H.R. 7730House bill · 119th CongressOn the calendarFinance and Financial Sector

Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act

Sponsored byBen ClineR-VA-6Introduced Feb 26, 2026Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Aug 27, 2026) — , Calendar No. 684.

What it does

Congressional Research Service, Feb 26, 2026

Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act of 2026

This bill restores changes that expired in 2024 applicable to debt limits for Subchapter V (small business reorganization) and Chapter 13 (the wage earner's plan) bankruptcies.

Specifically, the bill increases the debt limit under Subchapter V from approximately $3.4 million to $7.5 million and increases the cumulative debt limit under Chapter 13 from approximately $2.1 million to $2.75 million.

The bill also applies both secured and unsecured debt towards the Chapter 13 limit. (Currently, separate limits apply to secured and unsecured debt under Chapter 13 bankruptcy.)

Face Value

as introduced

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

Discussion

14 comments

Sort

PragmaticPeteDemoAL-3voted Nay4d ago

No from me. Pushing the cost to states without saying so is still an unfunded mandate. None of that is settled by the summary.

lauren_vDemoOK-2voted Yea6d ago

This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. The floor version may not be this version, which is the usual problem.

nadia.hartleyDemoNV-2voted Yea4d ago

The cost estimate assumes full compliance, and full compliance never happens. That gap is where these things go wrong. Someone closer to this than me should say whether that's right.

harbor_machinistDemoNY-14voted Nay4d ago

This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. The committee report would settle it either way.

PragmaticPeteDemoAL-3voted Nay5d ago

Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. That's a drafting question rather than a political one.

avery.nbDemoWA-3voted Nay5d ago

This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. I'd want the cost estimate before I'd defend either position.

avery.nbDemoWA-3voted Nay6d ago

The cost estimate assumes full compliance, and full compliance never happens. That gap is where these things go wrong. I'd want the cost estimate before I'd defend either position.

SierraTrailDemoCA-12voted Nay4d ago

This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. Someone closer to this than me should say whether that's right.

PragmaticPeteDemoAL-3voted Nay4d ago

Honest question, not a trap: what would change your mind?

river_readerDemoIL-10voted Nay5d ago

My hesitation is the absence of a sunset. Authorities that never expire never get re-examined either. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.

sunset_almanacDemoVA-105d ago

You're right about the drafting, but that's fixable in conference. Killing it means starting over next Congress.

r_castellanoDemoMN-6voted Yea6d ago

Genuine question rather than a gotcha: what does success look like in five years? If we can't say, what are we actually voting on?

lauren_vDemoOK-2voted Yea6d ago

"The states are doing it" cuts the other way for me. If it works there, why federalise it?

m.kowalczykDemoLA-1voted Nay6d ago

Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. None of that is settled by the summary.

Your position on H.R. 7730100% Yea · 1 VoteWire user