A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of the Treasury relating to "Regulatory Capital Rule: Modifications to the Enhanced Supplementary Leverage Ratio Standards for U.S. Global Systemically Important Bank Holding Companies and Their Subsidiary Depository Institutions; Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity and Long-Term Debt Requirements for U.S. Global Systemically Important Bank Holding Companies".
📝 TL;DR
This resolution would use Congressional authority to overturn a Treasury Department rule that modified capital requirements for the largest U.S. banks, likely making those requirements stricter again. It's sponsored by Senator Warren as pushback against what she apparently views as dangerous weakening of post-2008 financial safety regulations.
Standard Analysis
Senate Joint Resolution 110 is a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution introduced by Senator Warren that seeks to overturn a Treasury Department banking regulation published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2025. The target rule modified capital requirements for the largest U.S. banks - specifically the Enhanced Supplementary Leverage Ratio standards and Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity requirements for Global Systemically Important Bank Holding Companies (G-SIBs). Under the CRA, Congress has the power to disapprove federal agency rules through a joint resolution, effectively nullifying the regulation and preventing agencies from reissuing substantially similar rules. This resolution represents Congressional pushback against what Senator Warren likely views as weakened banking regulations for the largest financial institutions that pose systemic risk to the economy.
Detailed Analysis
This joint resolution operates under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, commonly known as the Congressional Review Act of 1996. The CRA provides Congress with a mechanism to review and potentially overturn federal agency regulations within 60 legislative days of their publication. The resolution is structured as a simple disapproval measure with a single operative clause that both disapproves the specified Treasury rule and declares it to have 'no force or effect.' The targeted regulation, published at 90 Fed. Reg. 55248, appears to have modified capital standards that were originally implemented following the 2008 financial crisis to ensure large banks maintain sufficient capital buffers. The Enhanced Supplementary Leverage Ratio (eSLR) requires large banks to hold capital equal to at least a certain percentage of their total leverage exposure, while Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) requirements ensure banks have sufficient loss-absorbing instruments to facilitate orderly resolution without taxpayer bailouts. The resolution's introduction by Senator Warren, a prominent banking regulation advocate, suggests the Treasury rule likely weakened these requirements in ways she viewed as dangerous to financial stability. If passed by both chambers and signed by the President (or if a presidential veto is overridden), this resolution would not only nullify the Treasury rule but also prevent the agency from issuing substantially similar regulations in the future without explicit Congressional authorization. The bill was referred to the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over banking regulation matters.
🎯 Key Provisions
Congressional Disapproval Declaration: The resolution formally disapproves the Treasury Department's banking capital rule. This is the core mechanism that triggers the Congressional Review Act process. (Resolved clause - 'That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of the Treasury relating to [the specified banking regulation]')
Nullification of Rule Effect: The resolution explicitly states that the disapproved rule shall have no legal force or effect, immediately voiding any regulatory changes it implemented. (Resolved clause - 'and such rule shall have no force or effect')
Congressional Review Act Authority: The resolution operates under the specific statutory authority of Chapter 8 of Title 5, which gives Congress power to review and overturn agency regulations. (Title - 'under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code')
Specific Rule Identification: The resolution precisely identifies the target regulation by its Federal Register citation and full title to ensure legal clarity about which rule is being disapproved. (Federal Register citation - '90 Fed. Reg. 55248 (December 1, 2025)')
👥 Impact Analysis
Direct Effects If enacted, this resolution would immediately nullify the Treasury Department's modifications to banking capital requirements for Global Systemically Important Banks. The Enhanced Supplementary Leverage Ratio standards and Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity requirements would revert to their previous, presumably stricter, formulations. This would likely require the largest U.S. banks to maintain higher capital reserves than the disapproved rule would have allowed, potentially affecting their lending capacity and profitability. The resolution would also prevent Treasury from issuing substantially similar rules in the future without explicit Congressional approval, effectively requiring legislative action for any similar regulatory changes.
Indirect Effects Beyond the immediate regulatory impact, this resolution could signal broader Congressional skepticism toward banking deregulation efforts and may influence other financial regulators' approaches to similar rules. It could also affect bank stock prices and lending markets as financial institutions adjust their capital planning. The precedent of using the CRA against banking regulations might encourage more frequent Congressional intervention in financial regulatory matters.
Affected Groups - Global Systemically Important Bank Holding Companies - U.S. Treasury Department - Federal banking regulators - Bank shareholders and creditors - Borrowers and credit markets - Financial stability oversight bodies
Fiscal Impact The resolution itself contains no direct fiscal impact on the federal budget, as it merely disapproves an existing regulation rather than appropriating funds or creating new programs. However, the indirect fiscal effects could be significant - stricter bank capital requirements might reduce bank profitability and thus corporate tax revenues, while potentially reducing the likelihood of future taxpayer-funded bank bailouts by maintaining stronger capital buffers. The bill does not specify any costs or funding mechanisms because it operates purely as a regulatory disapproval measure.
📋 Latest Action
3/4/2026
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.