HR-6552-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 456.
Sponsored by Andy Barr (R-KY)
What it does
This bill would require four federal financial regulators — the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) — to each conduct a study on partnerships between their regulated institutions and financial technology (fintech) companies. Within one year of enactment, each agency would submit a report to Congress covering the effects of these partnerships on competition, innovation, consumer protection, and financial product availability, as well as recommending any changes to federal law or agency rules that could improve such partnerships.
Who benefits
Community banks and credit unions seeking technology partnerships to compete with larger institutions. Fintech companies seeking clearer regulatory frameworks for bank partnerships. Consumers in underserved areas who may gain access to new financial products. New banking organizations that may form more easily if regulatory barriers are identified and reduced. Congress, which would receive structured agency analysis to inform future legislation.
Who is hurt
Large incumbent banks that benefit from the current regulatory complexity, which creates barriers to entry for smaller competitors. Consumer advocacy groups concerned that fintech partnerships may introduce new risks without adequate oversight. Agency staff who must absorb the cost of conducting and publishing the studies. Taxpayers who fund the regulatory agencies' operations, though the cost is likely modest.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that bank-fintech partnerships have the potential to expand access to financial services in communities underserved by traditional banking, and that outdated or unclear regulations are a key barrier to forming these partnerships. They contend that a coordinated, evidence-based study by all four major regulators would give Congress the factual foundation needed to modernize banking law — a low-cost, low-risk step that could unlock significant economic benefits for community banks and credit unions struggling to compete with large financial institutions.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill is a precursor to deregulation that could expose consumers and the financial system to the risks already demonstrated by fintech-bank partnerships, such as the 2024 Synapse Financial collapse that left thousands of customers unable to access their funds. They contend that the agencies already have the authority and information to act on these issues without a mandated study, and that framing the inquiry around how to "promote" partnerships — rather than neutrally assess them — signals a predetermined conclusion that may shortchange consumer protection concerns.
Constitutional context
This bill directs federal agencies to conduct studies and report to Congress, which falls squarely within Congress's authority to oversee executive branch agencies and regulate financial institutions under the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3). No significant constitutional tension is raised, as the bill does not delegate broad rulemaking authority or impose new regulations.
Checks and balances
Congress gains informational leverage over financial regulators by mandating study findings and recommendations; the Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, and NCUA retain discretion over how they conduct the studies and what conclusions they reach, and Congress retains authority over any subsequent legislative action.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously directed financial regulators to conduct studies and report findings as precursors to legislation, including the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, which mandated dozens of agency studies on financial products and market practices.