Bill Overview
Title: Taylor Force Martyr Payment Prevention Act of 2022
Description: This bill expands the institutional factors the Department of the Treasury must consider when making a finding that a foreign financial institution is of primary money laundering concern and is therefore subject to special measures, including the prohibition of opening or maintaining correspondent accounts in U.S financial institutions. Specifically, Treasury must consider (1) the extent to which an institution knowingly provides financial services to Hamas, or to an agent of Hamas; and (2) the extent to which an institution, transaction, or type of account is used to facilitate or promote payments for certain acts of terrorism against U.S. and Israeli citizens.
Sponsors: Rep. Lamborn, Doug [R-CO-5]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals affected by disrupted payments to Hamas and related terrorism financing
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The legislation targets financial institutions that provide services to terrorist organizations, thus aiming to disrupt their financing.
- Hamas and its agents are specifically mentioned, indicating a direct impact on these groups.
- U.S. financial institutions may need to implement stricter compliance measures, affecting their operational processes.
- If foreign financial institutions are banned from U.S. correspondent accounts, this can affect international financial transactions broadly.
Reasoning
- The primary aim of the policy is to disrupt financial support for Hamas and related terrorist activities. This could benefit Americans by reducing the risk of terrorism, though direct impacts on individual wellbeing may vary.
- Financial institutions will need to spend on compliance measures, which might indirectly influence customers through higher fees or reduced services. Those working in these institutions, especially in compliance, could see an increase in job opportunities or workloads.
- The policy may result in stricter international financial transactions, affecting individuals and businesses engaged in international trade or having accounts with foreign institutions impacted by this act.
- Increased compliance can lead to a more cumbersome banking experience for users as institutions adapt their processes, though this varies widely across individuals.
- It is necessary to model varying degrees of impact taking into account a large population where not everyone is directly affected.
Simulated Interviews
Compliance Officer at a Bank (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe that this policy is necessary to prevent terrorism financing, but the increased compliance workload is significant.
- Our bank has to overhaul several processes to ensure we're not at risk of being associated with these types of transactions.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Retired Veteran (Chicago, IL)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support any actions that reduce the capabilities of terrorist groups like Hamas.
- While I'm not directly affected financially, I feel that increased security gives me peace of mind.
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 | 7 |
Software Developer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might delay some of our transactions, increasing the friction in our international operations.
- Security is important, but I worry about the operational impact on the business.
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 |
Financial Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could deter international clients from engaging with us, worried about compliance hurdles.
- In the short term, we'll see increased work assessing which clients may be impacted.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
College Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to combat terrorism financing, though I'm personally not directly impacted yet.
- This could be an interesting case study for my course work, especially the impact of policy on international security.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Oil Industry Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our dealings are legitimate, but we may face tougher scrutiny.
- These policies are a double-edged sword, promoting security while possibly hampering legitimate business processes.
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 |
CEO of a Small Export Company (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might complicate banking arrangements with our buyers overseas.
- While I support measures against terrorism, it should not create unnecessary barriers for lawful businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Non-profit Worker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy won't restrict our ability to transfer funds to legitimate partners that need support.
- Transparency in operations and secure processes are important, but we need clear guidelines to ensure we're compliant.
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 | 7 |
Retired former Intelligence Officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a strong deterrent to financing terrorism which I fully support.
- I'm aware of the complexities in implementing such policies but believe they're necessary.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Freelance Journalist (Boston, MA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm curious about the actual impact of policy on reducing terrorism.
- Covering this topic might attract more readers and provide valuable insights into global security issues.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 3: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Impact on international diplomatic relations, especially with countries where targeted financial institutions are based.
- Risk of financial institutions finding loopholes to circumvent new regulations, requiring vigilant oversight.
- The necessity for ongoing assessments on whether the targeted measures effectively disrupt terrorism financing without unnecessary harm to global financial networks.