PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jan 30, 2018
Financial Institution Living Will Improvement Act of 2017
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to establish the frequency with which certain nonbank financial companies and bank holding companies shall be required to submit a "living will" (i.e., the company's plan for rapid and orderly resolution in the event of financial distress or failure) to the Federal Reserve Board (FRB), the Financial Stability Oversight Council, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Specifically, such companies shall be required to do so once every two years. (Current regulations generally require annual submission of plans.)
The FRB and the FDIC must provide feedback to a company regarding such a plan within six months.
People & committees
Rep. Zeldin, Lee M. [R-NY-1] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0 (Roll no. 50).
House roll call 50 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0 (Roll no. 50).
House roll call 50 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H725)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4292.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H650-652; text: CR H650-651)
Mr. Tipton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 345.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 115-465.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 115-465.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 60 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.4292 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.4292 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.4292 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.4292 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.