Skip to main content
CivicGate

HR 2331
Introduced Re-checks Congress.gov for new actions and updates the bill's status, and fills in any sponsors, committees, or related bills that are missing. It does not re-pull sponsors/cosponsors/committees/related — those rarely change — and it skips all work if nothing has changed upstream, so it's cheap to click.

Transparency in CFPB Cost-Benefit Analysis Act

To enhance rulemaking requirements for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

Introduced Mar 25, 2025

Latest action (Mar 25, 2025) Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Issues
Economy & Taxes

Summary

  • Requires the CFPB to include comprehensive cost-benefit analyses in all proposed rules, with both quantitative and qualitative assessments of direct and indirect costs and benefits to regulated entities, small businesses, consumers, and state and local governments.
  • Mandates that CFPB rules must examine whether the regulation is necessary, duplicative with other federal rules, or could be addressed by the private market or state and local authorities instead.
  • Requires the CFPB to identify and analyze reasonable alternatives to any proposed regulation, and justify the regulation if alternatives would produce greater net benefits.
  • Requires the CFPB to consult with the Small Business Administration to minimize costs to small businesses and to assess how regulatory burden will be distributed across different groups.
  • Requires the CFPB to disclose underlying assumptions, identify studies and data used (including whether peer-reviewed), and when feasible, provide probability distributions of regulatory outcomes.

AI-generated plain-language summary of the bill text — neutral, and may be imperfect. See the full text below for the exact wording.

Sponsor (1)

2 cosponsors

Money behind the sponsor

Top reported contributors to Barry Loudermilk’s campaign committee (2024 cycle) — who funds the bill’s sponsor, not a claim about this bill. Data from FEC.

  • Employer not reported $21,050
  • CROY ENGINEERING $6,600
  • CAPITAL ONE $6,600
  • GENERAL WHOLESALE BEER CO $6,600
  • QUEST $6,600

Organizations whose employees gave the most — itemized individual contributions grouped by the donor’s reported employer (FEC Schedule A). Full finance for Barry Loudermilk → · Outside spending →

Actions (2)

  1. Mar 25, 2025 Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. · house
  2. Mar 25, 2025 Introduced in House

Similar bills (6)

Bills with similar text or summary — includes reintroductions across Congresses. Ranked by semantic similarity of the bill text (computed locally); a neutral discovery aid, not a claim the bills are duplicates.

Text versions (1)

  • Introduced in House · Mar 25, 2025

Only one text version is on file, so there’s no earlier version to compare against yet.

Committee action

What happened to this bill in committee — the meetings where it was considered and every recorded vote taken on it.

Meetings where this bill was on the agenda

Full text

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 25, 2025

Mr. Loudermilk (for himself and Mr. Barr) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

A BILL

To enhance rulemaking requirements for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Transparency in CFPB Cost-Benefit Analysis Act”.

SEC. 2. TRANSPARENCY IN COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

Section 1022(b) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5512(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(5) Additional rulemaking requirements.—

“(A) In general.—Each notice of proposed rulemaking issued by the Bureau shall be published in its entirety in the Federal Register and shall include—

“(i) a statement of the need for the proposed regulation;

“(ii) an examination of why the Bureau must undertake the proposed regulation and why the private market, State, local, or tribal authorities cannot adequately address the problem;

“(iii) an examination of whether the proposed regulation is duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible with other Federal regulations and orders;

“(iv) if the proposed regulation is found to be duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible with other Federal regulations and orders, a discussion of—

“(I) why the proposed regulation is justified;

“(II) how the proposed regulation can coexist with the existing regulations; and

“(III) how the Bureau plans to reduce the regulatory burden associated with the duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible proposed regulation;

“(v) a quantitative and qualitative assessment of all anticipated direct and indirect costs and benefits of the proposed regulation, including—

“(I) compliance costs for all regulated entities, including small businesses;

“(II) effects on economic activity, efficiency, competition and capital formation;

“(III) regulatory and administrative costs of implementation; and

“(IV) costs imposed on State, local and tribal entities;

“(vi) an identification of reasonable alternatives to the regulation, including modification of an existing regulation;

“(vii) an analysis of the costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of any alternative identified pursuant to clause

(v);

“(viii) if the Bureau determines the proposed regulation would increase costs for small businesses, then the Bureau shall consult the Office of Advocacy within the Small Business Administration to determine ways to minimize the effect of direct and indirect costs imposed on small businesses by the proposed regulation;

“(ix) if quantified net benefits of the proposed action do not outweigh the quantified net benefits of the alternatives, a justification of the regulation;

“(x) if quantified benefits identified pursuant to clause (iv) do not outweigh the quantified costs of the regulation, a justification of the regulation;

“(xi) an assessment of how the burden imposed by the regulation will be distributed; including whether consumers, or small businesses will be disproportionately burdened; and

“(xii) when feasible, and using appropriate statistical techniques, a probability distribution of the relevant outcomes of the proposed regulation.

“(B) Assumptions and studies used.—With respect to the information required to be included under subparagraph (A), the Bureau will include—

“(i) a discussion of underlying assumptions used as a basis for such information; and

“(ii) a description of any studies or data used in preparing such information, and whether such studies were peer-reviewed.”. <all>

Comments

Comments

Loading comments…