Bill Overview
Title: Cell Phone Theft Prevention Act of 2022
Description: This bill sets out requirements to prevent the sale of stolen smartphones. Specifically, a commercial provider of mobile or data services may not knowingly provide its services on a smartphone that has been reported stolen by an authorized user. When a user makes such a report, the bill further requires that the provider transmit the report to a central registry of stolen smartphones. Providers may not provide their services on a smartphone that is included in the registry. Additionally, the bill makes it a crime to knowingly sell a smartphone if its mobile device identification number (i.e., a number or signal that identifies a specific device) is listed as stolen on the registry; or remove, obliterate, tamper with, or alter the mobile device identification number, including by facilitating such conduct through hardware or software. Violators are subject to a fine, a prison term of up to five years, or both. The bill also requires any smartphone manufactured for the U.S. market to have (1) a mobile device identification number, or (2) anti-theft functionality that is available to the consumer at no cost.
Sponsors: Rep. Garbarino, Andrew R. [R-NY-2]
Target Audience
Population: Smartphone users susceptible to phone theft and illegal reselling
Estimated Size: 300000000
- This legislation targets the smartphone industry, specifically those dealing in stolen goods and providing network services to stolen devices.
- Individuals who engage in the theft and resale of stolen smartphones will be directly impacted due to the criminalization and penalties introduced.
- Law enforcement agencies will require tools to manage and access the registry of stolen smartphones, impacting their operations.
- Mobile service providers will need to implement systems to actively monitor and manage reports of stolen devices as they can no longer provide services to such devices.
- Consumers, particularly those who have their smartphones stolen, are also impacted as the bill aims to prevent the resale and reuse of such devices, decreasing the incentive for theft.
Reasoning
- The legislation's primary target is the secondhand smartphone market, focusing on preventing the theft and resale of stolen devices.
- Given that there are 300 million smartphone users in the U.S., the impact on individuals will vary depending on their involvement with or exposure to stolen devices.
- The budget constraints mean that the implementation and operational costs for service providers and law enforcement will be well-regulated to ensure cost-effectiveness.
- The Cantril wellbeing assessment will help understand personal and societal impacts, such as reduced theft (leading to increased security and satisfaction) and possible loss of income for those involved in illegal activities.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Chicago, IL)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved that something is finally being done to reduce phone theft. I've lost a lot of data and peace of mind before.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might make secondhand phones more expensive, which is frustrating for students like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small business owner (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried that this law might add more regulation and red tape for my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Police officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This adds to our workload, but it's necessary to curb the growing issue of stolen phones.
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 |
Tech industry consultant (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a much-needed step to protect consumers and ensure ethical business practices.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Tech entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This creates opportunities for tech advancements to develop more anti-theft solutions.
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 |
Retired teacher (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this bill prevents others from going through what I did.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
High school student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 18 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried this could lead to hassle if my phone gets wrongly reported as stolen.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
IT professional (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's always good to see regulations that strengthen our cybersecurity framework.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freelance journalist (Detroit, MI)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a necessary regulation but we'll have to see its overall impact on the market.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $45000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $65000000)
Year 3: $40000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $35000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $55000000)
Year 10: $30000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- Implementation costs mainly incurred by mobile service providers, who must not enable stolen devices.
- Smartphone manufacturers must include anti-theft features, potentially passing costs to consumers.
- Impact on secondhand smartphone market could change consumer behavior, possibly increasing new device sales.