PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Securities, Insurance, and Investment. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-94.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 19, 2015
Policyholder Protection Act of 2015
Amends the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to declare that any regulation, order, or other action of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System that requires a bank holding company to provide funds or other assets to a subsidiary depository institution shall not be effective nor enforceable with respect to an entity that is a savings and loan holding company that is also an insurance company, an affiliate of an insured depository institution that is an insurance company, or any other company that is an insurance company and that directly or indirectly controls an insured depository institution if: (1) such funds or assets are to be provided by the entity, and (2) the state insurance authority for the insurance company determines that such an action would have a materially adverse effect on the entity's financial condition.Declares that requiring a bank holding company that is an insurance company or such an entity to serve as a source of financial strength shall be deemed the kind of action of the Board to which this Act applies.
Amends the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, with respect to systemic risk determination and the treatment of insurance companies and their subsidiaries, to authorize the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to stand in the place of the appropriate regulatory agency and file a judicial action to place such companies into orderly rehabilitation under state law if the appropriate regulatory agency has not done so.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the FDIC, when funding the orderly liquidation of an insurance company or its subsidiary, to notify the relevant state insurance authority promptly of its intention to take a lien on the company's assets.
Prohibits the FDIC from taking such a lien if the state insurance authority informs it that doing so would have a materially adverse effect upon the insurance company's policyholders.
People & committees
Sen. Vitter, David [R-LA] · R–LA
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 Subcommittee on Securities, Insurance, and Investment. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-94.
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 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.798 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.798 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.798 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.798 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.