Get started free →
HR 9490 119th Congress · House

Bill Would Make Bank Executives Pay Fine Costs Out of Deferred Pay

Advocate

Official title: To defer part of the compensation of senior employees of large financial institutions (and their subsidiaries), to use such deferred amounts to pay any civil or criminal fines that may be levied on the institution (or subsidiary), and for other purposes.

This bill would require senior employees at large financial institutions, including subsidiaries, to have part of their compensation deferred. Those deferred amounts could then be used to cover civil or criminal fines imposed on the institution or its subsidiary. In practical terms, the bill shifts some financial risk from the institution itself onto top earners whose pay is tied to the firm’s conduct. It is aimed at the largest banks and similar financial firms, not ordinary workers or most small businesses.

  • Applies to senior employees of large financial institutions and their subsidiaries.
  • Requires part of their compensation to be deferred.
  • Deferred compensation may be used to pay civil or criminal fines.
  • Targets penalties imposed on the institution or subsidiary, not ordinary consumer fines.
  • Reaches only the largest financial firms and their top-paid staff.
Public Relevance 22 / 100
Niche Modest scope Broad

If you are a senior employee at a large financial institution, this bill could reduce how much of your compensation you receive immediately and expose deferred pay to being used for the firm’s fines. If you are a customer, worker, or investor in a large bank, the bill could indirectly affect you if it changes how aggressively institutions manage compliance, risk, and executive pay. For most Americans outside the financial sector, the effect would be indirect rather than a direct change to benefits or eligibility.

See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysis
FOR
  • Financial regulators and bank accountability advocates They would argue that executives and senior staff should bear more of the cost when their institutions break the law or create serious compliance failures. Tying pay to potential fines can discourage reckless conduct and improve oversight.
  • Consumer and taxpayer advocates They would say the bill helps prevent the public and customers from indirectly absorbing the cost of misconduct by large banks. If senior employees have money at risk, firms may be more likely to police illegal behavior before it leads to penalties.
  • Governance reform supporters They may see deferred compensation as a straightforward incentive tool that aligns pay with long-term institutional performance rather than short-term gains. This can reinforce responsible management in highly regulated firms.
AGAINST
  • Bank executives and senior financial employees They may argue the proposal is punitive and could reduce take-home pay or make compensation less competitive. They may also contend that employees should not be treated as a backstop for institutional fines they did not personally cause.
  • Financial institutions and industry compliance officers They may say the rule would add complexity to compensation systems and make recruitment and retention harder at large firms. Firms might also worry about disputes over when deferred pay can be seized and how broadly liability should extend.
  • Labor and employment attorneys representing highly compensated employees They may argue the policy could create unclear contractual and legal consequences for deferred pay arrangements. They may also question whether the approach fairly distinguishes between executive misconduct and broader corporate liability.
  • “defer part of the compensation of senior employees”

    This means a portion of pay would not be paid out immediately. Senior staff would have money held back, creating a financial stake that could be used later if the firm is fined.

  • “large financial institutions (and their subsidiaries)”

    The bill focuses on major banks and related companies, so its reach is limited to a narrow slice of the financial sector. Smaller lenders and most employers would not be covered by this framework.

  • “pay any civil or criminal fines”

    Deferred compensation could be redirected to satisfy penalties from enforcement actions. That raises the likelihood that top employees, not just the institution’s balance sheet, absorb some of the cost of wrongdoing.

  • “levied on the institution (or subsidiary)”

    The rule would apply even when the fine is imposed on an affiliated subsidiary rather than the parent company. That broadens the reach of the penalty-capture mechanism within corporate groups.

BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.

Bill
HR 9490
Congress
119th Congress
Official title
To defer part of the compensation of senior employees of large financial institutions (and their subsidiaries), to use such deferred amounts to pay any civil or criminal fines that may be levied on the institution (or subsidiary), and for other purposes.
Policy area
Economy & Finance
Latest action
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. (June 25, 2026)
Last updated
June 26, 2026

June 25, 2026

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

Take Action

Get more from BillBoard

Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.

Ask AI about this bill

Data sourced from api.congress.gov.

Free to use · No credit card

Understand every bill.
Make your voice count.

BillBoard turns dense U.S. legislation into plain-English summaries, helps you take a stance, and connects you to your representatives — in seconds.