Bill · H.J.Res. 64· House(119-HJRES-64)
Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications".
- Introduced
- 2/27/2025
- Last activity
- 2/27/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- Sponsored by
- Mike Flood
- Cosponsors
- - 7 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This is a joint resolution introduced in the 119th Congress. It aims to disapprove a final rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule in question is titled ``Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications''. If passed, this resolution would ensure that the rule has no force or effect.
Yes
Would high-income households be better off under this?+2
The disapproval of the rule may benefit large financial institutions and high-income stakeholders by reducing regulatory compliance burdens.
Would business owners be better off under this?+2
The resolution prevents new regulatory definitions that would apply to large participants in the digital payment market.
The opposite
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?-3
The resolution prevents the implementation of a rule intended to define and regulate larger participants in digital payment markets, which could reduce consumer protections.
Does this give the federal government more power?-2
By disapproving the rule, the resolution reduces the regulatory authority and power of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Nullification of the Bureau's Rule: By disapproving the final rule, the resolution would prevent the rule from having any force or effect. This would stop the implementation of the Bureau's definition regarding ``Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications'' (Resolution Text).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly stated: The provided text does not contain information regarding any potential negative consequences or burdens that would result from this resolution.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners+2Good For High Income Households+2
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Consumer Protection-3
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power-2
- 3/26/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/5/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 2/27/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Andy BarrRepublican · Kentucky
Troy DowningRepublican · Montana
Young KimRepublican · California
Barry LoudermilkRepublican · Georgia
Daniel MeuserRepublican · Pennsylvania
Tim MooreRepublican · North Carolina
Bryan SteilRepublican · Wisconsin