This bill eliminates and reduces certain requirements applicable to new depository institutions, certain rural community depository institutions, and federal savings associations.
Federal banking agencies must issue rules allowing a new depository institution or depository institution holding company three years to meet capital requirements. During this period, a depository institution or its depository institution holding company may request to deviate from an approved business plan, and the appropriate agency has 30 days to approve or deny the request.
In addition, the community bank leverage ratio—a way of evaluating debt levels—is reduced for new rural community depository institutions. Specifically, new rural community depository institutions must have a ratio of 8%, with a three-year phase-in of the rate. After this period, the ratio rises to its current level of 9%.
Finally, the bill removes certain restrictions to allow federal savings associations to invest in, sell, or otherwise deal in agricultural loans.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.478 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.478 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.478 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.478 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.