PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Feb 25, 2026
Regulatory Efficiency, Verification, Itemization, and Enhanced Workflow Act of 2025 or the REVIEW Act of 2025
This bill increases the frequency and expands the scope of regulatory reviews conducted by federal financial agencies.
Currently, these regulatory reviews must occur every 10 years to identify outdated or unnecessary regulations imposed on insured depository institutions. The bill increases this frequency to every 7 years.
Additionally, the bill expands these reviews to include an internal review of the cumulative impacts of regulations, including an assessment regarding (1) access to financial products and services, (2) credit availability and market liquidity, and (3) costs and benefits of regulations with respect to financial safety and soundness and overall economic activity.
The bill also codifies the National Credit Union Administration’s inclusion in this review process.
People & committees
Rep. Timmons, William R. [R-SC-4] · R–SC
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. 452.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-527.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-527.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 23.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
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: Sep 19, 2026. 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.6544 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.6544 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.6544 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.6544 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.