PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 2009
Troubled Assets Relief Program Targeted Assets Act of 2009 - Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to establish the Troubled Asset Restoration and Assistance Program (TARAP) to allow the Treasury to purchase lender or servicer losses on rehabilitated mortgages, on terms and conditions determined by the Secretary.
Directs the Treasury, acting through TARAP, to pay up to 80% of the difference between the original asset and the rehabilitated asset to the lender or servicer under certain conditions.
Permits the portion of the difference between the original asset and the rehabilitated asset to the lender or servicer that is not paid for by the Secretary to be written to loss.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires any regulations and other guidance the Secretary may issue to determine qualifications for an independent appraiser, and make final determinations as to: (1) whether an asset is troubled; (2) what the values are that will determine the amount of purchase; (3) the amount of reductions in the purchase price for certain otherwise ineligible assets; and (4) any other functionality issues required to operate the program.
Authorizes the Secretary, conforming to specified guidelines, to make all necessary rules and determinations regarding documented best efforts, required timelines, and other processes and procedures.
Identifies criteria for eligible assets and eligible lenders or servicers.
Sunsets TARAP on December 31, 2009.
Prohibits, for a 90-day period, a mortgage servicer, or holder, from taking action to initiate a foreclosure, or any action in connection with a foreclosure already instituted (other than to suspend it), with respect to any eligible mortgage of a consumer.
Entitles a consumer to defer initiation of a foreclosure, or any action in connection with one already instituted by any creditor, servicer, or holder of a mortgage, until the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Meek, Kendrick B. [D-FL-17] · D–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 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.421 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.421 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.421 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.421 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.