Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3316

Bill Overview

Title: A bill 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: Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in or impacted by anti-money laundering and financial crime reporting

Estimated Size: 200000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Financial Auditor (New York City, NY)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the act could encourage more transparency within organizations, which is positive.
  • It might make my job busier but more rewarding if I can make a real impact.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Compliance Officer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy adds more responsibility on compliance teams, which is both a challenge and an opportunity.
  • I hope it leads to better practices across the industry.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Whistleblower (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The financial incentive is encouraging but I worry if it's enough to outweigh the risks involved.
  • More protections would be appreciated alongside the financial rewards.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 3
Year 2 5 3
Year 3 6 3
Year 5 7 3
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 8 3

Retired Banker (Chicago, IL)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's encouraging to see steps being taken to combat financial crimes with meaningful incentives.
  • I think it will benefit the financial system in the long run.

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

Data Analyst (Austin, TX)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Data analysis in whistleblower cases might become more demanding but also more impactful.
  • It feels good to know we might be part of a bigger change in reducing financial crimes.

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 6 6

Accountant (Miami, FL)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm optimistic about the act encouraging accountability in larger corporations.
  • I doubt it would change much for smaller businesses though.

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

Legal Advisor (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This adds a meaningful tool in our legal toolkit for encouraging clients to maintain compliance.
  • I think it might lead to more clients seeking regulation-based advice.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Developer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The act seems good for those reporting, but it won't affect my work directly.
  • Maybe there will be an increased demand for secure systems to accompany the policy.

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

Financial Crime Investigator (Denver, CO)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The incentive could lead to increased reporting, which will keep us busier.
  • I believe it could help us tackle financial crimes more effectively if implemented well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Economics Professor (Boston, MA)

Age: 45 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Such policies generally bolster economic integrity if their execution is transparent.
  • The fund's success will depend on how consistently it can reward whistleblowers.

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 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $75000000)

Year 2: $52500000 (Low: $26250000, High: $78750000)

Year 3: $55125000 (Low: $27562500, High: $82687500)

Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $90000000)

Year 10: $75000000 (Low: $37500000, High: $112500000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)

Key Considerations