PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 111-204.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jul 22, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on June 23, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 to expand requirements for identifying programs and activities susceptible to improper payments by requiring the head of each federal agency, during the year after the enactment of this Act and at least once every three fiscal years thereafter, to review and identify agency programs and activities that may be susceptible to significant improper payments. Defines "significant" to mean: (1) improper payments in the preceding fiscal year that may have exceeded $100 million or $10 million of all program and activity payments and 2.5% of program outlays; and (2) for fiscal years prior to FY2013, improper payments that may have exceeded $100 million or $10 million of all program and activity payments and 1.5% of program outlays.
Sets forth risk factors to be considered in conducting improper payment reviews, including: (1) whether the program or activity reviewed is new to the agency; (2) the complexity of the program or activity; (3) the volume of payments made; (4) whether payment or payment eligibility decisions are made outside of the agency; (5) recent major changes in program funding, authorities, practices, or procedures; (6) the level, experience, and quality of personnel training; and (7) significant deficiencies in auditing practices.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises requirements for estimating improper payments to require agency heads to: (1) produce a statistically valid estimate of the improper payments in their agencies; and (2) include such estimates in their annual financial statements.
Expands agency reporting requirements on actions to reduce improper payments to require a statement of whether the agency has sufficient resources with respect to internal controls, human capital, and information systems and other infrastructure to prevent improper payments. Requires reports on actions to recover improper payments.
Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to: (1) report each fiscal year to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on actions agencies have taken to report information relating to improper payments and to recover such payments; (2) prescribe guidance to agencies to implement requirements of this Act; and (3) develop specific criteria as to when an agency should be required to obtain an opinion on internal control over mproper payments.
Requires agency heads to: (1) conduct recovery audits for agency programs that expend $1 million or more annually if such audits would be cost-effective; (2) conduct financial management improvement programs that address problems that contribute directly to agency improper payments; and (3) impose certain requirements upon contractors performing recovery audits, including a requirement to report to the agency credible evidence of fraud or vulnerabilities to fraud, and conduct appropriate training of personnel on identification of fraud. Requires the Chief Financial Officers Council to conduct a study of the implementation and cost effectiveness of recovery audits and report on such study to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Comptroller General.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Inspector General of each federal agency in each fiscal year to determine whether such agency is in compliance with the requirements of this Act and submit a report on that determination to the head of the agency, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Comptroller General. Deems an agency to be in compliance if such agency has conducted a program specific risk assessment and has published specified information, including improper payment estimates for all programs and activities, a corrective action plan, and improper payment reduction targets. Sets forth requirements for bringing noncompliant agencies into compliance.
Authorizes the OMB Director to establish one or more pilot programs for testing accountability mechanisms for compliance with this Act and report to Congress on such programs.
Requires the Chief Financial Officers Council and the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to: (1) jointly examine the lessons learned in implementing the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and identify reforms or improvements in federal financial management; and (2) report on such examination to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Comptroller General.
People & committees
Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] · D–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 111-204.
Became Public Law No: 111-204.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0 (Roll no. 442). (text: CR H5553-5556)
House roll call 442 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0 (Roll no. 442).(text: CR H5553-5556)
House roll call 442 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5590)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1508.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5553-5558)
Mr. Davis (IL) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee reported amendment was withdrawn by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5309)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S5306-5309; text as reported in Senate: CR S5306-5309)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 430.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.1508 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 S.1508 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 S.1508 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 S.1508 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.