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The legislation seeks to repeal authority regarding mandatory predispute arbitration. It also removes specific authority related to fiduciary duties within the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Additionally, the bill repeals certain unused authority regarding standards of conduct.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill reduces the regulatory burden on financial service providers.
- Scored +5
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The reduction of SEC regulatory authority may reduce compliance burdens for financial entities.
- Scored +4
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Lower regulatory oversight may benefit high-net-worth investment structures.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -5
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill decreases federal regulatory power by repealing SEC authorities.
- Scored -5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The repeal of fiduciary duty authorities and arbitration restrictions may reduce protections for individual investors.
- Scored -3
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Repealing mandatory arbitration restrictions may impact investor due process in disputes.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
The provided text does not explicitly list specific benefits or positive outcomes for individuals or groups.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
The provided text does not explicitly list specific negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups.
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill reduces the regulatory burden on financial service providers. Would billionaires be better off under this? Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Lower regulatory oversight may benefit high-net-worth investment structures. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? Would high-income households be better off under this? — Reduction in regulation often benefits high-income investors and financial institutions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Reduction in investor protections may negatively impact individual retail investors. Would retired people be better off under this? — Reduced fiduciary protections may negatively impact retirees' investment security.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill decreases federal regulatory power by repealing SEC authorities. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Repealing mandatory arbitration restrictions may impact investor due process in disputes.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The reduction of SEC regulatory authority may reduce compliance burdens for financial entities. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The repeal of fiduciary duty authorities and arbitration restrictions may reduce protections for individual investors.
- 11/4/2025
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-363.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 315.
- 9/16/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 26 - 24.
- 6/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/20/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 5/19/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Michael BaumgartnerRepublican · Washington
Tom EmmerRepublican · Minnesota
Richard HudsonRepublican · North Carolina
Ashley HinsonRepublican · Iowa
Pete SessionsRepublican · Texas
Roger WilliamsRepublican · Texas
Bruce WestermanRepublican · Arkansas