H.R. 2331House119th Congress (2025-2027)In Committee

Transparency in CFPB Cost-Benefit Analysis Act

To enhance rulemaking requirements for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

AI-Generated Summary

Updated November 24, 2025 at 1:42 AM UTC

The Transparency in CFPB Cost‑Benefit Analysis Act amends the Consumer Financial Protection Act to tighten the CFPB’s rulemaking process. It requires the agency to publish full, detailed notices of proposed rules that explain the need, assess costs and benefits, consider alternatives, and address impacts on small businesses and other stakeholders. The bill aims to make the CFPB’s regulatory decisions more transparent and evidence‑based.

Key Provisions

Requires every CFPB notice of proposed rulemaking to be fully published in the Federal Register with a detailed statement of why the rule is needed and why the problem can't be solved by the private sector, states, local or tribal authorities.
Mandates an analysis of whether the proposed rule duplicates, conflicts with, or is incompatible with existing federal regulations, and if so, requires justification, how it can coexist, and steps to reduce the regulatory burden.
Calls for a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment of all expected direct and indirect costs and benefits, including compliance costs for regulated entities (especially small businesses), impacts on the economy, competition, and capital formation, as well as costs to state, local, and tribal governments.
Requires identification and cost‑benefit analysis of reasonable alternative approaches, including modifications to existing rules.
If the rule would raise costs for small businesses, the CFPB must consult the SBA Office of Advocacy to find ways to lessen those impacts.
If the net benefits of the proposed rule are lower than those of alternatives, or if costs outweigh benefits, the CFPB must provide a justification for proceeding.
Includes an assessment of how the regulatory burden is distributed, noting any disproportionate impact on consumers or small businesses, and, when feasible, a statistical probability distribution of likely outcomes.
Demands disclosure of the assumptions, studies, and data underlying the analysis, noting whether any studies were peer‑reviewed.

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

1 earlier action

HouseIntro Referral Latest Action

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Financial Services Committee

March 25, 2025

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

March 25, 2025

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Financial Services Committee

March 25, 2025

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF XML

Introduced in HouseIssued March 25, 2025

119th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2331

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 25, 2025

Mr. Loudermilk (for himself and Mr. Barr) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

A BILL

To enhance rulemaking requirements for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Transparency in CFPB Cost-Benefit Analysis Act.

Transparency in cost-benefit analysis

Section 1022(b) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5512(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(5)

Additional rulemaking requirements

(A)

In general

Each notice of proposed rulemaking issued by the Bureau shall be published in its entirety in the Federal Register and shall include—

(i)

a statement of the need for the proposed regulation;

(ii)

an examination of why the Bureau must undertake the proposed regulation and why the private market, State, local, or tribal authorities cannot adequately address the problem;

(iii)

an examination of whether the proposed regulation is duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible with other Federal regulations and orders;

(iv)

if the proposed regulation is found to be duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible with other Federal regulations and orders, a discussion of—

(I)

why the proposed regulation is justified;

(II)

how the proposed regulation can coexist with the existing regulations; and

(III)

how the Bureau plans to reduce the regulatory burden associated with the duplicative, inconsistent, or incompatible proposed regulation;

(v)

a quantitative and qualitative assessment of all anticipated direct and indirect costs and benefits of the proposed regulation, including—

(I)

compliance costs for all regulated entities, including small businesses;

(II)

effects on economic activity, efficiency, competition and capital formation;

(III)

regulatory and administrative costs of implementation; and

(IV)

costs imposed on State, local and tribal entities;

(vi)

an identification of reasonable alternatives to the regulation, including modification of an existing regulation;

(vii)

an analysis of the costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of any alternative identified pursuant to clause (v);

(viii)

if the Bureau determines the proposed regulation would increase costs for small businesses, then the Bureau shall consult the Office of Advocacy within the Small Business Administration to determine ways to minimize the effect of direct and indirect costs imposed on small businesses by the proposed regulation;

(ix)

if quantified net benefits of the proposed action do not outweigh the quantified net benefits of the alternatives, a justification of the regulation;

(x)

if quantified benefits identified pursuant to clause (iv) do not outweigh the quantified costs of the regulation, a justification of the regulation;

(xi)

an assessment of how the burden imposed by the regulation will be distributed; including whether consumers, or small businesses will be disproportionately burdened; and

(xii)

when feasible, and using appropriate statistical techniques, a probability distribution of the relevant outcomes of the proposed regulation.

(B)

Assumptions and studies used

With respect to the information required to be included under subparagraph (A), the Bureau will include—

(i)

a discussion of underlying assumptions used as a basis for such information; and

(ii)

a description of any studies or data used in preparing such information, and whether such studies were peer-reviewed.