PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 6, 2017
Fair Access to Investment Research Act of 2017
(Sec. 2) This bill directs the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to establish and implement a "safe harbor" for certain investment fund research reports published by brokers and dealers. Such reports shall be deemed not to be "offers" under specified provisions of securities law, even if the broker or dealer participates in the registered offering of the investment fund's securities.
In implementing the safe harbor, the SEC must prohibit a self-regulatory organization from maintaining or enforcing a rule that would prevent a member from: (1) publishing or distributing a covered investment fund research report solely because the member is also participating in a registered offering of the fund, or (2) participating in a registered offering of a covered investment fund solely because the member has published a research report about the fund.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill restricts the SEC from conditioning the safe harbor upon specified requirements.
The safe harbor shall generally not apply to reports about a business development company or a registered closed-end investment company published by a broker or dealer during a specified time frame.
People & committees
Sen. Heller, Dean [R-NV] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 115-66.
Became Public Law No: 115-66.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7547-7548)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7547-7548)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 327.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7547-7549)
Mr. Hill moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S5167-5168)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S5167-5168)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S5166-5168)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 11.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Crapo with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Crapo with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
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: Dec 6, 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.327 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.327 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.327 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.327 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.