PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 20, 2011
Preventing Affinity Scams for Seniors Act of 2011 or PASS Act of 2011 - Defines "affinity scam" as a transaction in which a person trusted by a senior, such as a caregiver, relative, guardian, "new friend," or service provider, claims to share similar interests or values and establishes a relationship with the senior, then uses the relationship to defraud the senior.
Requires each financial institution to: (1) educate its staff about affinity scams and how to identify transactions that may be part of an affinity scam, (2) train staff members on educating seniors about affinity scams, (3) provide senior depositors with educational materials on how to identify affinity scams, and (4) offer seniors a "senior protection (checking) account."
Directs the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) to: (1) issue implementing regulations, and (2) audit financial institutions periodically to ensure compliance with them.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth senior protection account requirements, including protective measures to block and investigate transactions suspected of being an affinity scam.
Instructs the Secretary of the Treasury to establish an income tax deduction of .77% of the average of the amount of deposits held by a financial institution in senior protection accounts.
Subjects a noncompliant financial institution to a civil liability with respect to a senior who has sustained actual damage as a result of the institution's failure to comply with this Act.
Directs the Secretary to require each financial institution, and each of its directors, officers, employees, or agents, to report any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible affinity scam.
People & committees
Rep. Baca, Joe [D-CA-43] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.370 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.370 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.370 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.370 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.