PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jul 26, 2022
Timely Delivery of Bank Secrecy Act Reports Act
This bill requires the Department of the Treasury to provide Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reports to a congressional committee or subcommittee not later than 30 days after a request. Under the BSA, financial institutions must keep records of certain transactions and report suspicious activity indicative of money laundering or other criminal activity.
Additionally, when subpoenaed, a financial institution must provide such reports to a congressional committee or subcommittee.
People & committees
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 349 - 70 (Roll no. 393). (text: CR H7126)
House roll call 393 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 349 - 70 (Roll no. 393).(text: CR H7126)
House roll call 393 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7146)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 7734.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7126-7127)
Ms. Waters moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 331.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 117-425.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 117-425.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Voice Vote.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: May 28, 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.7734 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.7734 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.7734 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.7734 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.