Community Bank Regulatory Tailoring Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/7056
Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]

ID: B001282

Follow the money

The bill

Community Bank Regulatory Tailoring Act

HR. 7056, 119th Congress — read as touching Commercial Banks.

The sponsor

Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$92,054 raised

22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "22" section, p. 724-726 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 480.

March 18, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

The Community Bank Regulatory Tailoring Act (HR 7056). Because what the world really needs is more banking deregulation, am I right? Let's get down to business and dissect this legislative abomination.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The bill's primary objective is to "tailor" regulations for community banks, which is code for "let's loosen the reins on these poor, struggling institutions so they can make more money." The sponsors of this bill want you to believe that it's all about helping small banks compete with the big boys. But let's be real, folks; this is just a thinly veiled attempt to roll back post-2008 financial reforms and give banks more freedom to engage in reckless behavior.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes numerous changes to existing laws, including:

* Increasing thresholds for bank holding companies, community reinvestment, and depository institution management interlocks. * Amending the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to raise the asset threshold for systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) from $50 billion to $105 billion. * Modifying the Federal Credit Union Act to increase the threshold for credit unions to be considered "well-capitalized" from $10 million to $34 million.

These changes are designed to reduce regulatory burdens on community banks, but in reality, they'll just make it easier for them to engage in riskier behavior and accumulate more debt.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

* Community banks: They're the supposed beneficiaries of this bill, but let's not forget that they've been lobbying for deregulation for years. * Large banks: They'll also benefit from these changes, as they can now engage in even riskier behavior without fear of regulatory reprisal. * Consumers: You know, the ones who will ultimately bear the brunt of this bill's consequences. They'll be left to deal with the fallout when these banks inevitably fail or engage in predatory practices.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is staggering:

* Increased risk-taking by community banks, leading to a higher likelihood of failures and bailouts. * Reduced regulatory oversight, making it easier for banks to engage in shady practices and accumulate toxic assets. * A greater concentration of power among large banks, which will only exacerbate the too-big-to-fail problem.

In short, this bill is a recipe for disaster. It's a classic case of "we didn't learn anything from 2008," and it'll only serve to enrich bank executives at the expense of ordinary Americans. But hey, who needs financial stability when you can have more profits?

Related Topics

Banking & Financial Services
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$92,054
21 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$1,300
Committees
$0
Individuals
$90,754

No PAC contributions found

1
TED J. BALESTRERI ENTERPRISES
1 transaction
$1,000
2
QUEENSLAKE
1 transaction
$300

No committee contributions found

1
BOUCHER, DAWN D
2 transactions
$6,800
2
VESTER, NANCY
1 transaction
$6,600
3
KOLLAR, CLINT WILLIAM
1 transaction
$6,600
4
FIELD, CHESTER JACK
1 transaction
$6,600
5
FISHER, KENNETH
1 transaction
$6,600
6
FISHER, SHERRILYN
1 transaction
$6,600
7
BROWN, CHRIS
1 transaction
$5,600
8
DARWISH, SAM
1 transaction
$5,000
9
CORRELL, JESS T.
1 transaction
$5,000
10
JOHNSON, TRAVIS
1 transaction
$5,000
11
BARKER, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,409
12
KAUDER, JOSEPH
1 transaction
$3,409
13
LEVINE, ALLAN
1 transaction
$3,409
14
LINDSAY, OLIVIA
1 transaction
$3,409
15
SCHWIMMER, STEVEN
1 transaction
$3,409
16
WOLFF, JARED
1 transaction
$3,409
17
ATKINS, RANDALL
1 transaction
$3,300
18
BARON, CHRIS
1 transaction
$3,300
19
BAUGUESS, SCOTT
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]

ID: G000583

Top Contributors

29

1
AMERICAN EXPRESS
OrganizationNEWARK, NJ
$22,941
Apr 12, 2024
2
AMERICAN EXPRESS
OrganizationNEWARK, NJ
$10,621
May 10, 2024
3
PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING
OrganizationTAMPA, FL
$6,337
May 15, 2024
4
PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING
OrganizationTAMPA, FL
$6,337
Apr 15, 2024
5
PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING
OrganizationTAMPA, FL
$6,337
Apr 30, 2024
6
PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING
OrganizationTAMPA, FL
$5,751
Apr 1, 2024
7
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
8
SEKAS LAW GROUP LLC
OrganizationENGLEWOOD CLIFFS, NJ
$1,500
Apr 12, 2024
9
SANDOR F. GENET & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
OrganizationNORTH MIAMI BEACH, FL
$250
Apr 12, 2024
10
FIRESTONE MILKEN, SARAH
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA
$13,200
Jul 2, 2024

Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]

ID: M001204

Top Contributors

22

1
PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS CORP
OrganizationDURYEA, PA
$2,500
Sep 18, 2024
2
COTLER, YUDACUFSKI, HUEBNER
OrganizationSAINT CLAIR, PA
$1,000
Apr 23, 2024
3
DOWD, JOHN J
SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT
IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA
$6,600
Mar 25, 2024
4
PEYKOFF, ANDY
NIAGARA BOTTLING, LLC • CEO
IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV
$6,600
Mar 22, 2024
5
DOWD, JOHN J
SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT
IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA
$6,600
Sep 18, 2024
6
ROWAN, MARC J
APOLLO MANAGEMENT • MANAGEMENT
IndividualGREENWICH, CT
$6,600
Aug 23, 2023
7
ROWAN, CAROLYN
CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION • OWNER
IndividualGREENWICH, CT
$6,600
Aug 23, 2023
8
RICH, BRIAN R MR. JR
GILBERTON COAL CO. • EXECUTIVE SALES
IndividualCONSHOHOCKEN, PA
$6,600
Oct 24, 2024
9
VOLPE, ELLEN M
SELF • HOMEMAKER
IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA
$5,800
May 31, 2023
10
VOLPE, CHARLES J
EXCALIBUR INSURANCE MGMT • PRESIDENT
IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA
$5,800
May 31, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 48 nodes and 48 connections

Total contributions: $48

Top Donors - Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.

  • +Commercial Banksconfidence 0.95

    Section 2 adjusts thresholds upward for various banking statutes (Bank Holding Company Act, Community Reinvestment Act, Dodd-Frank, etc.), raising asset-size limits that trigger regulatory requirements, thereby reducing regulatory burden on banks, especially community and mid-sized banks.

  • Section 2(d)(1)(A) raises the threshold in Dodd-Frank section 210(o) from $50B to $105B for 'systemically important' financial institution designations, which reduces the number of large investment banks subject to enhanced prudential standards and resolution planning, benefiting them.

  • +Real Estateconfidence 0.80

    Section 2(l) increases the threshold in RESPA from $1M to $19M for certain disclosure exemptions, reducing compliance burden on smaller real estate settlement service providers and potentially benefiting real estate developers and agents involved in smaller transactions.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

  • from 27 contributions
    • SCHARF, CHARLIE$3,300
    • DIMON, JAMES$3,300
    • LEOPOLD, ROBIN$3,300
    • OESTERLE, MARK$2,500
    • MAGUIRE, MICHAEL$2,500
  • from 9 contributions
    • ZALIK, DAVID$6,600
    • KUSHEL, RICHARD$3,300
    • BANTWAL, VIVEK$2,000
    • BARRY, JONATHAN$2,000
    • GLOVER, JOHN LITTLETON III$1,000
  • from 1 contribution
    • ROGERS, GEORGE$1,500

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

22

Strong
Vector: 61%
Pages: 724-726AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly reduces regulatory thresholds and compliance burdens for community banks, aligning with the Treasury's goal to lessen regulatory impediments and compliance costs to foster economic growth."

Key themes:regulatory reliefcompliance cost reductioneconomic growth promotionfinancial regulation reform

— 691 — 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American people’s due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administration’s Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries;

Financial Regulatory Agencies

Moderate
Vector: 61%
Pages: 872-874AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 policy seek to reduce regulatory burdens on financial institutions, particularly community banks, and to roll back certain Dodd‑Frank provisions. However, the bill does not address the CFPB abolition or specific Project 2025 measures targeting the Bureau’s structure and funding."

Key themes:regulatory reliefDodd‑Frank reformcommunity bank burden reductionfinancial deregulationsmall‑business lending

— 839 — Financial Regulatory Agencies On February 27, 2023, the Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari.51 The Court should issue its final decision by 2024. The CFPB is a highly politicized, damaging, and utterly unaccountable federal agency.52 It is unconstitutional. Congress should abolish the CFPB and reverse Dodd–Frank Section 1061, thus returning the consumer protection function of the CFPB to banking regulators53 and the Federal Trade Commission. Provided the Supreme Court affirms the Fifth Circuit holding in Community Financial Ser- vices Association of America, the next conservative President should order the immediate dissolution of the agency—pull down its prior rules, regulations and guidance, return its staff to their prior agencies and its building to the General Services Administration. Until this can be accomplished, however, Congress should: l Ensure that any civil penalty funds not used to recompense wronged consumers go to the Department of the Treasury. The funds should not be retained by the Bureau to be dispensed at the pleasure of the Director— potentially to political actors. Moreover, the CFPB should not have a financial incentive to impose penalties. l Repeal Dodd–Frank Section 1071. This section, which relates to small- business data collection, imposes requirements on financial institutions’ lending to small firms, raises costs, and limits small businesses’ access to capital.54 l Require that no CFPB funds are spent on enforcement actions that are not based on a rulemaking that complies with the Administrative Procedure Act.55 l Require that respondents in administrative actions be allowed to elect whether an adjudication occurs in an administrative law court or an ordinary Article III federal court.56 l Specify the nature of “deceptive, unfair, and abusive” practices to define the scope of the CFPB mission more precisely. — 840 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. H.R. 5480, Securities Act of 1933, Public Law No. 73-22, 73rd Congress, May 27, 1933, https://govtrackus. s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/48/STATUTE-48-Pg74.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 2. H.R. 9323, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Public Law No. 73-291, 73rd Congress, June 6, 1934, https:// govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/48/STATUTE-48-Pg881a.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 3. Mark T. Uyeda, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “Remarks at the 2022 Cato Summit on Financial Regulation,” November 17, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/uyeda-remarks- cato-summit-financial-regulation-111722 (accessed February 20, 2023); Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “It’s Not Just Scope 3: Remarks at the American Enterprise Institute,” December 7, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/peirce-remarks-american-enterprise-institute-120722 (accessed February 20, 2023); comment letter from David R. Burton to Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, “Re: The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors [File No. S7-10-2; Release No. 33-11042; RIN 3235-AM87],” June 17, 2022, https://www. sec.gov/comments/s7-10-22/s71022-20131980-302443.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 4. Size would probably be measured best by public float or the number of beneficial owners. 5. See David R. Burton, “Securities Disclosure Reform,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3178, February 13, 2017, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/BG3178.pdf; David R. Burton, “Offering and Disclosure Reform,” Chapter 11 in Reframing Financial Regulation: Enhancing Stability and Protecting Consumers, ed. Hester Peirce and Benjamin Klutsey (Arlington, VA: Mercatus Center at George Mason University, 2016), pp. 277–315, https://www.mercatus.org/research/books/reframing-financial-regulation (accessed February 20, 2023); Andrew N. Vollmer, “Investor-Friendly Securities Reform to Increase Economic Growth,” Securities Regulation & Law Report, Bloomberg BNA, Vol. 49, June 5, 2017. 6. See, for example, David R. Burton, “Reforming the Securities and Exchange Commission,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3378, January 30, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/ BG3378.pdf; Andrew N. Vollmer, “Testimony on Workforce Management Disclosures and Other SEC Issues,” submitted to the Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets, Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, December 6, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/ meeting/house/115227/witnesses/HHRG-117-BA16-Wstate-VollmerA-20221208.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Reforming FINRA,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3181, February 1, 2017, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/BG3181.pdf; Hester Peirce, “The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority: Not Self-Regulation After All,” Mercatus Center at George Mason University Working Paper, January 2015, https://www.mercatus.org/research/working-papers/financial-industry-regulatory- authority-not-self-regulation-after-all (accessed February 20, 2023); Thaya Brook Knight, “Transparency and Accountability at the SEC and at FINRA,” Chapter 11 in Prosperity Unleashed: Smarter Financial Regulation, ed. Norbert J. Michel, (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2017) https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2017-02/11_ProsperityUnleashed_Chapter11.pdf. 7. Reorganization Plan No. 10 of 1950, U.S. Code Title 5—Appendix, Reorganization Plans, http://uscode.house. gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5a-node84-leaf114&num=0&edition=prelim (accessed February 20, 2023). 8. The board or commission should evaluate the regulatory functions of the National Securities Exchanges, Registered Securities Future Product Exchanges, Registered Clearing Agencies (such as the Depository Trust Company (DTC), the National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC) and the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC)), the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) and the National Futures Association (NFA). This board or commission should have a broad composition and permit minority reports. 9. Boyden Gray & Associates, Comments Submitted on Behalf of Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment Concerning the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Adopt Listing Rules Related to Board Diversity, Amendment No. 1, File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-081, April 6, 2021 https://www.sec.gov/ comments/sr-nasdaq-2020-081/srnasdaq2020081-8639478-230941.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Nasdaq’s Proposed Board-Diversity Rule Is Immoral and Has No Basis in Economics,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3591, March 9, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-03/BG3591_0.pdf. The SEC is contemplating at least two rules that can be expected to require differential treatment based on race, sex, ethnicity, and so on. See Executive Office of the President, Office

Federal Reserve

Moderate
Vector: 61%
Pages: 770-772AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reducing regulatory burdens for community banks by adjusting thresholds, which aligns with the Project 2025 goal of easing crony regulatory burdens and encouraging innovation. However, it does not address the broader free‑banking, gold‑standard, or Federal Reserve structural reforms central to the policy."

Key themes:regulatory reliefreducing burden on small bankspromoting economic growthencouraging innovationeasing crony regulatory burdens

— 737 — Federal Reserve by ensuring that cash earns a positive (inflation-adjusted) rate of return, it can pre- vent households and businesses from holding inefficiently small money balances. Further benefits of free banking include dramatic reduction of economic cycles, an end to indirect financing of federal spending, removal of the “lender of last resort” permanent bailout function of central banks, and promotion of currency competition.26 This allows Americans many more ways to protect their savings. Because free banking implies that financial services and banking would be gov- erned by general business laws against, for example, fraud or misrepresentation, crony regulatory burdens that hurt customers would be dramatically eased, and innovation would be encouraged. Potential downsides of free banking stem from its greatest benefit: It has mas- sive political hurdles to clear. Economic theory predicts and economic history confirms that free banking is both stable and productive, but it is radically different from the system we have now. Transitioning to free banking would require polit- ical authorities, including Congress and the President, to coordinate on multiple reforms simultaneously. Getting any of them wrong could imbalance an otherwise functional system. Ironically, it is the very strength of a true free banking system that makes transitioning to one so difficult. Commodity-Backed Money. For most of U.S. history, the dollar was defined in terms of both gold and silver. The problem was that when the legal price differed from the market price, the artificially undervalued currency would disappear from circulation. There were times, for instance, when this mechanism put the U.S. on a de facto silver standard. However, as a result, inflation was limited. Given this track record, restoring a gold standard retains some appeal among monetary reformers who do not wish to go so far as abolishing the Federal Reserve. Both the 2012 and 2016 GOP platforms urged the establishment of a commis- sion to consider the feasibility of a return to the gold standard,27 and in October 2022, Representative Alexander Mooney (R–WV) introduced a bill to restore the gold standard.28 In economic effect, commodity-backing the dollar differs from free banking in that the government (via the Fed) maintains both regulatory and bailout functions. However, manipulation of money and credit is limited because new dollars are not costless to the federal government: They must be backed by some hard asset like gold. Compared to free banking, then, the benefits of commodity-backed money are reduced, but transition disruptions are also smaller. The process of commodity backing is very straightforward: Treasury could set the price of a dollar at today’s market price of $2,000 per ounce of gold. This means that each Federal Reserve note could be redeemed at the Federal Reserve and exchanged for 1/2000 ounce of gold—about $80, for example, for a gold coin the weight of a dime. Private bank liabilities would be redeemable upon their issuers. Banks could send those traded-in dollars to the Treasury for gold to replenish their

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills