CATFISH Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Hamadeh, Abraham J. [R-AZ-8]
- Committees
- Agriculture Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 17, 2026
Bottom line
This bill seeks to deter romance fraud against seniors through harsher penalties and to empower financial institutions and large retailers to detect, report, and prevent such fraud through mandatory training, reporting, and internal control requirements.
What it actually does
Establishes enhanced criminal penalties for romance fraud targeting individuals aged 60 or older, mandating additional imprisonment and fines. It also requires financial institutions to implement new reporting procedures for suspected elder fraud, enhance internal controls, and provide employee training. Furthermore, it directs the FBI to develop training for financial institutions and large retailers on identifying and preventing romance fraud, particularly concerning gift card purchases by seniors.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill is a critical step to protect vulnerable senior citizens from rapidly increasing and financially devastating romance fraud schemes, which often target their life savings. They emphasize the need for stronger deterrents and proactive measures from financial institutions and retailers, who are often the first point of contact for victims, to prevent irreversible financial losses.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while the intent to protect seniors is laudable, the bill imposes significant new compliance burdens and potential civil penalties on financial institutions and retailers, which could lead to increased operational costs or unintended consequences like over-reporting or discriminatory practices. Some may also question the effectiveness of enhanced penalties alone without addressing the transnational nature of many fraud operations.
The bill is relatively concise and its provisions are clearly laid out, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core impacts within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 3(a), adding new Section 1353 to Title 18, U.S. Code.
Enhanced Penalties for Romance Fraud Targeting Seniors
This provision creates a new federal crime specifically for romance fraud that targets individuals aged 60 or older. If convicted of an underlying fraud offense (like mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud) committed in furtherance of romance fraud against a senior, offenders face an additional prison term of up to 10 years and an additional fine of up to $1,000,000. Romance fraud is defined as establishing an intimate relationship primarily to defraud the other individual.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that these enhanced penalties are necessary to reflect the severe financial and emotional damage inflicted on senior victims, providing a stronger deterrent and ensuring justice for those who exploit vulnerable populations.
Critics contend
Some legal experts might argue that existing fraud statutes already provide significant penalties, and adding specific enhancements could lead to sentencing disparities or be difficult to prove the "primary purpose" of defrauding in a romantic context.
Tradeoffs
Balances the desire for stronger deterrence and punishment for elder fraud against concerns about potential over-criminalization or complexity in applying sentencing enhancements.
Section 3(b)
FBI-Led Training Programs for Fraud Prevention
The FBI Director is mandated to develop and implement training programs. These programs will teach covered financial institutions how to identify and prevent romance fraud targeting senior customers and educate seniors about such fraud. Additionally, employees of large retailers (500+ full-time equivalent employees) will be trained to intervene when a senior customer purchases a gift card over $500, providing warnings, recommending the National Elder Fraud Hotline, and assisting with calls if requested. The FTC will publish a sample written advisory.
Section 3(c)(1) and (2)
Mandatory Reporting of Elder Fraud Red Flags
Covered financial institutions are required to report specific "red flag" events to the Secretary of the Treasury. These events include unusual changes in senior customer contact information, new digital asset connections, unusual large withdrawals or transfers, distressed customer behavior, mentions of online friends asking for money transfers, or third parties showing excessive interest in a senior's finances. Reports must include detailed information about the event, the senior customer, transaction amounts, and the institution's response.
Section 3(c)(3)
Internal Controls and Customer Education for Financial Institutions
Covered financial institutions must establish procedures to mitigate romance fraud, including transaction monitoring, allowing seniors to designate a contact person for fraud suspicions, referring victims to the National Elder Fraud Hotline, and handling fraud reports. They must also provide employee training on detecting and preventing romance fraud and appropriate actions. Additionally, institutions must provide senior customers with instructions for reporting fraud to various law enforcement agencies and information on trending frauds and prevention methods.
Section 3(d)
Civil Penalties for Violations
Covered banking agencies are authorized to bring civil actions for penalties up to $50,000 for each violation of the requirements outlined in subsection (c) (mandatory reporting, internal controls, training, customer education). The provision includes a "safe harbor" clause, protecting financial institutions and their employees from liability if they act in good faith reliance on policies designed to comply with the bill. This subsection takes effect one year after enactment.
Defines "covered financial institution" broadly to include institutions under various federal banking agencies, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, insured credit unions, AND "a provider of digital assets." It also defines "covered retailer" as any retailer with 500 or more full-time equivalent employees.
Section 3(h)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to consolidate definitions.
Case for: Supporters would argue that a broad definition of "covered financial institution" is essential to ensure comprehensive protection for seniors, especially by including digital asset providers, which are increasingly used in fraud schemes. Defining "covered retailer" ensures that only larger entities with the capacity to implement training are burdened.
Case against: Critics might argue that including "providers of digital assets" without further specificity could create regulatory ambiguity or impose disproportionate burdens on nascent or smaller crypto firms. The 500+ FTE threshold for retailers might exclude many smaller businesses that also sell gift cards and could potentially intervene.
Estimated impact: Significantly expands the scope of entities subject to the bill's requirements, particularly bringing digital asset providers under new anti-fraud mandates.