PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 19, 2009
Taxpayer Investment Protection Act of 2009 - Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to divest, by December 31, 2010, the federal ownership interest in certain troubled assets purchased by the Secretary under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA).
Requires all repayments of obligations arising under EESA, and all proceeds from the sale of assets acquired by the federal government under EESA, to be paid into the general fund of the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.
Instructs the Secretary to report periodically to Congress on plans for compliance with this Act, providing detail on equity divestiture plans and return of capital for the following corporate investments: (1) Bank of America; (2) Chrysler; (3) General Motors; (4) Citigroup; (5) American International Group, Inc. (AIG); (6) Hartford Financial Services; (7) Lincoln National Corporation; and (8) GMAC (formerly General Motors Acceptance Corporation).
People & committees
Rep. Kirk, Mark Steven [R-IL-10] · R–IL
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2821)
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 14, 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.4118 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.4118 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.4118 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.4118 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.