S. 427 (119th)Bill Overview

TAILOR Act of 2025

Finance and Financial Sector|Banking and financial institutions regulationBusiness records
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Feb 5, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

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

The bill directs federal banking, credit union, and consumer financial regulators to consider institutions' risk profiles and business models when creating regulations and to tailor rules to limit undue burdens. Agencies must document that tailoring in each proposed and final rule, report annually to Congress, and review regulations issued in the prior seven years to apply these requirements and revise rules within three years.

Why people may split

Left fears consumer and stability rollbacks; right sees deregulatory relief.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a procedural/operational statute that establishes clear new duties and reporting obligations for financial regulatory agencies and requires a set of reviews and disclosures to tailor rules by institution type.

The bill directs federal banking, credit union, and consumer financial regulators to consider institutions' risk profiles and business models when creating regulations and to tailor rules to limit undue burdens.

Agencies must document that tailoring in each proposed and final rule, report annually to Congress, and review regulations issued in the prior seven years to apply these requirements and revise rules within three years.

The bill also requires short-form call reports for banks eligible for the Community Bank Leverage Ratio for two quarterly filings and tasks banking agencies with an 18-month report to Congress on modernizing supervision.

Passage45/100

Technocratic, modestly deregulatory bill with limited fiscal impact increases chances, but interagency resistance and contested policy tradeoffs reduce odds.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a procedural/operational statute that establishes clear new duties and reporting obligations for financial regulatory agencies and requires a set of reviews and disclosures to tailor rules by institution type. It specifies responsible entities and several timelines but leaves central implementation concepts and resource implications under-specified.

Contention70/100

Left fears consumer and stability rollbacks; right sees deregulatory relief.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
CommunitiesConsumers

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

Likely helped
  • CommunitiesReduces compliance and operational costs for lower‑risk and community banks by tailoring requirements.
  • CommunitiesDecreases reporting burden for Community Bank Leverage Ratio‑eligible banks via short‑form call reports.
  • Potential benefitEnables regulators to target resources and supervisory attention toward higher‑risk institutions and activities.
Likely burdened
  • ConsumersCould weaken consumer or safety protections if tailoring reduces substantive regulatory requirements.
  • Potential burdenMay produce inconsistent regulatory standards across institution types, complicating compliance and oversight.
  • Potential burdenCreates potential for regulatory arbitrage if firms alter business models to qualify for lighter regulation.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Left fears consumer and stability rollbacks; right sees deregulatory relief.
Progressive30%

Skeptical overall: supports proportional regulation but concerned this could be used to weaken consumer protections and safety rules.

Will scrutinize agency discretion and the look-back process for possible rule rollbacks.

Wants strong transparency, clear criteria, and safeguards to protect financial stability and consumers.

Likely resistant
Centrist60%

Cautiously favorable: welcomes proportionality, administrative relief, and modernization, but concerned about implementation and tradeoffs.

Wants clear standards, consistent interagency application, and metrics to ensure safety and consumer protection remain intact.

Views annual reports as useful oversight if substantive.

Split reaction
Conservative85%

Broadly supportive: views the bill as pro-growth deregulation that reduces burdens on community banks and small institutions.

Appreciates mandated tailoring, reduced reporting, and regulatory review of recent rules.

Sees documentation and timelines as reasonable checks on agency power.

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 likelihood45/100

Technocratic, modestly deregulatory bill with limited fiscal impact increases chances, but interagency resistance and contested policy tradeoffs reduce odds.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Whether agencies will resist added procedural constraints
  • Level of industry lobbying support or opposition
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

Left fears consumer and stability rollbacks; right sees deregulatory relief.

Technocratic, modestly deregulatory bill with limited fiscal impact increases chances, but interagency resistance and contested policy trad…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a procedural/operational statute that establishes clear new duties and reporting obligations for financial regulatory agencies and requires a set of reviews and 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