The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 1771·119th Congress·Introduced Mar 3, 2025

Improper Payments Transparency Act

IntroducedEconomics and Public FinanceSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Yakym, Rudy [R-IN-2]
Committees
Budget Committee (primary)
Last action
Mar 3, 2025

Bottom line

The bill aims to increase transparency and accountability regarding improper payments in federal programs by requiring more detailed reporting in the President's annual budget.

What it actually does

This bill mandates that the President's annual budget submission include detailed information on improper payments within federal programs and activities. It requires executive agencies to provide narrative explanations for trends in improper payment rates over the previous three years and to outline incomplete corrective actions along with future steps to address these issues.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue this bill enhances government transparency and accountability by making it easier for Congress and the public to track improper payments and agency efforts to reduce them. They contend that greater visibility will incentivize agencies to improve financial management and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that while the intent is good, adding more reporting requirements could burden agencies with additional administrative tasks without necessarily leading to a significant reduction in improper payments. They might also contend that existing reporting mechanisms are sufficient or that the proposed level of detail could be redundant or overly prescriptive.

The bill text is very short and straightforward, making it easily accessible for a quick read and evaluation.

Section 2, amending Section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code

Mandating Improper Payment Information in President's Budget

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision requires the President's annual budget to include a new section detailing improper payments across federal executive agencies. For each program, it mandates a narrative explanation of why improper payment rates have changed (or not changed) over the past three years. It also requires agencies to report on incomplete corrective actions and their plans to resolve these payment issues.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupExecutive AgenciesImpactIncreased reporting requirements and accountabilityMechanismMandate to include specific data and narratives in the annual budget submission.ScaleGovernment-wide for programs subject to improper payment reporting.
GroupCongress and the PublicImpactImproved access to information on government spending and wasteMechanismCentralized, detailed reporting in the President's budget document.ScaleBroad access to transparency data.
GroupTaxpayersImpactPotential for reduced waste, fraud, and abuse of federal fundsMechanismEnhanced oversight leading to better financial management.ScaleIndirect financial benefit through improved government efficiency.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that this provision is crucial for holding federal agencies accountable for taxpayer money. By requiring detailed explanations of payment errors and corrective action plans, it creates a clear mechanism for oversight, driving agencies to prioritize reducing improper payments and improving financial integrity.

Critics contend

Some might argue that while transparency is good, the additional narrative requirements could lead to boilerplate responses or divert resources from actual payment error reduction efforts to reporting. They might contend that existing laws already require agencies to identify and report improper payments, making this an incremental, potentially burdensome, addition.

Tradeoffs

The bill balances the desire for greater transparency and accountability with the potential for increased administrative burden on federal agencies. It aims to provide more actionable insights into improper payment trends, which could lead to better policy, but requires agencies to dedicate resources to detailed narrative explanations.

FOUND

The bill defines "improper payment" by referencing section 3351 of title 31, United States Code, rather than providing the definition directly within the bill text.

Section 2, amending 31 U.S.C. 1105(a)(40)

Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to avoid redundancy and ensure consistency with existing legal definitions. It is not intended to be evasive.

Case for: Referencing existing law ensures legal consistency and avoids creating conflicting definitions for a term already defined in federal statute. It streamlines the legislative text.

Case against: For a lay reader, it requires an extra step to fully comprehend the bill's scope, potentially making the bill less immediately accessible without external legal research.

Estimated impact: Ensures the bill's scope aligns with the established legal framework for improper payments, which covers a wide range of federal programs and activities.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Buried treasure
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this