PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 15, 2005
Consumer Checking Account Fairness Act - Amends the Expedited Funds Availability Act to direct the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to prescribe regulations to: (1) reduce the expedited funds availability time periods to take into account the time within which any receiving institution can reasonably expect to learn of the nonpayment of most items for each category of checks under the Checking Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21 Act) or its implementing regulations; and (2) eliminate distinctions between the time period schedules if the Board finds that they no longer have any significance for any category of checks under such Act or regulations.
Extends the next business day availability requirement to funds deposited at a proprietary ATM.
Sets a limit upon certain overdraft fees imposed during a check hold period.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires a depository institution to credit all deposits to a consumer checking account before debiting any check drawn on the account and presented for payment.
Requires that Saturday be treated as a business day in the calculation of any period within which funds deposited in an account are required to be made available if the depository institution debits accounts on Saturdays for checks received.
Reduces from four business days to two business days the mandatory check hold period on funds deposited by nonlocal checks.
Prohibits a depository institution from imposing a fee for paying any check drawn on an account which lacks sufficient funds (bounce protection) unless the accountholder has requested check protection service.
Amends the Check 21 Act to provide that if a bank that holds the account of a consumer imposes any fee for producing a copy of a substitute check, the expedited recredit process shall be available for all charges initiated by check against the account regardless of whether a substitute check was involved or provided to the consumer.
People & committees
Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-14] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E232-233)
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 15, 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.799 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.799 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.799 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.799 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.