Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 64.
The Promoting New Bank Formation Act requires federal banking agencies to allow a three‑year phase‑in of federal capital requirements for newly insured depository institutions and their holding companies. It permits de novos to request changes to approved business plans with expedited 30‑day agency review and automatic approval if agencies fail to act.
Liberals emphasize financial‑stability and depositor risk concerns
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive regulatory changes and some procedural requirements but leaves substantial implementation detail to agency rulemaking without statutory timelines, fiscal acknowledgment, or robust safeguards.
The Promoting New Bank Formation Act requires federal banking agencies to allow a three‑year phase‑in of federal capital requirements for newly insured depository institutions and their holding companies.
It permits de novos to request changes to approved business plans with expedited 30‑day agency review and automatic approval if agencies fail to act.
The bill sets a Community Bank Leverage Ratio of 8% for rural depository institutions during the three‑year period, with lower percentages in years one and two, expands agricultural lending authority for Federal savings associations, and mandates a one‑year joint study and report on causes and remedies for low de novo bank formation.
Technically focused deregulatory bill with modest fiscal signals that can pass the House but faces meaningful Senate and regulatory scrutiny before becoming law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive regulatory changes and some procedural requirements but leaves substantial implementation detail to agency rulemaking without statutory timelines, fiscal acknowledgment, or robust safeguards.
Liberals emphasize financial‑stability and depositor risk concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize financial‑stability and depositor risk concerns
Mixed view: welcomes efforts to expand banking access in underserved and rural areas but worries easing capital rules may increase systemic and depositor risks.
Wants stronger consumer protections, targeted safeguards, and monitoring to prevent unsafe practices.
Generally favorable but cautious: supports reducing regulatory hurdles for firm formation while insisting on prudential safeguards.
Sees value in a timed phase‑in and expedited business‑plan review if agencies retain monitoring authority.
Strongly favorable: sees the bill as sensible deregulatory relief to encourage new banks and expand local credit.
Views phased capital rules and faster bureaucratic decisions as pro‑market measures that reduce entry barriers.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically focused deregulatory bill with modest fiscal signals that can pass the House but faces meaningful Senate and regulatory scrutiny before becoming law.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize financial‑stability and depositor risk concerns
Technically focused deregulatory bill with modest fiscal signals that can pass the House but faces meaningful Senate and regulatory scrutin…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive regulatory changes and some procedural requirements but leaves substantial implementation detail to agency rulemaking without statutory…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.