Overview
Title
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission relating to Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121.
ELI5 AI
S. J. RES. 59 is like a big "no thank you" from Congress to a rule they didn't like from a special group in charge of making money rules. They want to make sure this rule doesn't count anymore.
Summary AI
S. J. RES. 59 is a joint resolution that expresses Congress's disapproval of a specific rule made by the Securities and Exchange Commission related to "Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121." This resolution argues that the rule, published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2022, should be considered invalid under chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code and thus should not have any effect. The resolution was introduced by Ms. Lummis and has been referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "S. J. RES. 59" was introduced in the Senate of the United States aiming to express congressional disapproval of a rule made by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) related to "Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121." By invoking chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code, this resolution seeks to ensure that the rule in question will not have any legal effect or operational capability. This indicates that Congress has chosen to reject the SEC's guidance as laid out in the bulletin.
Significant Issues
Several issues arise concerning the context and clarity of the bill:
Lack of Contextual Clarity: The bill does not provide clear reasoning or background details on why Congress has decided to disapprove of the rule. This lack of explanation might create ambiguity around the motivations and possible implications of this legislative decision.
Complex Language Barrier: The bill is couched in highly technical and legislative language. This style may limit accessibility, making it difficult for individuals without legal or financial expertise to understand the full implications of the resolution.
Referential Complexity: The reference to specific documents like "Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121" and other legal sources such as the Federal Register might pose a comprehension challenge. These references, while crucial for legal precision, might obscure understanding for those unfamiliar with these texts.
Unclear Execution Process: The phrase "such rule shall have no force or effect" could benefit from further elaboration. More details are needed on the practical steps of how this disapproval is enforced, which would help the public understand the actual workings and consequences of the resolution.
Public Impact
The broader public impact of this bill hinges on its implications for regulatory processes and financial oversight:
Potential Decrease in Regulatory Clarity: For the general public, especially those individuals and businesses that rely on consistent regulatory signals, this move might lead to uncertainty about accounting practices and compliance with financial regulations.
Limited Transparency: The technical language and lack of detailed reasoning within the bill could result in a decreased level of public discourse and engagement. Citizens may have difficulties accessing or debating the merits of the disapproval due to the complexity of the language and references.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The bill can have varying impacts, both positive and negative, on different stakeholders:
Financial Institutions and Analysts: Entities directly involved in financial reporting or governance might find this move disruptive if the SEC's guidance aimed at standardization or clarity around accounting practices.
Regulatory Bodies and Policymakers: The decision to disapprove the SEC rule might be seen as an assertion of legislative power over regulatory bodies, impacting future interactions and regulations proposed by similar agencies.
Legal and Compliance Professionals: Lawyers and compliance experts may face increased workloads as they work to navigate these changes and advise their clients on adjusted strategies in light of the disapproval.
Overall, the bill highlights the intricate balance between congressional oversight and regulatory guidance while raising questions about legislative transparency and public understanding in complex financial matters.
Issues
The bill lacks clear context on why Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission relating to 'Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121', which could lead to ambiguity about the motives and implications of this disapproval. This is critical for understanding the broader political and economic impacts of the legislation. [Section without header]
The language used in the bill is technical and dense, which may hinder accessibility and understanding for the general public, potentially reducing transparency and informed public discourse on the subject. [Section without header]
The reference to 'Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121' and various legal documents, such as the Federal Register and a letter from the Government Accountability Office, might be overly complex for individuals without a legal or financial background, limiting comprehensibility for most citizens. [Section without header]
The phrase 'such rule shall have no force or effect' might benefit from additional clarification regarding its practical implications and the process for its execution, which is necessary for understanding the actual effects of the law if passed. [Section without header]
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 has decided to reject a rule from the Securities and Exchange Commission that relates to "Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121." This decision is based on the conclusion that this bulletin is considered a rule under a specific chapter of U.S. law, and therefore, it will not be effective.