News and analysis right to your inbox. Click to get Ballotpedia’s newsletters!

Business Combinations Under the Bank Merger Act rule (2024)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Business Combinations Under the Bank Merger Act
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Action: Final rule
Res. of disapproval status: Signed into law
Type: Not deemed significant
Federal code: 12 CFR Part 5
Estimated cost:[2] $0[1]
Estimated benefit:[2] $0
Policy topics: Finance

The Business Combinations Under the Bank Merger Act rule is a rule issued by the Department of the Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) designed to go into effect on January 1, 2025, that amends existing procedures for reviewing applications under the Bank Merger Act.[3]

A resolution of disapproval to repeal this rule under the Congressional Review Act passed the U.S. Senate on May 7, 2025, and the U.S. House of Representatives on May 20, 2025. President Donald Trump (R) signed the resolution on June 20, 2025, repealing the rule.[4]

Timeline

The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

View all

Background

Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.

Under the Bank Merger Act, the OCC is mandated to review the merger of banks and other similar financial institutions according to specific criteria enumerated in the act. This rule amends previous OCC regulations under the Act, by removing provisions related to expedited review for large financial institutions and by providing (in an appendix) a clarifying discussion of the OCC's principals for review of such transactions.

Congressional Review Act

See also: Congressional Review Act

Under the CRA, Congress can nullify recent administrative rules if both the House and the Senate pass a joint resolution of disapproval by a simple majority and the President signs it.

Summary of the rule

The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[3]

“ The OCC is adopting a final rule to amend its procedures for reviewing applications under the Bank Merger Act and adding, as an appendix, a policy statement that summarizes the principles the OCC uses when it reviews proposed bank merger transactions under the Bank Merger Act.[8] ”

Summary of provisions

The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[3]

“ To better reflect the OCC's view that a business combination is a significant corporate transaction, the OCC proposed amendments to 12 CFR 5.33 to remove provisions related to expedited review and the use of streamlined applications. The OCC also proposed adding a policy statement at appendix A to 12 CFR part 5, subpart C, that would discuss both the general principles the agency uses to review applications under the BMA and how it considers financial stability, financial and managerial resources and future prospects, and convenience and needs factors. Proposed appendix A also described the criteria informing the OCC's decision on whether to hold a public meeting on an application subject to the BMA.[8] ”

Significant impact

See also: Significant regulatory action

Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

Significant rules have had or might have a large effect on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic effect of $100 million or more. E.O. 14215, issued on February 18, 2025, by President Donald Trump (R), required independent agencies to comply with all aspects of OMB review, including review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). The text of the rule states that OMB had not ruled on the economic significance of this rule under E.O. 12866 at the time the final rule was published:

“ For purposes of the Congressional Review Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) makes a determination as to whether a final rule constitutes a “major rule.” If a rule is deemed a “major rule” by OMB, the Congressional Review Act generally provides that the rule may not take effect until at least 60 days following its publication.


The Congressional Review Act defines a “major rule” as any rule that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the OMB finds has resulted in or is likely to result in: (1) an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.

As required by the Congressional Review Act, the OCC will submit the final rule and other appropriate reports to Congress and the Government Accountability Office for review.[8]

”

Text of the rule

The full text of the rule is available below:[3]

See also


External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ "The OCC estimates that the annual aggregate cost of the final rule once fully phased in will be de minimis."
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Note: Estimated costs and estimated benefits here refer to estimated quantitative costs represented by dollar amounts. The estimates are a required part of the rulemaking process and are provided in the rule text. For qualitative costs or benefits, see the summaries of rule purpose and provisions.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Federal Register, "Business Combinations Under the Bank Merger Act," accessed May 20, 2025
  4. ↑ The White House, "The President Signed into Law S.J. Res. 13 and S.J. Res 31," accessed June 26, 2025
  5. ↑ Federal Register, "Business Combinations Under the Bank Merger Act," accessed May 20, 2025
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Congress.gov, "Senate Joint Resolution 13," accessed May 20, 2025
  7. ↑ The White House, "The President Signed into Law S.J. Res. 13 and S.J. Res 31," accessed June 26, 2025
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
v • e
The Administrative State
MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
Pillars
Reporting
Laws
Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Cases
Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
Terms
Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
Bibliography
Agencies
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Business_Combinations_Under_the_Bank_Merger_Act_rule_(2024)&oldid=10691959"