- Not enactedThe President has not signed this bill
- The senate has not voted
- The house has not voted
Committee on AgricultureCommodity Exchanges, Energy, and CreditCommittee on Education and LaborCommittee on Financial ServicesCommittee on the BudgetCommittee on Oversight and ReformCommittee on RulesCommittee on the JudiciaryAntitrust, Commercial and Administrative LawCommittee on Transportation and InfrastructureEconomic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency ManagementCommittee on Ways and MeansIntroducedSeptember 9th, 2016
- house Committees
Bill DetailsOfficial information provided by the Congressional Research Service. Learn more or make a suggestion.
The Congressional Research Service writes summaries for most legislation. These summaries are listed here. Countable will update some legislation with a revised summary, title or other key elements.
Financial CHOICE Act of 2016
To create hope and opportunity for consumers, investors, and entrepreneurs by ending bailouts and Too Big to Fail, holding Washington and Wall Street accountable, eliminating red tape to increase access to capital and credit, and repealing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that make America less prosperous, less stable, and less free, and for other purposes.
Financial CHOICE Act of 2016 This bill amends the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, among other Acts, to: repeal the "Volcker Rule" (which restricts banks from making certain speculative investments); with respect to winding down failing banks, eliminate the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's orderly liquidation authority and establish new provisions regarding financial institution bankruptcy; and repeal the "Durbin Amendment" (which limits the fees that may be charged to retailers for debit card processing). Certain banks may exempt themselves from specified regulatory standards if they maintain a certain ratio of capital to total assets and meet other specified requirements. The bill removes the Financial Stability Oversight Council's authority to designate non-bank financial institutions and financial market utilities as "systemically important" (also known as "too big to fail"). Under current law, entities so designated are subject to additional regulatory restrictions. Designations made previously are retroactively repealed. The bill also amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to: restructure the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by replacing its director with a bipartisan commission; subject the commission to the congressional appropriations process, expanded judicial review, and additional congressional oversight; and limit the commission's authority to take action against entities for "abusive" practices. In addition, the bill: modifies provisions related to the Securities and Exchange Commission's managerial structure and enforcement authority; eliminates the Office of Financial Research within the Department of the Treasury; and revises provisions related to capital formation, insurance regulation, civil penalties for securities laws violations, and community financial institutions.
Please, please vote against this bill as a small business owner and South Carolina resident, I am very worried about the negative effects this bill could have on my community and colleagues. The stipulation removing the Durbin amendment is the biggest slap in the face to small business that you could muster. The rule applies to large banks with assets in excess of $10 million dollars. As a small business owner, I absolutely have to accept credit cards to remain convenient and relevant, but if those swipe fees are not regulated to be proportional to the cost of goods sold is tantamount to highway robbery. I own a bookstore and the most expensive item is about $50. If the Durbin amendment--which ensured that swipe fees need to be proportional to the cost of the goods sold-- is done away with there is a real chance that I won't be able to financially sustain my business, which already operates under a razor-thin margin. I don't see who this helps other than the mega-banks who already unsuccessfully sued the Fed over this amendment when it was originally introduced (a decision which was upheld by the Supreme Court, by the way). If congress wants to help foster growth and stimulate the economy, placing increased financial burden that occurs on a daily basis on the backs of small business owners--the people who you all claim are the backbone of the economy--is not the way to do it. It is by turns cruel, hypocritical, and frankly doesn't make sense.