PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-108.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 13, 2017
Taking Account of Institutions with Low Operation Risk Act of 2017 or the TAILOR Act of 2017
This bill requires federal financial regulatory agencies to: (1) in general, tailor a regulatory action so as to limit the regulatory impact and other burdens on the institutions involved, with consideration of the risk profiles and business models of those institutions; and (2) report to Congress on specific actions taken to do so, as well as on other related issues.
The bill's requirements apply not only to future regulatory actions but also to regulations adopted on or after July 21, 2010.
People & committees
Sen. Rounds, Mike [R-SD] · R–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-108.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-82.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-81.
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 11, 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.366 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.366 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.366 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.366 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.