Overview
Title
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Financial Stability Oversight Council related to Guidance on Nonbank Financial Company Determinations.
ELI5 AI
H. J. RES. 120 is like a special letter from lawmakers saying they don't like a new rule about some money businesses. If they agree on this letter, that rule won't happen, and we need to find another way to decide about those businesses.
Summary AI
H. J. RES. 120 is a joint resolution that aims to disapprove a specific rule submitted by the Financial Stability Oversight Council. This rule is about "Guidance on Nonbank Financial Company Determinations" and was published on November 17, 2023. If this resolution is passed, the rule would be nullified and would not go into effect. The resolution was introduced by Mr. Hill and has several additional sponsors.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
House Joint Resolution 120 from the 118th Congress aims to express congressional disapproval of a rule issued by the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). This rule is related to the guidance on determining which nonbank financial companies should be subject to enhanced supervision and regulation. If Congress passes this resolution, the guidance proposed by the FSOC will not be enforceable.
Significant Issues
One major issue with the resolution is its complexity and formal language, which may not be easily understood by the general public, particularly those without legal expertise. Such language barriers might prevent constituents from fully grasping the legislative process and its implications.
Another significant issue is the lack of explanation within the resolution itself regarding why Congress seeks to disapprove the FSOC's rule. This omission can lead to confusion about the motivations behind the legislative move and may cause stakeholders to question its purpose and necessity.
Moreover, the resolution does not offer any alternative guidance or rules to replace the one being disapproved. This lack of replacement could leave a regulatory void, causing uncertainty and potential instability in the financial sector regarding the supervision of nonbank financial entities.
The reference to an external document, the Federal Register (88 Fed. Reg. 80110), as the source of the rule being disapproved requires additional documentation review. This reliance can create a barrier to understanding the full context for those who do not have direct access to or familiarity with such documents.
Lack of Discussion on Implications: The absence of a discussion concerning the potential consequences of rejecting the FSOC's rule leaves the implications of this disapproval open-ended. Without clear insights into how this might affect the financial sector, stakeholders could find themselves unprepared for any resulting regulatory gaps.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, particularly consumers of financial services, the bill's unclear language and the lack of detailed reasoning could lead to confusion about how financial oversight might change. Without understanding the potential impacts on financial stability, public trust in the regulatory process could be weakened.
Impact on Stakeholders
Positive Impacts: Some stakeholders, particularly those in the financial services industry, might view this resolution positively if they believe that the FSOC's rule imposes unnecessary or overly burdensome regulations. By nullifying this guidance, these companies may experience eased regulatory pressures and lower compliance costs.
Negative Impacts: On the other hand, consumer advocacy groups and financial watchdogs might perceive the disapproval of this rule negatively. They may argue that without robust oversight, systemic risks could arise from nonbank financial companies, potentially leading to financial instability.
Overall, while the bill seeks to repeal a specific rule, the lack of transparency and explanation about its motivations and consequences could lead to uncertainty and divisiveness among various stakeholders. It is essential for Congress to consider these factors and communicate effectively to ensure that all impacted parties understand the rationale and potential outcomes of this legislative action.
Issues
The language of the resolution is highly formal and complex, which may be difficult for the general public to understand, especially for those without a legal background. This can hinder transparency and public understanding of the legislative process. [Section: Issues 0]
The resolution does not provide a clear explanation for why the rule submitted by the Financial Stability Oversight Council is being disapproved. This lack of clarity could lead to ambiguity and misunderstanding about the motives and rationale behind the legislative action. [Section: Issues 1]
The absence of any proposed alternative guidance or rule to replace the disapproved rule creates a gap in regulatory guidance, potentially leading to uncertainty and instability in the affected financial areas. [Section: Issues 2]
There is a reference to an external document (88 Fed. Reg. 80110), requiring readers to access additional materials to fully understand the context and details of the disapproved rule. This reliance on external documentation can be a barrier to understanding. [Section: Issues 3]
The potential implications of the rule having no force or effect are not discussed in the resolution. This lack of discussion leaves the consequences of disapproval open to interpretation and could result in unforeseen impacts on the financial sector. [Section: Issues 4]
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress is rejecting a rule from the Financial Stability Oversight Council about "Guidance on Nonbank Financial Company Determinations," which means this rule will not be enforced.