New Bank Bill Exempts Mergers Under $10 Billion From Competition Review: What That Means for Your Local Branch

The “Bank Competition Modernization Act” is deceptively named. It’s not about making banks compete harder; it’s about making it easier for them to merge. This bill fundamentally changes how federal regulators—like the FDIC and the Federal Reserve—review proposed bank mergers and acquisitions, but only for the smaller players. Specifically, if a bank merger or acquisition results in an institution with less than $10 billion in assets, regulators are explicitly prohibited from considering whether that deal would “result in a monopoly” or “substantially lessen competition.” They literally have to ignore the antitrust implications below that threshold.

The $10 Billion Loophole

Think about what this actually does. Currently, when two banks want to merge, the government reviews the deal to make sure it doesn’t hurt consumers by reducing competition—which often leads to higher fees or worse service. This bill removes that essential check for transactions involving institutions under the $10 billion mark. For a bank that size, $10 billion is a lot of money, but in the banking world, it’s still considered relatively small to mid-sized. The bill applies this relaxed standard across the board, covering traditional bank mergers, bank holding company acquisitions, and savings and loan transactions. It’s a green light for consolidation among regional and local banks.

How This Hits Your Wallet and Main Street

If you live in a rural or suburban area where only a few banks operate, this change could matter a lot. Imagine your local credit union or community bank gets bought by a slightly larger regional bank—one that still falls under the $10 billion cap. Under current law, regulators might say, “Hold on, if you buy them, you’ll control 80% of the checking accounts in this county, and that’s bad for the local economy.” This bill tells those regulators to skip that part of the review. The result? Easier consolidation means fewer choices for consumers and small businesses, which historically leads to higher ATM fees, lower interest rates on savings, and less accessible credit for local entrepreneurs.

For small business owners, this could mean fewer options when seeking a loan, potentially forcing them to accept less favorable terms from the one or two big players left in town. For the average consumer, it could mean the loss of a trusted local institution and a shift to a larger, more impersonal bank that might close down local branches to cut costs, leaving you driving further just to deposit a check.

The GDP Escalator Clause

There’s another detail in the bill that’s easy to miss but has major long-term implications: the $10 billion threshold is not static. It’s set to be adjusted annually based on the growth of the U.S. nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Every time the GDP increases, the asset threshold for this limited review goes up. This is essentially an escalator clause that ensures the loophole gets bigger over time. As the economy grows, larger and larger bank mergers will be able to skip the antitrust review. This means that year after year, more transactions will be waved through without regulators having the authority to ask the basic question: Does this merger hurt competition and consumers?