Overview
Title
To permit State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies that receive eligible Federal grant funds to use such funds for investigating elder financial fraud, pig butchering, and general financial fraud, and to clarify that Federal law enforcement agencies may assist State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies in the use of tracing tools for blockchain and related technology, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The GUARD Act lets police use special government money to catch people who cheat older folks out of their money. It also helps them use smart computer tools to track down these tricky scammers.
Summary AI
H. R. 2978, also known as the “Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act” or the “GUARD Act,” allows State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies to use certain federal grant funds to investigate elder financial fraud, pig butchering scams, and general financial fraud. It encourages collaboration and sharing of technology between various levels of law enforcement, particularly in the use of blockchain tracing tools. The bill also mandates reports on the effectiveness and impact of these efforts, alongside a broader report on the status of scams in the United States within a specified timeline. Additionally, federal law enforcement can assist local agencies with technology to trace and combat financial fraud.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The recent congressional bill, H. R. 2978, introduces significant measures to combat financial fraud in the United States. This legislation, entitled the "Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act" or the "GUARD Act," focuses primarily on directing federal grant funds to address various types of financial fraud, notably those affecting vulnerable populations such as the elderly.
General Summary of the Bill
The GUARD Act seeks to empower State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies by enabling them to use federal grants to investigate elder financial fraud, schemes known as "pig butchering," and other forms of financial fraud. It lays out specific definitions for these terms to guide enforcement and establishes a framework for cooperation between federal and other law enforcement agencies. Additionally, the Act requires various reports on financial fraud trends, the use of tracing tools for blockchain technology, and the broader state of scams in the U.S.
Summary of Significant Issues
A notable issue with this bill is the term "pig butchering," which might be unfamiliar to many and lacks a clear definition within the bill. This could hinder public understanding and make it difficult for enforcement agencies to uniformly address such scams. Another point of concern is the potential lack of oversight for the allocation and use of federal grants, raising questions about the efficient and effective use of public funds. Furthermore, the bill discusses various reporting requirements, but some lack specifics on methodology and accountability, which may lead to challenges in data reliability and enforcement actions.
Impact on the Public
The bill could have a beneficial impact on the general public by strengthening measures against financial fraud, thereby potentially reducing the number and severity of such crimes. By targeting financial crimes that affect particularly vulnerable groups, like the elderly, the bill aims to protect citizens from losing their savings to deceitful schemes. However, if the lack of clarity regarding technical terms and funding allocation persists, the implementation of these measures may be ineffective or inconsistent.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies stand to gain the most direct benefit from this bill, as it provides them with additional resources and federal support to combat financial crimes. However, without clear guidance on implementing these resources, they may struggle to maximize their effectiveness. Financial institutions and technology companies could find themselves more frequently collaborating with law enforcement, which could lead to higher operational demands.
In conclusion, while H. R. 2978 positions itself as a vital legislative step towards addressing financial fraud, its success will largely depend on clarifying ambiguous terms, ensuring robust oversight of federal funding, and streamlining inter-agency cooperation. Properly addressing these issues could bolster public confidence and enhance the operational efficacy of law enforcement agencies tasked with protecting consumers from financial fraud.
Financial Assessment
The Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act, or "GUARD Act," primarily focuses on enabling various law enforcement agencies to apply federal grant funds towards investigating elder financial fraud, pig butchering scams, and general financial fraud. This commentary examines the financial elements of the bill and how they intersect with issues identified during the review process.
Summary of Financial Allocations
The bill authorizes the use of eligible Federal grant funds by State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies to address elder financial fraud, pig butchering scams, and general financial fraud. These funds can be drawn from several existing federal programs:
- Department of Justice Economic, High-Technology, White Collar, and Internet Crime Prevention National Training and Technical Assistance Program
- Department of Justice Information Sharing Training and Technical Assistance Program
- Department of Justice Internet of Things National Training and Technical Assistance Program
- Section 1401 of the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2022 that includes grants for enforcing cybercrimes against individuals.
- Department of Justice COPS Technology and Equipment Program
These allocations aim to support law enforcement by hiring personnel, procuring technology, and fostering collaboration across different levels of government.
Relation to Identified Issues
Ambiguity in Financial Definitions: The term "pig butchering" is used in the financial fraud context but might be unfamiliar to the general public. Clear definitions within financial documentation are critical to ensuring accurate grant application and usage, as ambiguity can hinder effective implementation.
Metrics and Evaluation: The bill specifies the usage of allocated funds but does not detail metrics or benchmarks, such as improved data collection and reporting procedures. This lack may lead to inconsistent implementation across jurisdictions and impede the evaluation of funds' effectiveness.
Accountability and Oversight: Section 6 calls for agencies using federal grants to report to Congress. However, it lacks clear consequences or accountability measures for agencies that fail to adhere to reporting requirements, potentially undermining oversight.
Undefined Tools and Technologies: Section 7 mentions "tracing tools for blockchain and related technology tools" without further definition. This ambiguity could lead to discrepancies in how funds are utilized across jurisdictions, impacting financial oversight and the precision of support provided by federal agencies.
Timeliness of Reports: The requirement for broad consultations in Section 5 and the collaborative report from multiple authorities in Section 4 may cause bureaucratic delays, affecting the timely presentation of findings regarding financial frauds and scams, which is necessary for legislative and public oversight.
In conclusion, the GUARD Act's financial provisions aim to strengthen law enforcement capabilities against specific types of financial fraud. However, certain issues, such as unclear definitions, lack of detailed metrics, and potential delays in the processing of reports and oversight, present challenges that could affect the effective and equitable use of federal grant funds. Addressing these issues would ensure that the financial allocations achieve their intended goals efficiently.
Issues
The term 'pig butchering' used in various sections (Sections 2, 3, 4, 5) is not widely recognized and could lead to confusion or misinterpretation. It requires a clear definition or explanation to ensure understanding by a general audience, as it relates to serious financial fraud issues.
Section 3 outlines the use of 'eligible Federal grant funds' but lacks details on metrics or benchmarks for improved data collection and reporting, which may result in inconsistent implementation or evaluation. Moreover, the absence of oversight or review processes for fund allocation could lead to inefficient or wasteful spending.
Section 5's requirement for a report on the state of scams in the United States lacks specific methodology for estimating consumer losses, which could impact the reliability of the data. The lack of clarity on how 'overseas actors' and 'organized crime' will be identified is also a concern for accurate reporting.
Section 7 mentions federal assistance with 'tracing tools for blockchain and related technology tools' but does not define these tools or provide oversight measures, potentially leading to ambiguity and questions about the effectiveness and transparency of federal assistance.
Section 6 addresses report submissions to Congress but lacks details about accountability or consequences for agencies that fail to comply, which could undermine the effectiveness of oversight and accountability efforts.
Section 5's wide-ranging consultation requirements for preparing scam reports could lead to bureaucratic delays and conflicts, impacting timely completion and submission of the report.
Section 4 demands a joint report from multiple authorities, which could result in coordination challenges and potential delays in report preparation and submission, undermining timely legislative and public oversight.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the Act states its official title, which is the “Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act” or simply the “GUARD Act”.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for key terms used in the Act, including "elder financial fraud," which refers to the misuse of money belonging to elderly or disabled people; "eligible Federal grant funds," which are funds given by several Department of Justice programs and other acts; "general financial fraud," defined as deceitful activities to unlawfully take money or valuables; "pig butchering," a scam where victims are tricked into investing in fake schemes; "scam," which means committing financial crimes through trickery or social engineering; and "State," referring to any U.S. state, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories.
3. Federal grants used for investigating elder financial fraud, pig butchering, and general financial fraud Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies can use federal grants to tackle elder financial fraud, pig butchering scams, and other financial frauds by hiring experts, getting special training, using tools, and coordinating with other agencies. They must report on how they spent the money and how it helped fight fraud.
4. Report on general financial fraud, pig butchering, and elder financial fraud Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury and other officials to deliver a report to Congress, within a year after the bill is enacted, detailing efforts and suggestions for dealing with different types of financial fraud, such as scams targeting the elderly and fraud schemes known as "pig butchering."
5. Report on the state of scams in the United States Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Secretary of the Treasury and other officials to submit a report to Congress within two years, detailing the state of scams in the United States. This report will estimate the number and impact of scams, evaluate federal enforcement actions, and identify funds used to combat scams by various government agencies. Public comments will be solicited as part of the report preparation.
Money References
- (a) In general.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the appropriate Federal banking agencies and Federal functional regulators shall submit a report to the Congress on the state of scams in the United States that— (1) estimates— (A) the number of financial fraud, pig butchering, elder financial fraud, and scams committed against American consumers each year, including— (i) attempted scams, including through social media, online dating services, email, impersonation of financial institutions and non-bank financial institutions; (ii) successful scams, including through social media, online dating services, email, impersonation of financial institutions and non-bank financial institutions; (B) the number of consumers each year that lose money to one or more scams; (C) the dollar amount of consumer losses to scams each year; (D) the percentage of scams each year that can be attributed to— (i) overseas actors; and (ii) organized crime; (E) the number of attempted scams each year that involve the impersonation of phone numbers associated with financial institutions and non-bank financial institutions; (F) an estimate of the number of synthetic identities impersonating American consumers each year; (2) provides an overview of the Federal civil and criminal enforcement actions brought against the recipients of the proceeds of financial fraud, pig butchering, elder financial fraud, and scams in the period covered by the report that includes— (A) the number of such enforcement actions; (B) an evaluation of the effectiveness of such enforcement actions; (C) an identification of the types of claims brought against the recipients the recipients of the proceeds of financial fraud, pig butchering, elder financial fraud, and scams; (D) an identification of the types of penalties imposed through such enforcement actions; (E) an identification of the types of relief obtained through such enforcement actions; and (F) the number of such enforcement actions that are connected to a Suspicious Activity Report; and (3) identifies amounts made available and amounts expended to address financial fraud, pig butchering, elder financial fraud, and scams during the period covered by the report by— (A) the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection; (B) the Department of Justice; (C) the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (D) the Federal Communications Commission; (E) the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board; (F) the Federal Trade Commission; (G) the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; (H) the Securities and Exchange Commission; and (I) the Social Security Administration. (b) Solicitation of public comment.—In carrying out the report required under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury shall solicit comments from consumers, social media companies, email providers, telecommunications companies, financial institutions, non-bank financial institutions.
6. Report to Congress Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Each year, federal agencies that give out certain grant funds must report to specific congressional committees on how law enforcement agencies used the money.
7. Federal law enforcement agencies assisting State, local, and tribal law enforcement and fusion centers Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Federal law enforcement agencies are allowed to help State, local, and Tribal law enforcement, as well as fusion centers, in using tracing tools for blockchain and similar technologies.