PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 24, 2014
PACE Assessment Protection Act of 2014 - Requires the Director of the Federal Housing Agency (FHA) to direct the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) to issue guidance providing that the levy of a PACE (property assessed clean energy) assessment and the creation of a PACE lien do not constitute a default on any loan secured by one of its uniform instruments, and do not trigger the exercise of remedies with respect to any provision of the instrument, if the PACE assessment and the PACE lien meet specified requirements.
Lists as PACE improvements any qualified clean energy improvements, energy conservation and efficiency improvements, and water conservation and efficiency improvements.
Prohibits the FHA Director, the Comptroller of the Currency, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and all federal agencies and entities chartered or otherwise established under federal law from discriminating in any manner against state or local governments implementing or participating in a PACE program, or against any property that is obligated to pay a PACE assessment or is subject to a PACE lien.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Specifies requirements a PACE program, and any related PACE assessment and PACE lien, must meet to be entitled to the protections of this Act.
Details obligations of property owners with respect to PACE assessments, and requires the local government to disclose to the participating property owner the costs and risk associated with participating in the PACE program.
Prescribes requirements for: (1) non-residential properties; and (2) qualifying PACE improvements, qualifying contractors, and financing terms for residential properties.
Limits the total amount of PACE assessments for a property to 10% of its estimated value. Requires the property owner to have equity in the property of at least 15%.
People & committees
Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-5] · D–CA
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.4285 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.4285 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.4285 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.4285 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.