PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.6072 / 109th Congress

Financial Services Regulatory Relief Amendments Act of 2006

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

Official summary

Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 27, 2006

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)

Financial Services Regulatory Relief Amendments Act of 2006 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act regarding depository institutions lacking federal deposit insurance to authorize the state supervisor of a private deposit insurer, or of a depository institution which receives deposits insured by a private deposit insurer, to examine and enforce compliance with the requirement that a private deposit insurer obtain annual independent audits.

Requires depository institutions without federal deposit insurance to disclose on every share certificate that: (1) the institution is not federally insured; and (2) if it fails, the federal government does not guarantee that depositors will get back their money.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Revises the requirement that such institutions disclose conspicuously in all advertising and at each place where deposits are normally received that the institution is not federally insured. Requires such a notice also on the institution's main Internet page. Makes an exception to such requirement for: (1) statements or reports of financial condition required to be published or posted by state or federal law or regulation; (2) any sign, document, or other item containing the institution's name, logo, or contact information, if no products, services, or other promotional information is included; and (3) small utilitarian items that do not mention deposit products or insurance if inclusion of the notice would be impractical.

Requires the institution to obtain or attempt to obtain a written acknowledgment of such disclosure from new depositors acquired through a conversion or merger.

Repeals the prohibition against use of the mails to receive deposits by any depository institution lacking federal deposit insurance unless a state supervisor determines that it meets all requirements for federal deposit insurance.

Repeals coverage as a depository institution under the Act of any entity that, as determined by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), is engaged in the business of receiving deposits, and could reasonably be mistaken for a depository institution by its current or prospective customers.

Redefines "depository institution" to exclude any national bank, state member bank, or federal branch.

Modifies FTC authority to enforce compliance with the requirements of the Act for depository institutions lacking federal deposit insurance. Removes independent audit requirements enforcement from FTC authority, while retaining enforcement of disclosure requirements. Authorizes an appropriate state supervisor of such institutions to enforce compliance with federal requirements, unless the FTC has already instituted an enforcement action.

(Sec. 3) Imposes on certain other lenders the maximum interest rate or related charges for debt applicable to home state banks in competition with local branches of out-of-state banks.

Defines other lender as any person engaged in the business of selling or financing the sale of personal property (and any incidental services) in a state. Excludes an insured depository institution from other-lender treatment, as well as any person or entity engaged in the business of providing a short-term cash advance to any consumer in exchange for: (1) a consumer's personal check or share draft, in the amount of the advance plus a fee, where presentment or negotiation of such check or share draft is deferred by agreement of the parties until a designated future date; or (2) a consumer authorization to debit the consumer's transaction account, in the amount of the advance plus a fee, where such account will be debited on or after a designated future date.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Ross, Mike [D-AR-4] · D–AR

Committees

  • Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee
  • Financial Services Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

  2. Received in the Senate.

  3. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  4. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7604-7605)

  5. Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7604-7605)

  6. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6072.

  7. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7604-7605)

  8. Mr. McHenry moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.

  9. Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

  10. Introduced in House

  11. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

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.6072 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.6072 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.6072 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.6072 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.

View full prompt & sources