Bill Overview
Title: Nowhere to Hide Oligarchs’ Assets Act
Description: This bill expands the scope of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network's (FinCEN's) authority to obtain records related to financial crimes. Specifically, FinCEN may request a nationwide geographic targeting order requiring additional recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to domestic financial institutions or nonfinancial trades or businesses. Under current law, such an order must be limited to a specific geographic area. Additionally, the bill expands existing recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to U.S. residents, citizens, and entities when transacting with a foreign financial agency to also include transactions with a foreign nonfinancial trade or business.
Sponsors: Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in cross-border financial transactions
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill primarily impacts oligarchs or wealthy individuals who use complex financial systems to hide assets.
- Financial institutions and nonfinancial trades or businesses dealing with potentially illicit wealth will be subject to stricter scrutiny.
- The focus is on transactions involving foreign financial agencies nonfinancial trades, potentially involving international business actions.
Reasoning
- The bill focuses on financial transactions, targeting those involved in hiding or manipulating assets, typically affecting a smaller segment of the population.
- The target group includes those involved in international financial transactions, both wealthy individuals and institutions.
- Given the cost limitations, the policy must be precisely enforced to avoid undue burden on those not engaged in financial crimes.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for increased scrutiny in financial transactions to avoid illegal activities.
- The policy might increase the workload for my firm, affecting our efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could add more paperwork for small business owners like me.
- I worry about increased operational costs due to more reporting requirements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Banker (Miami, FL)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased reporting requirements might strain our resources.
- However, it's necessary to prevent illicit financial activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Real Estate Investor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about privacy and the increased scrutiny on my transactions.
- Despite being compliant, this feels intrusive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 9 |
Freelancer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a freelancer with foreign clients, I'm worried about more tax paperwork.
- I wish there were resources to assist small earners like us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Oil and Gas Consultant (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might malign the confidentiality agreements we maintain.
- Increased auditing may hamper business negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
University Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy sounds beneficial in curbing corruption but increases paperwork.
- I hope the system compensates for the extra administrative work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Casino Manager (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may make our compliance more visible and adds operational costs.
- It's a double-edged sword with potential benefits and drawbacks for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Cryptocurrency Trader (Austin, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy threatens the privacy aspect of digital trading significantly.
- The increased reporting might scare off international clients.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
NGO Worker (Denver, CO)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may redirect important resources towards compliance rather than aid.
- Stricter regulations could delay necessary funding channels.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 3: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 5: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential complexity and burden on financial and nonfinancial sectors to comply with expanded requirements.
- Possibility for increased cross-border transaction transparency.
- Potential for improved governmental revenue from recovered assets and reduced financial crime.