H.R. 3645 (119th)Bill Overview

Amendment for Crowdfunding Capital Enhancement and Small-business Support Act of 2025

Finance and Financial Sector|Business recordsCorporate finance and management
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
May 29, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 166.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill amends Section 4A of the Securities Act of 1933 to raise the crowdfunding offering amount that triggers a requirement for financial statements reviewed by an independent public accountant from $100,000 to $250,000. It gives the Securities and Exchange Commission discretion to increase that threshold up to $400,000 following recommendations from the Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation and the Office of the Investor Advocate, and makes technical cross-reference corrections.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize investor protection and disclosure loss

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly and specifically alters a discrete provision of the Securities Act of 1933, grants limited administrative discretion to the Commission conditioned on recommendations, and corrects cross-references.

This bill amends Section 4A of the Securities Act of 1933 to raise the crowdfunding offering amount that triggers a requirement for financial statements reviewed by an independent public accountant from $100,000 to $250,000.

It gives the Securities and Exchange Commission discretion to increase that threshold up to $400,000 following recommendations from the Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation and the Office of the Investor Advocate, and makes technical cross-reference corrections.

The bill is titled the Amendment for Crowdfunding Capital Enhancement and Small-business Support Act of 2025 (ACCESS Act of 2025).

Passage35/100

Content is narrow and administratively focused so passage is plausible, but Senate procedure and investor-protection objections create material uncertainty.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly and specifically alters a discrete provision of the Securities Act of 1933, grants limited administrative discretion to the Commission conditioned on recommendations, and corrects cross-references.

Contention64/100

Progressives emphasize investor protection and disclosure loss

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
StatesLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • StatesLowers compliance costs for small issuers by reducing required accountant-reviewed financial statements.
  • Potential benefitEnables issuers to raise larger amounts via crowdfunding without incurring accountant review expenses.
  • Potential benefitSpeeds fundraising timelines by removing one procedural step for many small offerings.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenReduces investor protections because fewer offerings will include independent accountant reviews.
  • Potential burdenMay increase the risk of fraud or materially inaccurate financial information reaching investors.
  • Potential burdenCould lead to greater retail investor losses if disclosure quality declines.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize investor protection and disclosure loss
Progressive35%

Likely sees the bill as modest deregulation intended to ease capital formation for small businesses, but is concerned about weaker investor protections.

They note the replacement of a $100,000 review trigger with $250,000 (and potential up to $400,000) reduces third-party financial scrutiny for certain offerings.

They would press for stronger safeguards, monitoring, and enforcement to protect unsophisticated investors.

Likely resistant
Centrist65%

Views the bill as a pragmatic attempt to balance regulatory burden on small issuers with investor protection, worth supporting if paired with evaluation.

The $100,000-to-$250,000 increase appears to reduce paperwork for micro-issuers while retaining review requirements at higher amounts.

The commission’s discretionary authority is sensible if tied to data and safeguards.

Split reaction
Conservative90%

Likely supportive, seeing this as deregulatory relief that reduces costs for small businesses and expands market-based capital formation.

Raising the review threshold helps entrepreneurs raise small amounts without costly accountant reviews, and SEC flexibility up to $400,000 is viewed as modernization.

Main concerns are limited and framed as manageable market risks.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Content is narrow and administratively focused so passage is plausible, but Senate procedure and investor-protection objections create material uncertainty.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Absence of a congressional cost estimate or CBO score in the text
  • Potential opposition from investor-protection advocates or regulators
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize investor protection and disclosure loss

Content is narrow and administratively focused so passage is plausible, but Senate procedure and investor-protection objections create mate…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly and specifically alters a discrete provision of the Securities Act of 1933, grants limited administrative di…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis