PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 26, 2016
Portfolio Lending and Mortgage Access Act
This bill amends the Truth in Lending Act to create a safe harbor from lawsuit for creditors that are depository institutions for any failure to comply with certain requirements with respect to a residential mortgage loan, and the banking regulators are required to treat such a loan as a qualified mortgage, if the creditor has, since the loan's origination, held it on its balance sheet and all prepayment penalties with respect to the loan comply with specified limitations.
A safe harbor from lawsuit is also created for mortgage originators for steering a consumer to a residential mortgage loan if:
the creditor is a depository institution and has informed the mortgage originator that it intends to hold the loan on its balance sheet for the life of the loan, and the mortgage originator informs the consumer that the creditor intends to do so.
People & committees
Sen. Paul, Rand [R-KY] · R–KY
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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.2995 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.2995 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.2995 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.2995 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.