Congress eases bank exams for mid-sized lenders, trading oversight for relief
H.R. 4478 — TRUST Act of 2025 · Filed by Tim Moore (R-NC) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Jul 17, 2025 · Passed chamber
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill raises the asset threshold for 'well-managed' small banks from $3 billion to $6 billion, allowing those banks to be examined less frequently — once every 18 months instead of annually. Banks under $6 billion in assets that meet safety standards will face lighter regulatory oversight.
Why we flagged it
The bill's sole operative mechanism is to reduce examination frequency for mid-sized insured depository institutions by raising the asset threshold for lighter oversight. This is a deregulatory measure targeting a specific sector.
What the text implies
- Banks in the $3B–$6B range will move from annual to 18-month examination cycles, potentially delaying detection of emerging safety or compliance problems by up to 6 months.
- The bill does not specify what 'well-managed' means or how that status is determined; the operative threshold is asset-based only, so the actual safety filter depends on Section 10(d) criteria not quoted here.
- FDIC insurance premiums are risk-adjusted; if mid-sized banks fail at higher rates due to less frequent oversight, premiums may rise for all insured institutions, spreading costs across the banking system.
- The bill's title includes two alternative short titles ('or the Tailored Regulatory Updates for Supervisory Testing Act of 2025' and 'TRUST Act of 2025'), suggesting drafting ambiguity or late revision.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
Lighter examination cycles may reduce compliance costs for banks, potentially lowering lending costs for small-business and consumer borrowers. However, less frequent oversight of mid-sized banks ($3B–$6B) may reduce early detection of safety risks, increasing the probability of bank failure and FDIC insurance payouts (funded by bank premiums and ultimately consumers). The trade-off between reduced regulatory burden and reduced safety monitoring is genuine and unresolved by the text.
Who stands to gain
- insured depository institutions with $3B–$6B in total assets
- regional and community banks in the affected size range
Named in the bill
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal banking agencies, insured depository institutions, Section 10(d) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Democrats.
- Jul 17, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jul 17, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Financial Services and Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services”
- Jul 22, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
- Jul 23, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 48 - 0”
- May 12, 2026 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H3358)”
- May 12, 2026 — Floor vote scheduled · Congress.gov: “Mr. Hill (AR) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
4 lobbying clients named this bill on 7 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $57,000,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 50 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 72% of bills with at least one filing.
Tim Moore, the sponsor, reported $499,450 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $54,660,000 on 3 filings
- Independent Community Bankers of America — $2,170,000 on 1 filing
- American Fintech Council — $110,000 on 1 filing
- American Fintech Council — $60,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (516 characters) on Jul 2, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
- H.R. 4478 on Congress.gov
- Actions and status history
- Cosponsors (1)
- Bill text the analysis read
- Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — LDA filing, 2026 Q1
- Independent Community Bankers of America — LDA filing, 2026 Q2
- American Fintech Council — LDA filing, 2026 Q2
- Tim Moore — FEC candidate receipts, 2026 cycle
“Congress eases bank exams for mid-sized lenders, trading oversight for relief” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr4478 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.