Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 15, 2011
Debit Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011 - Amends the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to extend from 9 months after the date of enactment of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to 24 months after the date of enactment of this Act the rulemaking timelines and effective dates for the proposed debit interchange (swipe) rule of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) that is required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
Declares void and without legal effect any regulation proposed or prescribed by the Board pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act before the date that is 6 months after completion of the study required by this Act.
Directs specified banking regulatory agencies (study agencies) to study jointly and report to certain congressional committees regarding the impact of regulating debit interchange transaction (swipe) fees and related issues under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. Prescribes study contents including the costs and benefits of electronic debit card transactions (EDTs) and alternative forms of payment, including cash, check, and automated clearing house (ACH) for consumers, merchants, issuers, and debit card networks.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.575 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.575 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.575 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.575 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.