Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7338

Bill Overview

Title: To require congressional notification prior to payments of Department of State rewards using cryptocurrencies, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill requires the Department of State to notify Congress before paying out a reward in cryptocurrency under an existing program that authorizes rewards for information leading to the arrest or conviction of parties responsible for certain criminal acts. (Current law allows such rewards to consist of money, nonmonetary items, or both.) The State Department must also report to Congress on any cryptocurrency payments made under the rewards program, including an explanation of why a reward was made using cryptocurrency. The bill also requires the State Department to report to Congress on the most effective avenues to provide aid to Ukraine, including possible uses of cryptocurrencies or other blockchain-related technologies. (Blockchain is a digital ledger technology that allows for transactions without a trusted intermediary, such as a bank.) The Department of the Treasury must report to Congress an assessment of how digital currencies can affect the effectiveness and enforcement of U.S. sanctions relating to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Sponsors: Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in digital currency and sanctions policies

Estimated Size: 300000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Sanctions Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy provides a needed framework to handle digital currency risks during sanctions.
  • It might initially increase workload but ensures stronger policy resilience.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Cryptocurrency Developer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There might be increased regulatory scrutiny but it's a necessary step for industry legitimacy.
  • The implications for sanction resilience should be balanced with innovation freedom.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Financial Services Advisor (New York, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While it doesn't directly impact clients yet, it sets a precedent for future regulations.
  • It's important for overall market stability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Digital Security Consultant (Austin, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a positive move towards enhancing digital currency security against misuse.
  • Could lead to more business opportunities in developing security solutions.

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 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Policy Advocacy Group Member (Chicago, IL)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The act provides a clear focus on preventing the misuse of digital currencies.
  • Striking a balance between regulation and innovation will be critical.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 8 6

International Relations Scholar (Miami, FL)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The act is pivotal in understanding and controlling the geopolitical uses of digital currencies.
  • Will help in creating more researched and effective policies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Cryptocurrency Trader (Boston, MA)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Uncertain regulations can impact market stability, but clarity is beneficial in the long term.
  • Will watch how this policy impacts sanction circumvention.

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 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Blockchain Startup Founder (Seattle, WA)

Age: 27 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The push for transparency helps in legitimation, though it might introduce stringent compliance costs.
  • This policy might open discussions for broader applications.

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 7

Professor of Finance (Houston, TX)

Age: 44 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this are crucial in curbing illegal activities through cryptocurrencies.
  • It will serve as an important case for other regulations globally.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Computing Master’s Student (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Interesting real-world implications for my studies on how governments regulate crypto.
  • Learning about these policies could shape career paths.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1150000 (Low: $1000000, High: $1300000)

Year 2: $1100000 (Low: $950000, High: $1250000)

Year 3: $1050000 (Low: $900000, High: $1200000)

Year 5: $1000000 (Low: $850000, High: $1150000)

Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $850000, High: $1150000)

Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $850000, High: $1150000)

Key Considerations