Reporting Requirements in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Summary

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA, Division A of H.R. 1424, P.L. 110-
343) established numerous reporting requirements regarding a variety of issues, and many of
those reports have already been published. The entities charged with preparation of these reports
include both new entities established by the act (e.g., the Financial Stability Oversight Board and
the Congressional Oversight Panel) as well as agencies and officials who existed before the
enactment of EESA (e.g., the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller General of the United
States). The recipients of these reports also vary, as well as their timing, frequency, and factors
that trigger their development. These differences notwithstanding, all of the EESA reports appear
to share a common purpose--to provide information to Congress and other entities on the
implementation of the act's provisions.

No single entity receives all of the EESA-required reports. It is not readily apparent why some of
the reports are to be sent to a particular set of eight "appropriate committees," some to a subset of
those committees, and some to Congress as a whole. Although one of the purposes of the
legislation is to provide "public accountability" for the use of EESA authorities, only one of the
reports is required to be made to the public. Some of the reports are required to be submitted very
quickly, but other reports are not required for years. Some of the reporting requirements are
recurring (e.g., every 30 days, or quarterly), while others are one-time requirements. Most of the
requirements include clear starting points for the submission of the reports, but in some cases, the
starting points are unclear.

Many of the act's reporting requirements seem to address the same or similar issues. The number
and variety of the required reports may have been intended to provide a variety of perspectives on
the implementation of EESA, but the lack of integration of those requirements may make
understanding the implementation of the act difficult. Also, given the nature of the "troubled
assets" currently being purchased under the act (i.e., bank stock instead of mortgages or other
instruments related to mortgages), it is unclear whether some of the specific requirements are still
relevant. Other information that is not specifically required by the act (e.g., how the federal funds
are being used by the recipients) may be more helpful to Congress and others as they conduct
oversight of the program. Finally, some of the reporting requirements expire on the date that the
last troubled asset is sold or transferred, or the date that the last insurance contract expires.
Without some kind of a lag period for these requirements, a complete history of the transactions
may not be provided.

This report will be updated when new information becomes available.