Merger Agreement Approvals Clarity and Predictability Act

Proponents argue federal regulators are imposing merger conditions unmoored from statutory authority, hindering competition and innovation in banking, and that transparency via GAO study will constrain regulatory overreach. Critics contend that the study is a precursor to legislation weakening merger review, and that regulators' conditions often address systemic risk, consumer protection, and community reinvestment—concerns Congress itself embedded in law but regulators must apply case-by-case. Non-partisan evidence from GAO studies of regulatory practice typically shows that agencies do operate within broad statutory discretion, making the claim of 'extrastatutory' action difficult to establish without defining what counts as statutory versus discretionary authority.