New banks get 3-year free pass on safety rules—at depositors' expense
S. 113 — Promoting New Bank Formation Act of 2025 · Filed by Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Jan 16, 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 aims to encourage the formation of new banks, particularly in rural and underserved communities, by reducing regulatory barriers for new financial institutions during their first three years of operation. It allows new banks a 3-year grace period to meet federal capital requirements, permits them to deviate from their approved business plans with streamlined approval (auto-approval if regulators don't respond within 30 days), lowers capital ratio requirements for rural community banks, and expands lending authority for federal savings associations to include agricultural loans.
Why we flagged it
The bill's stated purpose is expanding banking access to underserved communities, but its primary mechanism is regulatory relief (capital requirement phase-ins, auto-approval of business plan deviations, lowered leverage ratios) that benefits new and small banks at the expense of prudential oversight. The community-access framing masks a deregulatory agenda.
- Section 7 amends the Home Owners' Loan Act to expand agricultural lending authority for federal savings associations—substantively unrelated to de novo bank formation or community banking access.
What the text implies
- Auto-approval of business plan deviations after 30 days (Section 5) creates a regulatory loophole: new banks can shift strategy without meaningful oversight, potentially increasing risk-taking or mission drift.
- The 8% Community Bank Leverage Ratio for rural banks (Section 6) is significantly lower than standard requirements, reducing capital buffers that protect depositors if the bank fails—particularly risky for institutions in economically fragile areas.
- Three-year capital requirement phase-in (Section 4) allows undercapitalized banks to operate longer before meeting safety standards, increasing systemic risk if multiple new banks fail simultaneously.
- The bill mandates a study on de novo formation but does not condition regulatory relief on study findings, suggesting relief is predetermined regardless of evidence about actual barriers or risks.
- Streamlined approval for business plan changes may enable predatory lending or high-risk strategies in communities with limited financial literacy or regulatory sophistication.
Who it affects
The bill addresses a genuine public problem—bank closures have left rural and low-income communities without banking access, disproportionately affecting African-American and poor populations. However, the regulatory relief provisions (auto-approval of business plan changes, relaxed capital standards) create moral hazard and may weaken consumer protections and deposit safety without clear offsetting public safeguards.
Who stands to gain
- new and de novo banks
- small regional banks (under $10B in assets)
- federal savings associations
- agricultural lenders
Named in the bill
Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), appropriate Federal banking agencies, depository institutions, rural community banks, federal savings associations, Home Owners' Loan Act, Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, Federal Deposit Insurance Act
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Republicans.
- Jan 16, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
- Jan 16, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
2 lobbying clients named this bill on 3 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $7,380,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 51 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 41% of bills with at least one filing.
Cindy Hyde-Smith, the sponsor, reported $1,334,320 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- American Bankers Association — $5,210,000 on 2 filings
- Independent Community Bankers of America — $2,170,000 on 1 filing
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 full bill text on Jun 8, 2026; 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.
“New banks get 3-year free pass on safety rules—at depositors' expense” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/s113 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.