PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9932-9933)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 29, 2009
TARP Recipient Ownership Trust Act of 2009 - Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to delegate to a private entity management authority over troubled assets with respect to any entity assisted under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
Prohibits any expenditure of TARP funds until the Secretary transfers all voting, nonvoting, and common equity in any designated TARP recipient to a limited liability company, to be held and managed in trust on behalf of U.S. taxpayers.
Requires the trustees to liquidate the trust and its assets by December 24, 2011, unless: (1) the trustees report to Congress that liquidation would not maximize profitability of the company and the return on investment to the taxpayer; and (2) Congress enacts into law a joint resolution disapproving the liquidation plan of the Secretary.
People & committees
Sen. Corker, Bob [R-TN] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9932-9933)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.1723 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 S.1723 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 S.1723 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 S.1723 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.