Federal consumer protections quietly carved out for insurance companies
H.R. 4735 — Business of Insurance Regulatory Reform Act of 2025 · Filed by Bryan Steil (R-WI) · 6 cosponsors · Introduced Jul 23, 2025 · Referred to committee
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 narrows the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) authority over insurance companies and insurance-regulated entities. It prohibits the CFPB from enforcing consumer financial protection rules against persons regulated by state insurance regulators when they are engaged in the business of insurance, and requires any CFPB enforcement authority over such entities to be interpreted narrowly in favor of state insurance regulators.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a jurisdictional exemption for insurance-regulated entities from federal consumer protection enforcement. It does not expand insurance regulation or consumer protections; it narrows federal oversight and delegates authority to state regulators whose primary mandate is not consumer protection.
What the text implies
- State insurance regulators prioritize insurer solvency and market conduct, not consumer financial protection — this shift may leave consumers of insurance-linked financial products (e.g., insurance-company-issued payment cards, stored-value products, credit products) with weaker protections than CFPB standards.
- The 'narrowly construed' language in subsection (ii) may create litigation risk: courts interpreting CFPB authority over insurance entities under transferred consumer laws (e.g., Fair Credit Reporting Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act) may read the CFPB's role as secondary to state insurance regulators, further fragmenting enforcement.
- Insurance companies offering financial products (e.g., prepaid cards, credit products, payment services) may face less rigorous federal oversight of unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices (UDAAP) violations, a core CFPB enforcement tool.
- The bill does not require state insurance regulators to adopt or enforce CFPB standards, creating a regulatory floor gap: a state may choose not to enforce consumer protections that the CFPB would have enforced federally.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
Ordinary consumers lose access to federal CFPB enforcement protections for financial products and services offered by insurance-regulated entities. State insurance regulators have different mandates (solvency and market conduct) than consumer protection, and fragmented state-by-state enforcement typically results in weaker protections than uniform federal standards. The bill creates a regulatory gap for consumers buying financial products from insurance companies.
Who stands to gain
- insurance companies offering financial products or services
- insurance holding companies with consumer finance subsidiaries
- state insurance regulators (reduced federal oversight burden)
Named in the bill
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), State insurance regulators, Insurance companies, Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, Section 1027(f)
Where it stands
6 cosponsors: 6 Republicans.
- Jul 23, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jul 23, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Financial Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services”
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 8 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $5,215,837 in lobbying spend. A filing names 36 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.
Bryan Steil, the sponsor, reported $1,735,700 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- American Council of Life Insurers — $4,085,837 on 3 filings
- Pacific Life Insurance Company — $480,000 on 1 filing
- Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America — $410,000 on 2 filings
- Cmfg Life Insurance Company — $240,000 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 (1,405 characters) on Jun 11, 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. 4735 on Congress.gov
- Actions and status history
- Cosponsors (6)
- Bill text the analysis read
- American Council of Life Insurers — LDA filing, 2025 Q4
- Pacific Life Insurance Company — LDA filing, 2026 Q2
- Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America — LDA filing, 2026 Q2
- Bryan Steil — FEC candidate receipts, 2026 cycle
“Federal consumer protections quietly carved out for insurance companies” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr4735 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.