PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 2008
Loan Shark Prevention Act - Amends the Truth in Lending Act to limit: (1) the annual percentage rate (APR) applicable to any extension of credit to a maximum of 8 percentage points above the interest rate on tax underpayments established under the Internal Revenue Code; and (2) the amount of any fee or charge that a creditor may impose, under the terms of a credit transaction, to $15.
Declares that, in the case of any credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan, no fee (including any annual fee, late payment fee, or over-the-limit fee) may be imposed on such account until 30 days after the obligor receives a specific notice of the imposition of such fee.
Requires such a notice to explain how, when, and why a fee will be imposed and what options the obligor may have for addressing the fee or any reason for it, including the prevention of any future imposition of such fee.
People & committees
Rep. Tierney, John F. [D-MA-6] · D–MA
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 14, 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.6977 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.6977 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.6977 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.6977 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.