The Safe Access to Cash Act of 2025 would amend federal bank robbery law in Title 18 to clarify that automated teller machines (ATMs) are treated as being in the care, custody, control, management, or possession of a bank, credit union, or savings and loan association even when the ATM is not physically located on the institution’s premises. The bill also defines “ATM” for purposes of the statute as a network-connected terminal that allows customers to access accounts for withdrawals, deposits, or balance inquiries using an authorized card or access device.
In addition, the bill specifies that cash in transit to an ATM, or being loaded into or unloaded from an ATM, is covered by the same federal protection. This would extend the reach of existing robbery-related provisions to off-site ATMs and to the handling of cash associated with those machines, regardless of whether the ATM is owned or operated by the financial institution itself.
Impact
The bill would amend Section 2113 of Title 18, United States Code, which governs federal bank robbery and related offenses. Its practical effect is to remove ambiguity about whether off-premises ATMs and cash being serviced for those machines fall within the protected custody of a financial institution, potentially making prosecutions easier in cases involving ATM theft or robbery. The measure would affect banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, ATM operators, and criminal defendants charged under federal robbery statutes.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally favorable and bipartisan support for the bill’s goal of strengthening protection for cash access infrastructure. The bill was introduced by a group of members from both parties, indicating cross-party interest in the issue. No committee transcript or recorded votes are provided, so there is no evidence of formal opposition in the supplied materials.
Contention
The main issue addressed by the bill is a legal gap or ambiguity in existing federal law: whether an ATM located away from a bank branch, or an ATM not directly owned or operated by the institution, is covered by bank robbery statutes. Supporters appear to favor a clear federal rule that protects off-site ATMs and cash handling operations. No specific objections are documented in the provided record, but potential points of debate could include the scope of federal criminal jurisdiction and whether the definition of ATM is broad enough to capture third-party or networked machines.