Katie Britt (R-AL)
A bill to amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to provide for tailoring and indexing enhanced regulations.
A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 bill amends the Financial Stability Act of 2010 and other related laws to raise various asset thresholds used for applying enhanced financial regulations to bank holding companies and financial entities. It establishes a system for the Board of Governors to make periodic adjustments to these statutory thresholds every five years based on economic indicators like the Gross Domestic Product or the Consumer Price Index. The legislation also requires the Board of Governors, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Corporation to review and periodically adjust non-statutory asset thresholds found in regulations. Additionally, agencies are directed to complete initial studies, publish adjustments in the Federal Register, and submit reports to specific congressional committees. Ultimately, the bill seeks to tailor and index financial regulations to account for economic changes over time.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +4
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Raising and indexing asset thresholds provides regulatory relief to mid-sized and community-focused banking institutions, facilitating better credit availability.
- Scored +4
Would business owners be better off under this?
Financial institutions and their leadership benefit from reduced regulatory scrutiny and compliance costs resulting from higher asset thresholds.
- Scored +3
Is this likely to grow the economy?
Tailoring and indexing financial regulatory asset thresholds supports economic growth by reducing compliance burdens on growing banking institutions.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill delegates ongoing quantitative threshold adjustments to unelected federal agencies, shifting some direct regulatory adjustments away from Congress.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 1(a): This section raises the asset threshold amounts across multiple financial statutes, such as increasing certain limits from $250,000,000,000 to $370,000,000,000. This could be considered positive by community or mid-sized banking institutions because it relieves certain regulatory burdens and compliance costs for institutions falling below the new higher limits.
-
Section 1(b) (Adding new Section 177 to the Financial Stability Act of 2010): This provision requires regular, periodic updates to financial thresholds using economic indicators like the Consumer Price Index or nominal Gross Domestic Product. This might be seen as a positive step to ensure that regulatory limits automatically keep pace with inflation and economic growth without requiring constant new legislation.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 1(a): By raising the asset thresholds required to trigger enhanced regulations and oversight, fewer financial companies will be subject to strict scrutiny under provisions like section 165 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010. This could be viewed negatively by the public if it results in reduced oversight of large financial institutions, potentially increasing risks to economic stability.
-
Section 1(b) (Adding new Section 178 to the Financial Stability Act of 2010): Agencies are required to review and modify regulatory thresholds using economic indicators, which delegates continuous threshold adjustments to unelected federal officials. Some may view this transfer of authority as a negative reduction in direct congressional oversight over how financial rules are scaled.
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 make it easier to run a small business? — Raising and indexing asset thresholds provides regulatory relief to mid-sized and community-focused banking institutions, facilitating better credit availability. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Tailoring and indexing financial regulatory asset thresholds supports economic growth by reducing compliance burdens on growing banking institutions.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Financial institutions and their leadership benefit from reduced regulatory scrutiny and compliance costs resulting from higher asset thresholds.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The legislation requires federal agencies to publish calculated threshold adjustments in the Federal Register and report findings to congressional committees. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill delegates ongoing quantitative threshold adjustments to unelected federal agencies, shifting some direct regulatory adjustments away from Congress.
- 9/22/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- Introduced in Senate
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.