HR-5402-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 688.
Sponsored by Young Kim (R-CA)
What it does
This bill would amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to explicitly permit landlords, utility companies, telecommunications providers, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to report consumers' full payment histories — both positive and negative — to credit reporting agencies. Consumers would have the right to opt out of this reporting in writing. Energy utility firms would be prohibited from reporting a balance as late if the consumer is actively meeting the terms of a payment plan. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to study the impact of this reporting on consumers and credit scores within two years of enactment.
Who benefits
Consumers with limited or no traditional credit history ("credit invisible" individuals) who pay rent and utilities on time — estimated at 45–50 million Americans — who could build or improve credit scores through this reporting. First-time borrowers, younger adults, recent immigrants, and lower-income renters who rely on non-traditional payment relationships. Landlords and utility companies that gain a legal safe harbor for reporting this data. Credit bureaus and fintech companies that use alternative data. Consumers on energy payment plans who are shielded from late-payment marks while meeting plan obligations.
Who is hurt
Consumers who have poor rent or utility payment histories, who could see their credit scores decline if this data is reported. Renters who are unaware of the opt-out right and do not exercise it in time. Low-income consumers who may have irregular payment histories due to financial instability, potentially making credit access harder. Privacy advocates concerned about expanded data sharing. Consumers in states with stronger existing credit reporting protections, whose state-law rights could be preempted by the "notwithstanding any other provision of law" language in the bill.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the current credit system systematically excludes tens of millions of Americans who reliably pay rent and utilities but have no credit cards or loans to demonstrate creditworthiness. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has estimated that roughly 45 million Americans are "credit invisible" or have unscorable files, and that alternative data like rent payments can meaningfully improve their scores. They contend that allowing full-file reporting — including positive payment history — gives these consumers a pathway to mortgages, car loans, and lower interest rates that the existing system denies them.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that permitting broad reporting of rent and utility data could harm the very consumers the bill aims to help, since low-income renters are more likely to have missed or late payments that would damage their credit scores. They contend that the opt-out structure — rather than an opt-in — places the burden on financially vulnerable consumers who may not know to exercise their rights, and that the "notwithstanding any other provision of law" clause could override stronger state-level consumer protections. Critics also note that without standardized data quality requirements, inconsistent or erroneous reporting by landlords could be difficult for consumers to dispute.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority to regulate credit reporting under the Commerce Clause, as credit markets are quintessentially interstate commercial activity well within the scope established by Wickard v. Filburn (1942). The bill's "notwithstanding any other provision of law" preemption language could raise Tenth Amendment questions about whether it displaces state consumer protection laws, though federal preemption of state credit reporting rules is well-established under the existing Fair Credit Reporting Act framework.
Checks and balances
Congress expands the authority of private furnishers and HUD to report data to credit bureaus; the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau retains rulemaking and enforcement authority; the GAO study requirement provides a congressional oversight mechanism; and courts retain jurisdiction over consumer disputes under the Fair Credit Reporting Act's existing private right of action.
Historical precedent
Earlier versions of the Credit Access and Inclusion Act were introduced in the 114th, 115th, and 116th Congresses but were not enacted; the Experian RentBureau and similar private programs have voluntarily reported rent data for years, providing some real-world data on the effects of alternative credit reporting.