Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Quality Control Standards for Automated Valuation Models".

Bill Number: H.J.Res. 51
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Finance and Financial Sector
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Last Updated: 2026-04-06T21:20:36Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 51) aims to block a new regulation from the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB), a federal agency that oversees consumer financial products. Specifically, it disapproves a rule setting standards for automated valuation models (AVMs), which are computer-based tools used to estimate real estate property values, often for mortgage lending or appraisals.

Key Provisions

Disapproval of the Rule: The resolution formally rejects the CFPB's rule titled "Quality Control Standards for Automated Valuation Models," published in the Federal Register on August 7, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 64538).
Nullification: If passed, the rule would have no legal force or effect, preventing it from being implemented.

This action is authorized under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a law that allows Congress to review and overturn certain federal agency rules within a set timeframe.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

The resolution does not amend existing laws but overrides a new agency rule before it can take effect.
Without this disapproval, the CFPB rule would introduce mandatory quality controls for AVMs, such as requirements for accuracy, transparency, and bias prevention in property valuations used by lenders.
By blocking it, the resolution maintains the current regulatory landscape, where no such federal standards exist specifically for AVMs, though general fair lending laws still apply.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: The CFPB would be unable to enforce the rule, potentially limiting its authority to regulate emerging technologies in consumer finance. This could encourage or deter similar future rulemaking by the agency.
On Citizens: Homebuyers, mortgage applicants, and real estate consumers might face continued risks from inaccurate or biased AVMs in loan decisions, without the added protections the rule intended (e.g., against discriminatory valuations). However, it avoids new compliance burdens that could indirectly raise lending costs.
On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the rule focuses on domestic financial practices.
Broader Economy: Financial institutions could continue using AVMs without new federal oversight, potentially speeding up lending processes but increasing vulnerability to errors in property assessments.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Financial Institutions and Lenders: Banks, mortgage companies, and appraisal firms that rely on AVMs for quick property valuations would avoid new compliance costs and requirements.
Consumers and Borrowers: Individuals seeking home loans or refinancing, who could benefit from fairer valuations but might now lack standardized protections against flawed AVM outputs.
CFPB and Regulators: The agency loses a tool to promote equity in housing finance; other regulators (e.g., Federal Reserve) might need to address gaps.
Real Estate Industry: Appraisers and tech providers of AVMs gain flexibility but face ongoing scrutiny under existing anti-discrimination laws.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Invokes the CRA, a streamlined process for Congress to veto agency actions without full debate, reinforcing Congress's oversight role over the executive branch. If enacted, it would set a precedent for challenging tech-focused financial rules.
Constitutional: Aligns with separation of powers by allowing legislative check on administrative rulemaking, but critics might argue it undermines agency expertise in protecting consumers.
Political: Introduced by Rep. Clyde (R-GA) and referred to the House Financial Services Committee, this reflects partisan divides on regulation—often favoring less oversight from Democrats (who back CFPB initiatives) versus deregulation from Republicans. Passage requires simple majorities in both chambers and presidential approval (or veto override), making it a tool in ongoing debates over consumer protection versus business burdens.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Clyde, Andrew S. [R-GA-9]

Recent Actions

2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
2025-02-12: Introduced in House
2025-02-12: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Quality Control Standards for Automated Valuation Models". — issued 2025-02-12 — PDF (2 pages)