PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 25, 2010
Ponzi Scheme Victim's Bill of Rights Act of 2010 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow: (1) a special tax deduction for qualified fraudulent investment losses held in an individual retirement account (IRA); (2) a six-year carryback of net operating losses which are qualified fraudulent investment losses; (3) withdrawals from tax-exempt retirement plans for a 10-year period without penalty to replace qualified fraudulent investment losses; (4) catch-up contributions to retirement plans to compensate for fraudulent investment losses; and (5) an extension of the limitation period for filing refund claims for overpayments of tax in connection with gifts and bequests of an interest in an investment for which there is a qualified fraudulent investment loss.
Defines "qualified fraudulent investment loss" as a loss discovered in 2008 or 2009 resulting from a fraudulent arrangement in which a person receives cash or property from investors, purports to earn income for investors, reports partially or wholly fictitious income to such investors, makes payments to some investors from payments made by other investors, and appropriates some or all of the investors' cash or property.
People & committees
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 12, 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.3166 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.3166 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.3166 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.3166 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.