- ConsumersPreserves CFPB guidance requiring consideration of reopening consumer-closed deposit accounts, supporting account acces…
- Federal agenciesMaintains a federal standard aimed at reducing barriers to consumers regaining access to their funds.
- ConsumersCould benefit financially vulnerable consumers by simplifying procedures to restore previously closed accounts.
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule…
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This joint resolution, filed under the Congressional Review Act, would disapprove a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) rule that withdrew ‘Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2023–02: Reopening Deposit Accounts That Consumers Previously Closed.’ If enacted, the resolution would nullify the CFPB’s withdrawal and prevent that withdrawal from taking effect, leaving the original Circular in place.
The bill text does not amend the Circular’s substance; it only seeks to block the agency’s action that rescinded it.
Narrow, non‑fiscal regulatory roll‑back increases viability, but partisan/regulatory alignment and procedural timing create significant uncertainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped Congressional Review Act disapproval that is clear in purpose and explicit in mechanism, but it omits fiscal and oversight details which are not uncommon for this vehicle and are absent from the text.
Progressives emphasize consumer access and inclusion benefits
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
- Targeted stakeholdersImposes compliance and operational requirements on banks to adhere to account-reopening guidance.
- Targeted stakeholdersMay increase fraud or risk exposure when institutions are constrained in refusing to reopen accounts.
- Targeted stakeholdersCould raise costs for financial institutions, which might be passed to customers through fees.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Progressives emphasize consumer access and inclusion benefits
Likely supportive: sees the resolution as protecting consumer access to banking and preventing financial exclusion.
Views congressional disapproval as restoring a consumer-protection guidance the CFPB issued about account reopenings.
Mildly supportive but cautious: values the consumer-protection intent while worrying about process and costs.
Prefers clearer rulemaking, cost analysis, and narrowly tailored fixes rather than blunt CRA disapproval.
Likely opposed: views the resolution as preventing regulatory relief and preserving intrusive agency guidance.
Prefers agency discretion and less federal micromanagement of banks' account decisions.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, non‑fiscal regulatory roll‑back increases viability, but partisan/regulatory alignment and procedural timing create significant uncertainty.
- Whether resolution meets CRA filing/timing window
- Committee and floor scheduling priority
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Progressives emphasize consumer access and inclusion benefits
Narrow, non‑fiscal regulatory roll‑back increases viability, but partisan/regulatory alignment and procedural timing create significant unc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped Congressional Review Act disapproval that is clear in purpose and explicit in mechanism, but it omits fiscal and oversight details which are not…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.