To require the Secretary of the Treasury to designate certain covered organizations as Foreign Financial Threat Organizations, and for other purposes.
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3523
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Finance and Financial Sector
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-20: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Last Updated
- 2025-06-05T08:06:58Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
This bill aims to protect U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents from foreign financial fraud by requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to identify and designate certain foreign organizations as "Foreign Financial Threat Organizations" (FFTOs). These designations would impose strict financial and operational restrictions to disrupt fraudulent activities targeting Americans.
Key Provisions
- Designation Process: The Secretary of the Treasury must designate covered organizations as FFTOs within 90 days of the bill's enactment. A "covered organization" is defined as a foreign entity (or its subsidiaries/affiliates) that engages in fraud to deceive U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents into providing cash or assets, as determined jointly by the Treasury Secretary and the Attorney General.
- Notification and Publication: Before designating an organization, the Secretary must notify congressional leaders and relevant committees in writing, explaining the factual basis. Designations are published in the Federal Register seven days after notification.
- Asset Freezing: Upon notification to Congress, the Secretary can order U.S. financial institutions to block all transactions involving the organization's assets until further instructions from the Secretary, Congress, or a court.
- Penalties and Procedures: FFTOs face the same penalties and processes as organizations designated as "specially designated global terrorists" under Executive Order 13224 (which blocks property and prohibits transactions with entities supporting terrorism).
- Enforcement Actions: The federal government can take steps to safeguard U.S. cybersecurity and restrict FFTOs' access to internet or cellular services.
- Prohibition on Contact: The Secretary must prevent FFTOs from reaching out to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents via phone, internet, or email.
- Reporting Requirements: The Secretary must submit annual reports to specified congressional committees starting two years after enactment. Reports will detail designated organizations, seized assets, identification methods, and funds returned to fraud victims. A public version will exclude sensitive information.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Introduces a new category of sanctions specifically for foreign financial fraudsters, modeled after the existing terrorism sanctions framework under Executive Order 13224. This expands the Treasury's authority beyond traditional threats like terrorism to include non-violent financial scams.
- Adds mandatory timelines (e.g., 90-day initial designations) and joint decision-making with the Attorney General, which formalizes and streamlines responses to foreign fraud not previously covered under a dedicated designation process.
- Empowers proactive measures like contact prohibitions and cybersecurity protections, which go beyond current fraud enforcement tools focused mainly on domestic or criminal prosecutions.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Increases workload for the Treasury Department and Attorney General in identifying, designating, and enforcing against FFTOs. Financial institutions must comply with asset freezes, potentially requiring new compliance systems. Congressional oversight is enhanced through notifications and reports.
- On Citizens: Provides stronger protections against foreign scams (e.g., by freezing assets and blocking communications), with potential for returning seized funds to victims, reducing financial losses for individuals.
- On International Relations: Could strain ties with countries hosting designated organizations by limiting their global financial access and internet services, signaling U.S. intolerance for cross-border fraud but possibly leading to diplomatic pushback or retaliatory measures.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents: Primary beneficiaries as victims of fraud, gaining protection from deceptive schemes and potential restitution.
- Foreign Organizations Involved in Fraud: Directly targeted, facing asset seizures, transaction blocks, and operational restrictions that could dismantle their activities.
- U.S. Financial Institutions: Required to freeze assets and monitor transactions, incurring compliance costs but aiding national security.
- Federal Agencies: Treasury Department and Attorney General lead enforcement; other agencies (e.g., those handling cybersecurity) may support actions.
- Congress: Gains oversight through notifications and reports, influencing foreign policy and financial security.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Broadens the application of terrorism-related sanctions to economic crimes, potentially allowing faster asset freezes without full judicial review initially (though courts can intervene). This could streamline enforcement but raise questions about due process for designated entities.
- Constitutional Implications: The contact prohibition and internet restrictions on foreign entities may implicate First Amendment concerns if they indirectly affect U.S. persons' communications, though the focus on foreign actors likely minimizes domestic free speech issues. Asset freezes align with existing executive powers under national security laws.
- Political Implications: Positions the U.S. as proactive against foreign economic threats, appealing to lawmakers focused on consumer protection and cybersecurity. However, it could spark debates over executive overreach in designations or international perceptions of U.S. interventionism in global finance.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]
Cosponsors (4)
Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24], Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3], Rep. Self, Keith [R-TX-3], Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-20: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-05-20: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-05-20: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-05-20: Introduced in House
- 2025-05-20: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- To require the Secretary of the Treasury to designate certain covered organizations as Foreign Financial Threat Organizations, and for other purposes. — issued 2025-05-20 — PDF (5 pages)