Small Business Investment Company Maximum Leverage Exclusion
Section 2 · Sec. 2 ·
What this chapter is about
This part changes two older rules about small business funds. It changes who may put money in. It changes how much a fund may borrow. It also names the kinds of firm whose deals may be left out of that count.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(2) in subparagraph (B)(iii)-- (A) in subclause (I), by striking "established prior to October 1, 1987"; (B) in subclause (II)-- (i) by striking "or" and inserting a comma; and (ii) by inserting ", foundation, endowment, or trust of any college or university" after "pension plan"”
Amends section 103(9) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, codified at 15 U.S.C. 662(9). In subclause (I) of subparagraph (B)(iii) it strikes the words "established prior to October 1, 1987". In subclause (II) it inserts ", foundation, endowment, or trust of any college or university" after "pension plan". What that subparagraph governs is set by the amended statute, which is not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“(2) in subparagraph (B)(iii)-- (A) in subclause (I), by striking "established prior to October 1, 1987"; (B) in subclause (II)-- (i) by striking "or" and inserting a comma; and (ii) by inserting ", foundation, endowment, or trust of any college or university" after "pension plan"”
That sentence, in plain words
This part changes a list in a 1958 law. It drops a date rule. It adds a fund, gift or trust held by a college.
What this is about
The 1958 law is not on this site. So the list itself is not shown here. This part only names the words to drop and the words to add.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“"(C) does not include any funds obtained directly or indirectly from any Federal, State, or local government or any government agency or instrumentality, except for funds described in subclauses (I) through (III) of subparagraph (B)(iii), for the purpose of approval by the Administrator of any request for leverage."”
Adds a new subparagraph (C) at the end of section 103(9) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. The added words rule out funds obtained directly or indirectly from any Federal, State or local government, or from any government agency or instrumentality, except funds described in subclauses (I) through (III) of subparagraph (B)(iii), for the purpose of approval by the Administrator of any request for leverage. What term the subparagraph belongs to is set by the amended statute, which is not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“"(C) does not include any funds obtained directly or indirectly from any Federal, State, or local government or any government agency or instrumentality, except for funds described in subclauses (I) through (III) of subparagraph (B)(iii), for the purpose of approval by the Administrator of any request for leverage."”
That sentence, in plain words
Money from the government does not count. That covers federal, state and city money. It covers any government body. A few named kinds of money still count.
What this is about
This rule is used when the head of the agency looks at a request to borrow. The list of kinds that still count sits in the older law. That law is not on this site.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) in subparagraph (A)-- (A) in clause (i), by striking "300" and inserting "200"”
Amends clause (i) of section 303(b)(2)(A) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, codified at 15 U.S.C. 683(b)(2), by striking "300" and inserting "200". What the figure governs is set by the amended statute, which is not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“(1) in subparagraph (A)-- (A) in clause (i), by striking "300" and inserting "200"”
That sentence, in plain words
One number in an older law changes. The number 300 comes out. The number 200 goes in.
What this is about
The older law is not on this site. So what the number is for is not shown here. This part just swaps one number for a smaller one.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(B) by amending clause (ii) to read as follows: "(ii)(I) with respect to such a company that makes quarterly or semiannual interest payments $250,000,000; or "(II) $175,000,000 with respect to any other company licensed under section 301(c)."”
Rewrites clause (ii) of section 303(b)(2)(A) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. As rewritten, the clause names $250,000,000 with respect to a company that makes quarterly or semiannual interest payments, and $175,000,000 with respect to any other company licensed under section 301(c). What the figures govern is set by the amended statute, which is not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“(B) by amending clause (ii) to read as follows: "(ii)(I) with respect to such a company that makes quarterly or semiannual interest payments $250,000,000; or "(II) $175,000,000 with respect to any other company licensed under section 301(c)."”
That sentence, in plain words
A firm may pay interest each quarter. Or it may pay twice a year. That firm has a figure of 250 million dollars. Any other firm with a license has 175 million dollars.
What this is about
These figures sit in a 1958 law. That law is not on this site. So what the figures cover is not shown here. This part only puts the new words in.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking "may not exceed $350,000,000." and inserting the following "may not exceed-- "(i) with respect to such companies that are commonly controlled and that make quarterly or semiannual interest payments, $475,000,000; or "(ii) $350,000,000 with respect to any other companies licensed under section 301(c) that are commonly controlled."”
Amends subparagraph (B) of section 303(b)(2) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. It strikes the words "may not exceed $350,000,000." and inserts two figures in their place: $475,000,000 with respect to commonly controlled companies that make quarterly or semiannual interest payments, and $350,000,000 with respect to any other commonly controlled companies licensed under section 301(c).
What the document actually says
“(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking "may not exceed $350,000,000." and inserting the following "may not exceed-- "(i) with respect to such companies that are commonly controlled and that make quarterly or semiannual interest payments, $475,000,000; or "(ii) $350,000,000 with respect to any other companies licensed under section 301(c) that are commonly controlled."”
That sentence, in plain words
Some companies are run by the same owner. If they pay interest each quarter or twice a year, their limit is 475 million dollars. Other such companies have a limit of 350 million dollars.
What this is about
The struck words named one flat limit. This part puts two limits in their place. The rest of the older law is not on this site.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“(B) in clause (i)-- (i) by striking "(i) In calculating" and inserting the following: "(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (iii), in calculating"; (ii) by inserting "or companies" after "of a company"; (iii) by striking "subparagraph (A)" and inserting "subparagraphs (A) and (B)"; (iv) by striking "equity"”
Amends clause (i) of section 303(b)(2)(C) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. It heads the clause "In general", makes it subject to clause (iii), inserts "or companies" after "of a company", replaces the reference to "subparagraph (A)" with one to "subparagraphs (A) and (B)", and strikes the word "equity".
What the document actually says
“(B) in clause (i)-- (i) by striking "(i) In calculating" and inserting the following: "(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (iii), in calculating"; (ii) by inserting "or companies" after "of a company"; (iii) by striking "subparagraph (A)" and inserting "subparagraphs (A) and (B)"; (iv) by striking "equity"”
That sentence, in plain words
The words of an older clause change. It now points to two limits, not one. It now covers more than one company. The word equity comes out.
What this is about
The older clause is not on this site. So its full text is not shown here. This part lists the words to take out and the words to put in.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“"the company or companies in-- "(I) a small business concern located in a low-income geographic area (as defined in section 351 of this title) or in a rural area (as defined in section 343(a)(13) of the Agricultural Act of 1961 (7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(13))); "(II) a small business concern operating primarily in a covered technology category (as defined in section 149(e) of title 10, United States Code); or "(III) a small manufacturer (as defined in section 501(e)(6) of this Act)."”
Rewrites the rest of clause (i) of section 303(b)(2)(C) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. As rewritten, the amounts a company or companies may leave out of the leverage calculation are those invested in a small business concern located in a low-income geographic area, as defined in section 351 of that title, or in a rural area, as defined in section 343(a)(13) of the Agricultural Act of 1961; in a small business concern operating primarily in a covered technology category, as defined in section 149(e) of title 10, United States Code; or in a small manufacturer, as defined in section 501(e)(6) of that Act. Those definitions sit in statutes that are not indexed here.
What the document actually says
“"the company or companies in-- "(I) a small business concern located in a low-income geographic area (as defined in section 351 of this title) or in a rural area (as defined in section 343(a)(13) of the Agricultural Act of 1961 (7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(13))); "(II) a small business concern operating primarily in a covered technology category (as defined in section 149(e) of title 10, United States Code); or "(III) a small manufacturer (as defined in section 501(e)(6) of this Act)."”
That sentence, in plain words
Three kinds of firm are named. One is a small firm in a low income area or a rural area. One is a small firm working mainly in a covered tech field. One is a small maker of goods.
What this is about
Money put into these firms may be left out of a count. That count is used to set how much a fund may borrow. Each kind is spelled out in another law. Those laws are not on this site.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“"(ii) Limitation.--While maintaining the limitation of subparagraph (A)(i) and consistent with a leverage determination ratio issued pursuant to section 301(c), the aggregate amount excluded for a company or companies under clause (i) from the calculation of the outstanding leverage such company or companies for the purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (B) may not exceed the lesser of 50 percent of the private capital of such company or companies or $125,000,000."”
Rewrites clause (ii) of section 303(b)(2)(C) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 as a limitation. As rewritten, the aggregate amount excluded for a company or companies under clause (i) may not exceed the lesser of 50 percent of their private capital or $125,000,000, while the limitation of subparagraph (A)(i) is maintained and consistent with a leverage determination ratio issued pursuant to section 301(c).
What the document actually says
“"(ii) Limitation.--While maintaining the limitation of subparagraph (A)(i) and consistent with a leverage determination ratio issued pursuant to section 301(c), the aggregate amount excluded for a company or companies under clause (i) from the calculation of the outstanding leverage such company or companies for the purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (B) may not exceed the lesser of 50 percent of the private capital of such company or companies or $125,000,000."”
That sentence, in plain words
There is a cap on what may be left out. It is half of the firm's own private money. Or it is 125 million dollars. The lower of the two is the cap.
What this is about
The cap covers one firm or a group of linked firms. The other limits in the law still hold. A ratio set under another part of that law applies as well.
What is disputed
The document does not define this
The inserted words read "the outstanding leverage such company or companies", with no preposition between "leverage" and "such". The site quotes the clause as printed and does not supply a reading of it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall apply”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“"(iii) Prospective applicability.--An investment by a licensee is eligible for exclusion from the calculation of outstanding leverage under clause (i) only if such investment is made by such licensee after the date of enactment of this clause."”
Rewrites clause (iii) of section 303(b)(2)(C) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. As rewritten, an investment by a licensee is eligible for exclusion under clause (i) only if the licensee makes it after the date this clause is enacted. The clause is enacted by this Act, which was approved on May 19, 2026.
What the document actually says
“"(iii) Prospective applicability.--An investment by a licensee is eligible for exclusion from the calculation of outstanding leverage under clause (i) only if such investment is made by such licensee after the date of enactment of this clause."”
That sentence, in plain words
An older deal does not count. Only money put in after this clause becomes law may be left out.
What this is about
This Act was approved on May 19, 2026. Deals made before that day do not get the break. The rule looks forward, not back.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the section does: the words it strikes from and adds to section 103(9) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and the words it strikes from and adds to section 303(b)(2) of that Act, including the new dollar figures, the new list of investments that may be excluded from the leverage calculation, the cap on that exclusion, and the rule that only later investments qualify.
Purely mechanical amendments. Striking a conjunction, a semicolon or a clause designation is recorded only where it changes what somebody must do, so the amendments at subsection (a)(1) and (a)(2)(C), and the two insertions into the heading of subparagraph (C) at subsection (b)(3)(A), are not indexed separately.
The section works entirely by amending the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and that statute is not indexed here. So the site does not record what section 103(9) defines, what the 300 and 200 figures govern, or what the surrounding wording of section 303(b)(2) says. A reader following a citation into that Act will find the older wording until this one is applied. The other statutes the inserted text points to, the Agricultural Act of 1961 and title 10 of the United States Code, are not indexed here either.
