PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.2572 / 113th Congress

Regulatory Relief for Credit Unions Act of 2013

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 28, 2013

Regulatory Relief for Credit Unions Act of 2013 - Amends the Federal Credit Union Act to authorize the National Credit Union Administration Board (NCUAB), if it determines that a regulation issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) would create an undue hardship when applied to credit unions, to: (1) delay the regulation's application to credit unions until the NCUAB determines that it would not create an undue hardship; and (2) modify the regulation as it applies to credit unions, so long as the modification meets CFPB's objective in issuing the regulation.

Authorizes a federal credit union to apply for NCUAB permission to comply with a state law applicable to a state credit union in lieu of applicable federal regulation (if any), for purposes of the credit union's branches located in that state. Limits such permission only to the state for which permission is given. Prohibits a federal credit union from complying with the regulation in any other state in lieu of the applicable federal regulation.

Prohibits a federal credit union, however, from applying for permission to comply with state law if it would conflict with federal limitations on member business loans.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Requires the NCUAB to: (1) implement a two-tier system of net worth ratios for credit unions, consisting of a risk-based net worth ratio and a net worth capital ratio; and (2) establish standards for leverage ratios to the same extent as are provided for net worth ratios.

Redefines net worth to include components of equity under generally accepted accounting principles not included in retained earnings.

Increases the net worth ratios for well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, and significantly undercapitalized credit unions.

Directs the NCUAB to design the risk-based net worth requirement to account for material risks applicable to insured credit unions that are taken account of by comparable standards applicable to institutions insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

Prohibits the NCUAB from reclassifying an insured credit union into a lower net worth category due solely to interest rate risk, or treat an insured credit union as if it were in a lower net worth category, for reasons not pertaining to its safety and soundness.

Exempts from the requirement of a net worth restoration plan any credit union undercapitalized as a result of a major natural or man-made disaster.

Eliminates the requirement that an insured credit union that is not well-capitalized set aside an earnings-retention amount annually. Authorizes the NCUAB to require an insured credit union that is not well-capitalized, instead, to submit a net worth restoration plan.

Directs the NCUAB to study problems associated with the current prompt corrective action regime.

Amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to require each regulation issued by the NCUAB and the CFPB to include a cost-benefit analysis detailing the estimated cost of compliance compared to its measurable benefit.

Directs the Comptroller General (GAO) to study whether improvements or modernization is needed for the Central Liquidity Facility.

Permits a federal credit union to: (1) purchase and hold for its own account investment grade securities, not exceeding 10% of its total assets; and (2) purchase mortgage servicing rights as an investment, including mortgage servicing rights from other credit unions.

Modifies NCUAB authority to define the extent of share insurance coverage for member accounts where a member holds funds for the use of a nonmember. Requires coverage for an account established by a member to be consistent with FDIC coverage, regardless of the membership status of the owner of funds deposited in an account established by a member.

Amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to authorize a federal banking agency, when it determines that a CFPB regulation would create an undue hardship upon a depository institution the agency regulates, to: (1) delay the regulation's application until the application would not create an undue hardship, and (2) modify the regulation so long as the modification meets the CFPB objective in issuing the regulation.

Requires that: (1) each CFPB regulation applicable to a depository institution include a cost-benefit analysis comparing the estimated cost of compliance with the regulation's measurable benefit, and (2) any information provided by a depository institution for purposes of that analysis be voluntary.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Miller, Gary G. [R-CA-31] · R–CA

Committees

  • Financial Services Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

    2. Introduced in House

    3. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.2572 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.2572 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.2572 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.2572 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.

    View full prompt & sources