PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 3, 2015
Financial Institution Legislative Edict Simplification Act of 2015 or the FILES Act of 2015
This bill amends the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to exempt from specified titles of the Act "safe and sound financial institutions," including any depository institution, credit union, bank holding company, or savings and loan holding company having:
total consolidated assets of less than $50 billion, and
a composite CAMELS rating of 1 or 2 under the Uniform Financial Institutions Rating System (or under an equivalent rating under a comparable rating system) as of the entity's most recent examination.
A CAMELS rating assesses a bank's capital adequacy, assets, management capability, earnings, liquidity, and sensitivity.
The bill exempts such institutions from the titles of the Act that address:
financial stability;
orderly liquidation authority;
improvements to regulation of bank and savings association holding companies and depository institutions; and
mortgage reform and anti-predatory lending.
People & committees
Rep. Clawson, Curt [R-FL-19] · R–FL
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.3890 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.3890 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.3890 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.3890 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.