H.R. 2478House bill · 119th CongressIn the SenateFinance and Financial Sector

Financial Exploitation Prevention Act of 2025

Sponsored byAnn WagnerR-MO-2Introduced Mar 27, 2025Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Jul 13, 2026) Received in the Senate and Read twice and on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

What it does

Congressional Research Service, Mar 27, 2025

This bill establishes procedures for delaying the redemption of certain securities if an investment company or agent believes that an older individual or an individual with certain impairments has been financially exploited.

Specifically, the bill allows for the delay of the redemption of a security issued by an open-end investment management company and serviced by a transfer agent if the company or agent reasonably believes the redemption involves the financial exploitation of an individual (1) age 65 or older, or (2) age 18 or older who is unable to protect his or her own interests due to a mental or physical impairment. (Open-end investment management companies offer securities in pooled investment vehicles such as mutual funds. Transfer agents facilitate certain transactions for corporations and investment companies, including dividend distribution and change of securities ownership.)

The company may initially delay the redemption for up to 15 days and, upon making a determination of exploitation, may delay the redemption an additional 10 days. A state regulator, appropriate administrative agency, or court may extend this period. In the event of delay, the company must hold the amounts related to the redemption in a demand deposit account. The bill also establishes notification requirements.

The bill requires the registered open-end investment company and transfer agent to notify the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) if they elect to comply with the procedures established under this bill.

Additionally, the SEC must make recommendations to address the financial exploitation of these adults.

Face Value

as passed the House
100Narrow

How much of this bill its name accounts for.

  • Every bill starts at100
  • Nothing counted against it: one area of law, and short enough that length doesn't register.

Face Value measures reach, not honesty. A big bill can be accurately named, and a low score is not an accusation — it means the contents reach further than any short title could describe. Count it yourself ↗ How this is worked out

What Congress did

1 recorded
  • On , as Amendeddecisive vote

    House · Jun 25, 2026

    A fast-track vote: no amendments, short debate, and two thirds needed to pass. Used for bills expected to be uncontroversial.

    4142

    Passed

    Every vote →

Who lobbied on this

2 organizations

These organizations told Congress, in their own quarterly disclosures, that they were lobbying on this bill.

  • Finsecano position stated
    …Meeting re: SEC overreach on Fixed Indexed Annuities Coalition letter to House re: H.R. 3682 / FSOC Improvement Act Joint Trades Letter to Senate re: H.R. 2478 / S. 2840: Financial Exploitation Prevention Act of 2025 filing ↗
  • …Prevention Act of 2025 S. 3578, Financial Stability Oversight Council Improvement Act of 2025 S. 3671, Increasing Investor Opportunities Act H.R. 2478, Financial Exploitation Prevention Act of 2025 H.R. 3383, INVEST Act (Sections 202, 205, 206, 302) H.R. 3633, Digital Asset Market Clarity… filing ↗

Most filings say only that an organization lobbied on a bill, not which side it took — where that's the case we say so rather than guessing. Quotes are verbatim from the filing. How this is built.

Discussion

8 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
24
SierraTrailDemoCA-12voted Nay19d ago
Against. I've seen this pattern before: a pilot programme with an authorisation that quietly becomes permanent at the next reauthorisation.
24
BackbenchBrendaDemoPA-2voted Yea28d ago
Reading the summary, this looks like it mostly codifies what agencies are already doing informally. That's worth doing — informal practice evaporates when administrations change.
22
cascade_kaiDemoIN-6voted Nay28d ago
I'd oppose this. It reads like it was written to be announced rather than administered.
10
marisol_qDemoPA-14voted Nay21d ago
You're right about the drafting, but that's fixable in conference. Killing it now means starting over in the next Congress.
8
PragmaticPeteDemoAL-3voted Yea22d ago
Fair, but the alternative on the table is nothing, and nothing has a cost too.
-1
lauren_vDemoOK-2voted Yea18d ago
Agreed on the substance, disagree on the timing. Doing this badly now makes doing it well later harder.
10
lauren_vDemoOK-2voted Yea18d ago
Sure, but 'the states are doing it' cuts the other way for me. If it's working there, why federalise it?
0
NorthWoodsNinaDemoNY-12voted Yea17d ago
Same conclusion, different reasoning. I'm less worried about scope and more about who administers it.
Your position on H.R. 247848% Yea · 23 VoteWire users