Bill Overview
Title: To provide for certain whistleblower incentives and protections.
Description: This bill revises the management of whistleblower incentive awards for individuals providing original information relating to illegal monetary transactions, money laundering, or other financial crimes. Specifically, the bill establishes a minimum award for whistleblowers of not less than 10 percent of the collected monetary sanctions. Further, the bill establishes the Financial Integrity Fund for the payment of such awards. The fund is comprised of collected monetary sanctions and investments of the fund.
Sponsors: Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or aware of financial crimes
Estimated Size: 500000
- Whistleblowers who provide information on financial crimes often risk retaliation and loss of income, thus they are directly affected by incentives and protection legislation.
- The legislation impacts professionals in financial industries where knowledge of financial crimes is more prevalent.
- Legal and compliance departments of corporations may face changes in how whistleblower information is handled.
- The overall integrity of financial markets may be affected as increased whistleblower protections might deter financial crimes.
Reasoning
- The bill aims to incentivize whistleblowing by providing monetary awards, potentially increasing the willingness of individuals in financial industries to report crimes.
- In the short term, individuals directly involved in whistleblowing may experience improved wellbeing due to financial rewards and the satisfaction of contributing to legal enforcement.
- Some financial professionals may have increased stress due to potential changes in workplace dynamics or fear of being implicated in reported activities.
- Over time, as financial markets potentially become more stable and transparent, general wellbeing might improve due to increased trust and reduced corrupt practices.
- Whistleblower initiatives generally impact a small portion of the population directly but can have broader societal benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York City, NY)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a great step towards protecting people like me who are aware of financial wrongdoing but fear reprisal.
- I would feel more secure reporting issues if I knew there was adequate financial compensation and protection.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Compliance Officer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy will encourage a culture of transparency where I work.
- There's always a concern about how whistleblowers are treated; the monetary incentives might help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm somewhat distanced from compliance issues, but I believe this policy will build integrity in the financial space.
- It might deter malicious activities in sectors I work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy change should significantly impact the number of cases and potentially the outcomes for my clients.
- However, it might complicate corporate negotiations further.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Banker (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a necessary policy to protect integrity in finance, though I'm not directly affected now.
- It's encouraging to see protections being taken seriously.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't foresee immediate changes for my business.
- However, clearer skies in finance help us all in the long term.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Accountant (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is vital, but it could complicate compliance even further in my work.
- Having strong protections might make necessary disclosures easier to manage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Credit Analyst (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it will be beneficial for those considering whistleblowing, though I don't feel it directly impacts my current role.
- It's likely to influence the overall ethical landscape positively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Risk Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could bring significant changes to our risk assessment models.
- The potential for increased whistleblower activity is something we must prepare for.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Financial Journalist (Boston, MA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may lead to a surge in stories related to whistleblower cases.
- It reaffirms the importance of accountability and transparency in financial sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $60000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $85000000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $130000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $220000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Effectiveness in significantly altering the volume of information provided by whistleblowers relies on both the perceived and actual efficacy of the protection being offered.
- Financial crimes are complex and determining eligibility for rewards could require substantial administrative oversight.
- Market responses and potential shifts, particularly in high-pressure financial sectors, must be monitored to adjust policy tools efficiently.