PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 26, 2016
Traditional Banking Regulatory Relief Act of 2015
This bill amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) to prescribe capital requirements for traditional banking organizations (TBOs) at a minimum simple leverage ratio of no less than 10%.
A TBO is any bank holding company, savings and loan holding company, bank, or savings association that individually (and when including its parent, subsidiaries, and affiliates) meets the following criteria:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
has zero trading assets and zero trading liabilities,
does not engage in swaps or security-based swaps other than those referencing interest rates or foreign exchange swaps, and
has a total gross notional exposure of swaps and security-based swaps of not more than $3 billion.
"Simple leverage ratio" means:
total equity less goodwill and deferred tax assets, divided by
total assets less goodwill and deferred tax assets, as measured by generally accepted accounting principles.
A TBO meeting this minimum simple leverage ratio may notify the federal banking agencies to maintain it as the sole measure of its capital adequacy. The risk-based capital requirement shall not apply to it.
If the TBO fails to maintain the minimum simple leverage ratio, it shall remain exempt from the risk-based capital requirement for an 18-month grace period.
The bill grants a TBO with a simple leverage ratio of 8% or more a phase-in period of 18 months after enactment of this bill within which to elect to meet the minimum simple leverage ratio as its sole measure of capital adequacy.
The federal banking agencies, with respect to reports of condition, shall permit a reduced reporting requirement for a TBO electing to maintain a simple leverage ratio as its sole measure of capital adequacy.
The 18-month on-site examination cycle shall apply to TBOs (and, as under current law, to insured depository institutions whose assets total less than $1 billion) if the appropriate federal banking agency believes this is consistent with the TBO's safety and soundness.
The bill repeals the authority of federal banking agencies, at their discretion, to increase the maximum asset amount of insured depository institutions for certain purposes.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is amended to exempt TBOs from mandatory annual stress tests.
People & committees
Rep. Perlmutter, Ed [D-CO-7] · D–CO
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.4647 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.4647 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.4647 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.4647 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.