PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2003
Identity Theft Consumer Notification Act - Amends the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to include among mandatory consumer disclosures by a financial institution a statement informing the consumer of the institution's obligation to: (1) disclose that nonpublic personal information has been compromised; (2) provide assistance to remedy the compromise; and (3) reimburse any losses incurred as a result of such compromise.Permits waiver of such disclosure for a limited time at request of a law enforcement agency investigating such violation.Provides penalties for financial institution failure to notify and assist customers after an identity theft.Amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act to grant the Federal district courts jurisdiction in an action for identity theft. Tolls the two-year statute of limitations during any period during which a defendant has materially and willfully misrepresented any information to the plaintiff that is material to establishment of the defendant's liability.
People & committees
Rep. Kleczka, Gerald D. [D-WI-4] · D–WI
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 House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E268)
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 18, 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.818 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.818 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.818 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.818 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.