National Strategy for Combating Scams Act of 2025
SB 3355, the National Strategy for Combating Scams Act of 2025, would direct the FBI to convene a federal working group within 90 days of enactment to develop a national strategy for combating scams. The working group would include a broad set of federal agencies, including the FTC, CFPB, Treasury, DHS, FCC, SEC, SSA, and others, and would be required to consult with scam survivors, older adults, people with disabilities, law enforcement, state and local officials, businesses, nonprofits, and other stakeholders.
The strategy must define “scam” for use by the FBI, FTC, and CFPB; assess scam risks and harms; identify agency roles; evaluate prevention methods; and propose ways to improve complaint reporting, data collection, interagency coordination, private-sector information sharing, rapid response warnings, victim recovery, and cross-border enforcement. The bill also requires analysis of needed legislative, regulatory, or administrative changes, as well as the resources necessary to implement the strategy. The working group must submit the strategy to congressional committees and publish it publicly, then update it at least every five years. After publication, the FBI, FTC, and CFPB must adopt the common scam definition within one year, and update it when the strategy changes.
The bill would not directly create new criminal penalties or consumer remedies, but it would change federal coordination and reporting practices by mandating a government-wide anti-scam strategy and a shared definition of “scam” for key agencies. It would likely affect how federal agencies collect data, coordinate investigations, share information with private companies, and communicate scam warnings to the public. It also specifically contemplates possible legislative, regulatory, or administrative changes that could follow from the strategy, and it highlights impacts on older adults, people with disabilities, scam victims, financial institutions, telecom carriers, technology companies, and law enforcement agencies.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the overall sentiment appears strongly supportive and problem-solving in nature. The bill is framed as a response to widespread consumer fraud losses, the growing use of artificial intelligence in scams, and fragmented federal efforts. Its bipartisan sponsorship by Senators Gillibrand, Scott of Florida, Kelly, and Moody suggests cross-party interest in a coordinated anti-fraud approach.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the scope of federal coordination, the creation of a common definition of “scam,” and the extent of data sharing and private-sector cooperation the strategy may require. Agencies and stakeholders could differ over whether a single definition should apply across institutions, how much authority the FBI should have in leading the effort, and whether the bill could impose burdens on banks, telecom companies, social media platforms, and other businesses. There may also be debate over privacy, due process, and the practical feasibility of harmonizing complaint systems and data collection across many agencies and jurisdictions.