PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 23, 2015
Community Bank Access to Capital Act of 2015
This bill directs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to increase the asset threshold under the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement on Assessment of Financial and Managerial Factors from less than $1 billion to less than $5 billion.
The Comptroller of the Currency, the Board, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) shall exempt community banks from regulations implementing the International Regulatory Framework for Banks (Basel III), and, as they determine appropriate, to adjust the related capital requirements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
A community bank is defined as one whose consolidated assets are $50 billion or less.
The bill also exempts from the internal control attestation requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 both an insured depository institution and a depository institution holding company with consolidated assets of less than $1 billion.
Savings and loan associations meeting specified asset and equity security holder criteria shall be subject to security registration requirements.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is prohibited from adjusting under Regulation D the $1 million net worth threshold and $200,000 and $300,000 income thresholds that define a natural person as an accredited investor.
The SEC shall increase from 35 to 70 the number of purchasers of securities in transactions deemed not to involve a public offering and so are exempt from regulation under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933.
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is amended to: (1) subject a savings and loan holding company to registration requirements for securities whose issuer has total assets exceeding $10 million and a class of non-exempt equity security held of record by 2,000 or more persons; and (2) apply the automatic termination of registration, and suspension of the duty to file supplementary and periodic information, to a savings and loan holding company whose securities are found to be held by less than 1,200 persons.
People & committees
Rep. Garrett, Scott [R-NJ-5] · R–NJ
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.
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.1523 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.1523 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.1523 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.1523 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.