The legislation aims to modernize technology systems within federal agencies responsible for regulating banks and credit unions, enhancing their capacity for effective supervision and oversight. The FUTURES Act will enhance the ability of regulatory agencies to conduct thorough supervision and ensure the safety and soundness of the financial system. The legislation will address the critical need for modernization by requiring: Comprehensive Technology Assessments ... Advanced Reporting Requirements ...
Modernize federal financial regulators' technology systems and require regular assessments and reporting on those systems.
Occurrences
"The modernization of the regulatory technology our American financial systems rely on is essential. The FUTURES Act will help Congress better understand the red tape keeping our regulators in the past while our financial institutions race into the future."
Stutzman and Foster introduced the FUTURES Act to modernize technology systems within federal agencies responsible for regulating banks and credit unions, with assessments and recurring reporting requirements.
introduced the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act
To require certain supervisory agencies to assess their technological capabilities, and for other purposes.
introduced the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act
REP. STUTZMAN AND REP. FOSTER INTRODUCE THE FUTURES ACT
H.R. 8278, the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act , sponsored by Rep. Stutzman and Rep. Bill Foster (IL-11), passed 52-0. This bill requires financial regulators to assess whether their technology systems, supervisory tools, and data infrastructure are sufficient to support real-time oversight of regulated firms. The bill also directs agencies to review procurement practices and report to Congress on their technology capabilities, workforce, data-sharing processes, and modernization needs.
H.R. 8278 requires financial regulatory agencies to assess the technologies they use and determine whether those technologies pose challenges to conduct real-time supervisory assessments of the firms within its jurisdiction. H.R. 8278 also requires the agencies to review their practices to ensure efficiency and identify opportunities for the agency to test new technological systems.
Evidence
WASHINGTON, DC — Today, Congressman Marlin Stutzman (IN-03) and Congressman Bill Foster (IL-11) introduced the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act.
H.R. 8278, the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act, was introduced on April 14, 2026, by Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN) and has one cosponsor. ... The bill was attached as a discussion draft to the January 13, 2026, Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence Subcommittee hearing.
H.R. 8278, the Fostering the Use of Technology to Uphold Regulatory Effectiveness in Supervision (FUTURES) Act ... sponsored by Rep. Stutzman and Rep. Bill Foster (IL-11), passed 52-0. This bill requires financial regulators to assess whether their technology systems, supervisory tools, and data infrastructure are sufficient to support real-time oversight of regulated firms.
H.R. 8278. A bill to require certain supervisory agencies to assess their technological vulnerabilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Financial Services.
Assessments
Stutzman materially advanced the promise by introducing the FUTURES Act and moving it from discussion draft to formal introduction, with the bill then passing the House Financial Services Committee unanimously. The bill’s text aligns closely with the promise because it would require supervisory agencies to assess technological vulnerabilities and report on whether their systems and data infrastructure are sufficient for oversight. However, the evidence does not show enactment into law or final implementation across federal regulators, so the promised outcome was not fully delivered. Because there was meaningful legislative progress but not completion, partial is the best fit.