S.J.Res. 18 · 119th Congress · Senate

A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions".

Signed into LawEconomy

Introduced 2025-02-13 · Sponsored by Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC] (R-SC) · Last updated 2026-03-31

Last action (2025-05-09): Became Public Law No: 119-10.

Summary

Blocks a CFPB rule that would have capped overdraft fees at $5 at the largest banks. Right now, overdraft fees at big banks typically run $35 per transaction. The CFPB wanted to slash those fees, but banks warned they would just stop offering overdraft protection entirely, leaving customers with bounced payments and late penalties instead.

The Good

+

Preserves overdraft services that some consumers rely on

The CFPB rule would have capped overdraft fees at $5 at large banks. Banks argued that at $5 per transaction, the service would be unprofitable and they would simply eliminate overdraft coverage, leaving customers whose payments bounce with merchant fees, late penalties, and damaged credit.

+

Avoids unintended consequences of price caps

Price caps can cause services to disappear rather than become cheaper. Banks argued they would respond by tightening checking account eligibility, reducing access for the lower-income customers the rule was designed to protect.

The Bad

-

Keeps overdraft fees averaging $35 at large banks

Large financial institutions charge roughly $35 per overdraft transaction, generating billions in annual revenue. The CFPB found these fees far exceed the actual cost of covering short-term negative balances, making overdraft a profit center rather than a service.

-

Overdraft fees disproportionately affect low-income account holders

CFPB research shows that 9% of account holders pay 80% of all overdraft fees. These are predominantly lower-income customers living paycheck to paycheck. A single $35 fee can trigger a cascade of additional overdrafts, creating debt spirals from what started as a minor shortfall.

Vote Record

House, 2025-04-09

217 Yea211 Nay0 NV
Republicans
217Y / 1N / 2NV
Democrats
0Y / 210N / 3NV

Passed Congress.gov — House Roll Call #96

House vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

Senate, 2025-03-27

52 Yea48 Nay0 NV
Republicans
52Y / 1N
Democrats
0Y / 45N
Independents
0Y / 2N

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #153

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

Senate, 2025-03-26

52 Yea47 Nay0 NV
Republicans
52Y / 1N
Democrats
0Y / 44N / 1NV
Independents
0Y / 2N

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #152

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

All Sources

Everything on this page ties back to one of these. Click through if you want to check.