US Federal House Bill HB3523

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/20/25

Caption

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to designate certain covered organizations as Foreign Financial Threat Organizations, and for other purposes.

Summary

HB3523 would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to identify certain foreign entities as “Foreign Financial Threat Organizations” if, together with the Attorney General, they are determined to be engaging in fraudulent activity aimed at deceiving U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents into providing cash or other assets. The bill requires the first designations within 90 days of enactment and sets out a notice process to congressional leaders and relevant committees before a designation is made, followed by publication in the Federal Register. Once designated, these organizations would face sanctions-like consequences similar to those applied to specially designated global terrorist organizations under Executive Order 13224. The bill authorizes blocking of financial transactions involving their assets, allows federal action to protect U.S. cybersecurity and limit access to internet or cellular services, and directs the Treasury to take steps to prevent these organizations from contacting people in the United States by phone, internet, or email. It also requires Treasury to report to Congress on designations, assets seized, enforcement actions, and funds returned to victims of fraud.

Impact

The bill would expand federal authority over foreign fraud networks by creating a new Treasury designation category and tying it to asset blocking, communications restrictions, and other enforcement tools. It would affect foreign entities and their subsidiaries or affiliates that are found to be running deceptive schemes against U.S. residents, and it would involve coordination between Treasury and the Attorney General. The measure would also create new reporting obligations to Congress and public reporting requirements, while potentially implicating financial institutions, telecommunications, internet access, and cybersecurity enforcement.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct legislative sentiment can be measured from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a fraud-prevention and national-security tool, suggesting an intent to target foreign scam operations and protect U.S. victims. Because the bill was only referred to committee, its overall support or opposition within Congress is not yet evident from the available record.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are the breadth of executive authority and the severity of the restrictions imposed. The bill gives Treasury, in coordination with the Attorney General, significant discretion to designate organizations and to trigger blocking of assets and limits on communications and internet or cellular access, which could raise due process, overbreadth, and civil liberties concerns. Another possible issue is the use of terrorism-style sanctions procedures for fraud-based conduct, which may be seen as an aggressive enforcement approach even by supporters of anti-fraud measures.