A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The ReportScams.gov Act creates a federal priority goal to reduce scams affecting people in the United States. It establishes a Scams Steering Committee made up of various federal agencies to develop a Federal Scams Action Plan. The bill requires the creation of a centralized website, reportscams.gov, for scam prevention, reporting, and victim assistance. It also mandates regular progress reports to the public and Congress. Additionally, the act provides tools for interagency fund transfers and expedited hiring to support these goals.
Yes· 3 of 36
- Scored +9
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Specifically mentions the National Elder Fraud Hotline and provides resources for elder assistance.
- Scored +9
Would retired people be better off under this?
Strongly supports seniors through targeted fraud prevention and specialized hotlines.
- Scored +8
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
Creates a centralized hub for scam reporting, prevention, and victim assistance to protect consumers from fraud.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Centralized Information and Reporting: The establishment of reportscams.gov provides a single, secure place for the public to access education on how to avoid scams, report fraudulent activity, and find assistance for victims (Section 3(d)).
-
Victim Support Resources: The bill requires the website to provide resources for those who have been scammed, including steps to safeguard assets, how to recoup losses, and contact information for law enforcement and mental health crisis intervention (Section 3(d)(2)(D)).
-
Increased Public Awareness: The act mandates a public awareness campaign to inform people about the website and requires the site to provide updated information on recent scam trends every 90 days (Section 3(d)(2)(A)(i) and Section 3(e)).
-
Improved Agency Coordination: By creating a Scams Steering Committee with members from agencies like the DOJ, FBI, and FTC, the bill aims to create a uniform government-wide definition of scams and a coordinated strategy to hold perpetrators accountable (Section 3(b) and Section 3(c)).
-
Verification of Government Contact: The website will provide verified contact information for agencies often impersonated by scammers, allowing the public to proactively verify the authenticity of suspicious claims (Section 3(d)(2)(B)(iii)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Limited Scope of Direct Assistance: While the bill provides information and links to assistance, it does not explicitly mandate the provision of direct financial restitution to victims, only "assistance and guidance" (Section 3(c)(2)(G)).
-
Potential for Redacted Information: The annual report on scam data and trends may be redacted to remove sensitive or classified material, which could limit the amount of transparent information available to the public (Section 5(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — Strongly supports seniors through targeted fraud prevention and specialized hotlines. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Specifically mentions the National Elder Fraud Hotline and provides resources for elder assistance. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Financial losses from scams are disproportionately devastating for low-income households. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Provides verified government contact info to prevent impersonation scams targeting immigrants. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides tools to prevent financial loss and recoup assets. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of race. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of race. Would business owners be better off under this? — Provides education and prevention programs for private industry. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of race. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of identity. Would men be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of gender. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Provides centralized reporting and resources to recover from financial fraud. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of race. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Provides accessible resources for those who may be more vulnerable to scams. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Increases protection against fraud in areas with fewer local resources. Would students be better off under this? — Protects students from education and employment-related scams. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Increases protection against fraud in densely populated areas. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans are often targets of specific impersonation scams; this provides verification tools. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of race. Would women be better off under this? — Protects all citizens from fraud regardless of gender. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Increases protection for digitally active populations prone to online scams. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Offers resources for asset safeguarding. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Offers resources for asset safeguarding and scam reporting. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Offers resources for asset safeguarding. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Offers resources for asset safeguarding. Would children be better off under this? — Protects children and their guardians through scam education and prevention.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Creates a centralized hub for scam reporting, prevention, and victim assistance to protect consumers from fraud. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Includes education programs for private industry on how to recognize and avoid scams. Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill allows for expedited direct hiring of specialists to implement the Scams Action Plan. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Reducing financial losses from scams can marginally improve overall economic stability for consumers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires public annual reports on scam data, trends, and performance reviews. Does this give the federal government more power? — Establishes a new federal priority goal and an interagency steering committee.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The bill targets spoofing and digital deception, enhancing the government's cybersecurity posture against fraud.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — Provides guidance on safeguarding assets and personal information after a scam.
- Healthcare
- Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The website must provide links to mental health and crisis intervention organizations for scam victims.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Reducing financial losses to scams helps prevent families from falling deeper into poverty.
- 7/29/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/15/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Kirsten GillibrandDemocrat · New York
Rick ScottRepublican · Florida