To amend the Bank Secrecy Act to exempt transactions with respect to cash reward payments by crime stopper organizations from certain currency transaction reports.
- Sponsor
- Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3]
- Committees
- Financial Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Nov 12, 2025
Bottom line
This bill streamlines operations for crime stopper organizations by removing a federal reporting requirement for banks handling their cash reward payments, potentially enhancing their ability to offer anonymous rewards for crime information.
What it actually does
This bill amends Section 5313(d) of title 31, United States Code (part of the Bank Secrecy Act), to require the Secretary of the Treasury to exempt depository institutions from filing Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) for transactions with nonprofit crime stopper organizations. This exemption applies specifically when the transaction is related to the nonprofit providing a cash reward in exchange for information about a crime.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this exemption will reduce the administrative burden on both banks and nonprofit crime stopper organizations, making it easier and more efficient for these groups to distribute cash rewards to informants. This could encourage more individuals to come forward with valuable information, thereby assisting law enforcement efforts and improving public safety, without compromising the broader integrity of anti-money laundering regulations.
Opponents contend
Critics might contend that any exemption from Currency Transaction Report requirements, even for specific purposes, could create a potential loophole that could be exploited for money laundering or other illicit financial activities. They may argue that maintaining universal reporting standards is crucial for comprehensive financial transparency and national security, and that the administrative burden is a necessary and acceptable cost for preventing abuse.
The bill is exceptionally short and written in clear language, making it very accessible for any reader to understand its provisions quickly and thoroughly.
Section 1, amending Section 5313(d) of title 31, United States Code
Exemption for Crime Stopper Organizations from Currency Transaction Reports
This provision mandates that the Secretary of the Treasury must exempt depository institutions (banks) from the requirement to file Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) for cash transactions exceeding $10,000. This exemption specifically applies when these transactions occur between a bank and a nonprofit crime stopper organization, and are directly connected to the nonprofit providing a cash reward for information about a crime. Essentially, banks will no longer need to report these particular cash reward payments.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this specific exemption will remove an unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle for banks and crime stopper organizations, allowing these nonprofits to operate more efficiently in their mission to assist law enforcement. They contend that current reporting requirements can complicate the anonymous nature of reward payments, potentially deterring individuals from providing crucial information. Streamlining this process could lead to more tips and successful crime resolutions.
Critics contend
Critics may argue that even a narrow exemption could create a precedent or a potential avenue for illicit financial activity. They might contend that the Bank Secrecy Act's purpose is to track large cash transactions to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, and that any carve-out, regardless of its benign intent, weakens the overall financial surveillance framework. They could also argue that the administrative burden on banks for these specific transactions is minimal compared to the benefits of comprehensive reporting.
Tradeoffs
This provision navigates the tension between facilitating crime fighting through anonymous reward systems and maintaining robust financial transparency to combat money laundering. It seeks to reduce administrative burden for specific, well-defined transactions while potentially introducing a limited exception to a key anti-money laundering tool, raising questions about the balance between operational efficiency and regulatory oversight.