PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 11, 2013
Stop Outsourcing Banking Enforcement and Examination Act - Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to prescribe requirements with which a federal banking agency must comply in order to use an independent consultant in implementing a consent order with a person it regulates.
Requires the agency to: (1) make specified information about the consent agreement and the independent consultant available to the public, (2) send Congress a quarterly status report, and (3) hire and pay the consultant directly (and receive reimbursement by the entity subject to the consent agreement).
Declares that any remediation or penalties under the consent order will not apply to, or be settled in conjunction with, any other consent order, settlement, or enforcement action.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Permits a private right of action by any person or class of persons aggrieved by the failure of an independent consultant to comply with the contract under which the consultant assists the agency if the consent order requires financial remediation to such person or class.
Requires a repayment (clawback) of fees to the agency from the independent consultant upon court determination that the consultant has violated either the terms of the contract or has failed to disclose required conflict of interest information.
Prohibits federal banking agency staff who were involved in approving an independent consultant from seeking employment with the consultant during any period in which the consent order is in effect.
Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to confer oversight duties upon the Special Inspector General (SIG) for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) regarding: (1) consent orders entered into by a federal banking agency, and (2) the performance of independent consultants hired by the agency to assist in implementing such consent orders.
Repeals the SIG Office termination date.
Authorizes the SIG to bring a civil action against an independent consultant for damages and equitable relief for violations of the consultant's duties under the contract.
Directs the SIG to establish an whistleblower program which: (1) pays awards to whistleblowers who voluntarily provide original information leading to successful enforcement of a judicial or administrative action brought by the SIG against an independent consultant that results in monetary sanctions exceeding $1 million, and (2) prohibits a whistleblower's employer from discriminating against the whistleblower because of any lawful act the whistleblower performs.
People & committees
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1483 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1483 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1483 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1483 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.