PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 463.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · May 26, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Preserving Access to CRE Capital Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 concerning credit risk retention standards for commercial real estate loans to revise the optional standard that may include retention of the first-loss position by a third-party purchaser that specifically negotiates for the purchase of that first loss position, holds adequate financial resources to back losses, provides due diligence on all individual assets in the pool before issuance of the asset-backed securities, and meets the same standards for risk retention as the federal banking agencies and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) require of the securitizer.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The revised specifications for retention of the first-loss position by a third-party purchaser shall mean the permissible risk retention of the first-loss position by a one or two party third-party purchaser, who may hold the retention obligation in either a senior-subordinate structure or pari passu (where two or more assets, securities, creditors or obligations are equally managed without any display of preference), as long as each party meets the requirements expressed above.
The bill exempts from risk retention requirements the securitization of a single commercial real estate loan or a group of cross-collateralized or cross-defaulted commercial real estate loans that represent the obligation of one or more related borrowers secured by commercial properties under direct or indirect common ownership or control.
The SEC and the federal banking agencies shall jointly maintain specified regulations which exempt qualified commercial real estate loans from risk retention requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 463.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 114-597.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 114-597.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Securities, Insurance, and Investment. Hearings held.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 39 - 18.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Prior to Introduction and Referral.
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: Apr 7, 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.4620 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.4620 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.4620 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.4620 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.