A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions".

Bill Number: S.J.Res. 18
Origin Chamber: Senate
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Finance and Financial Sector
Status: Became Law
Became Law: Public Law 119-10
Latest Action: 2025-05-09: Became Public Law No: 119-10.
Last Updated: 2026-02-25T09:06:18Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) aims to block a new federal rule issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB), an agency that oversees consumer financial products. The rule, titled "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions," was published in the Federal Register on December 30, 2024. By disapproving the rule, Congress prevents it from taking effect, maintaining the status quo for how large banks handle overdraft fees and loans.

Key Provisions

The resolution explicitly disapproves the CFPB's final rule on overdraft lending practices for very large financial institutions (those with over $10 billion in assets).
Once enacted, the rule is declared to have "no force or effect," meaning it cannot be implemented or enforced.
This action is taken under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a law allowing Congress to review and overturn recent agency regulations with a simple majority vote and the president's signature.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

The resolution does not create new laws but nullifies the CFPB's rule, which sought to treat certain overdraft services as credit products under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). This would have required large banks to provide clearer disclosures, limit fees, and offer opt-in options for overdrafts.
By blocking the rule, it preserves current overdraft practices, avoiding stricter regulations that the CFPB intended to impose starting in 2025.

Potential Impacts

On government agencies: Limits the CFPB's ability to regulate overdraft lending, potentially reducing its influence over consumer protections in banking. It reinforces Congress's oversight role over executive branch agencies.
On citizens: Bank customers, especially those who rely on overdrafts, may continue facing higher or less transparent fees without the rule's proposed safeguards, such as easier opt-out options or caps on fees treated as loans.
On international relations: No direct impact, as this is a domestic financial regulation issue.
Overall, it could lead to ongoing debates about consumer protection versus bank flexibility in fee structures.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Large financial institutions: Banks with assets over $10 billion benefit by avoiding new compliance costs and restrictions on overdraft revenue, which generates billions annually.
Consumers: Everyday bank users, particularly lower-income individuals who incur overdraft fees, lose potential protections against unexpected charges.
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB): Faces a setback in its regulatory agenda, highlighting limits on agency rulemaking power.
Congress and lawmakers: Gains a tool to influence financial policy without passing comprehensive legislation.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Invokes the CRA (passed in 1996), which allows Congress to veto agency rules within 60 legislative days of submission. If signed into law, the rule cannot be reissued without new statutory authority, preventing the CFPB from easily reviving it.
Constitutional: Balances separation of powers by checking executive agency actions through legislative disapproval, upholding Congress's role in lawmaking as per Article I of the U.S. Constitution.
Political: Signals partisan divides on financial regulation; disapproval often aligns with efforts to reduce regulatory burdens on businesses. It may encourage similar challenges to other CFPB rules, influencing future banking policy debates without broader legislative reform.

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

Sponsor

Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC]

Cosponsors (16)

Sen. Rounds, Mike [R-SD], Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN], Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID], Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC], Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND], Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL], Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS], Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID], Sen. Boozman, John [R-AR], Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS], Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY], Sen. Ricketts, Pete [R-NE], Sen. Moreno, Bernie [R-OH], Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT], Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT], Sen. Thune, John [R-SD]

Recent Actions

2025-05-09: Became Public Law No: 119-10.
2025-05-09: Became Public Law No: 119-10.
2025-05-09: Signed by President.
2025-05-09: Signed by President.
2025-05-05: Presented to President.
2025-05-05: Presented to President.
2025-04-09: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
2025-04-09: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 211 (Roll no. 96). (text: CR H1519) (Roll call 96)
2025-04-09: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 211 (Roll no. 96). (text: CR H1519: 1) (Roll call 96)
2025-04-09: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1533)
2025-04-09: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on S.J. Res. 18, the Chair put the question on passage of the joint resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Hill (AR) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
2025-04-09: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
2025-04-09: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on S.J. Res. 18.
2025-04-09: Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 18, S.J. Res. 28, H.R. 1526 and H.R. 22. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28.
2025-04-09: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 294. (consideration: CR H1519-1525)

Bill Versions

Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions. — issued 2025-04-11 — PDF (1 pages)
Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions. — issued 2025-03-27 — PDF (2 pages)
Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions. — issued 2025-02-13 — PDF (1 pages)
Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions. — issued 2025-03-26 — PDF (4 pages)