[House Report 115-424]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


115th Congress    }                                   {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session      }                                   {       115-424

======================================================================



 
                        SENIOR SAFE ACT OF 2017

                                _______
                                

 November 28, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Hensarling, from the Committee on Financial Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3758]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Financial Services, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 3758) to provide immunity from suit for certain 
individuals who disclose potential examples of financial 
exploitation of senior citizens, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment 
and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    On September 12, 2017, Representatives Kyrsten Sinema and 
Bruce Poliquin introduced H.R. 3758, the ``Senior Safe Act of 
2017'', which provides that: (1) a supervisor, compliance 
officer, or legal advisor for a covered financial institution 
who has received training regarding the identification and 
reporting of the suspected exploitation of a senior citizen (at 
least 65 years old) shall not be liable for disclosing such 
exploitation to a covered agency if the individual made the 
disclosure in good faith and with reasonable care; and (2) a 
covered financial institution shall not be liable for such a 
disclosure by such an individual if the individual was employed 
by the institution at the time of the disclosure and the 
institution had provided such training.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The goal of H.R. 3758 is to protect seniors from financial 
exploitation. According to a study conducted by MetLife, 
seniors lose at least $2.9 billion annually in reported cases 
of financial exploitation. It also has been estimated that one 
in five seniors, age 65 and older, have been the victim of 
financial fraud. However, despite the prevalence of senior 
financial fraud, the National Adult Protective Services 
Association estimated that only 1 in 44 cases of financial 
abuse is ever reported.
    H.R. 3758 protects banks, credit unions, investment 
advisers, broker-dealers and their employees from civil or 
administrative liability, as long as employees receive training 
on how to identify and report predatory activity against 
seniors and that reports are made ``in good faith'' and ``with 
reasonable care.'' Current bank privacy laws make it difficult 
for these entities listed above to report any potentially 
fraudulent activity without incurring legal liability, and as a 
result, few cases of financial abuse are reported. H.R. 3758 is 
based on Maine's Senior Safe program, an initiative launched in 
2014 that is designed to train financial professionals to 
detect and report senior financial abuse.

                                HEARINGS

    The Committee on Financial Services held a hearing 
examining matters relating to H.R. 3758 on April 26, 2017, 
April 28, 2017, September 7, 2017, and March 22, 2017.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    The Committee on Financial Services met in open session on 
October 11, 2017, and October 12, 2017, and ordered H.R. 3758 
to be reported favorably to the House without amendment by a 
recorded vote of 60 yeas to 0 nays (Record vote no. FC-93), a 
quorum being present.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes 
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. The 
sole recorded vote was on a motion by Chairman Hensarling to 
report the bill favorably to the House without amendment. The 
motion was agreed to by a recorded vote of 60 yeas to 0 nays 
(Record vote no. FC-93), a quorum being present.


                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the findings and recommendations of 
the Committee based on oversight activities under clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

                    PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee states that H.R. 3758 
will reduce financial fraud against seniors by providing that 
certain employees of a covered financial institution that 
receive training, and financial institutions that provide 
training regarding the identification and reporting of the 
suspected exploitation of a senior citizen, would not be liable 
for disclosing such exploitation to a covered agency, provided 
that the individual made the disclosure in good faith and with 
reasonable care.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its 
own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement 
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the 
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974.

                 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                  Washington, DC, October 30, 2017.
Hon. Jeb Hensarling,
Chairman Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3758, the Senior 
Safe Act of 2017.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Sarah Puro.
            Sincerely,
                                                Keith Hall,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3758--Senior Safe Act of 2017

    H.R. 3758 would exempt financial institutions and some of 
their employees from liability in any civil or administrative 
proceeding in situations where those employees make a report 
about the potential exploitation of a senior citizen to a 
governmental agency. Based on information from the federal 
banking regulators, CBO concludes that the bill would not 
change their policies towards such reporting. Accordingly, CBO 
estimates that enacting the bill would have no effect on the 
federal budget.
    Enacting H.R. 3758 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO 
estimates that enacting H.R. 3758 would not increase net direct 
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 
10-year periods beginning in 2028.
    H.R. 3758 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act (UMRA) by preempting 
state laws that provide a lower level of liability protection 
for certain financial institutions and their employees than 
would be provided under the bill. The bill would exempt from 
liability financial institutions and employees of those 
institutions that have received training on the financial 
exploitation of senior citizens and have filed reports of such 
exploitation to an appropriate government authority. Although 
the preemption would limit the application of state laws and 
regulations, CBO estimates that the bill would impose no duty 
on state, local, or tribal governments that would result in 
additional spending or a loss of revenues.
    H.R. 3758 also would impose a private-sector mandate by 
removing a private right of action. The bill would eliminate 
the right of plaintiffs to file a civil action against some 
financial institutions and employees of such institutions for 
disclosing information about the potential exploitation of a 
senior citizen in compliance with the bill. Similar to the 
intergovernmental mandate, the scope of the private-sector 
mandate is narrow, applying liability protection to only those 
employees that have received training and filed reports as 
outlined in the bill. The protection is similarly narrow for 
financial institutions. The cost of the mandate would be the 
forgone net value of awards and settlements that would have 
been awarded for such claims in the absence of the bill. 
Therefore, CBO estimates that the cost of the mandate in any 
one year would fall below the annual threshold for private-
sector mandates established in UMRA ($156 million in 2017, 
adjusted annually for inflation).
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Sarah Puro 
(for federal costs) and Rachel Austin (for intergovernmental 
and private-sector mandates). The estimate was approved H. 
Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    This information is provided in accordance with section 423 
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
    The Committee has determined that the bill does not contain 
Federal mandates on the private sector. The Committee has 
determined that the bill does not impose a Federal 
intergovernmental mandate on State, local, or tribal 
governments.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of the section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

                         EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

    With respect to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has carefully reviewed 
the provisions of the bill and states that the provisions of 
the bill do not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits within the meaning of the 
rule.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that no 
provision of the bill establishes or reauthorizes: (1) a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program; (2) a program included in any report 
from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant 
to section 21 of Public Law 111-139; or (3) a program related 
to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance, published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Pub. L. No. 95-220, as amended by Pub. L. No. 
98-169).

                   DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULEMAKING

    Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5, (115th Congress), 
the following statement is made concerning directed 
rulemakings: The Committee estimates that the bill requires no 
directed rulemakings within the meaning of such section.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    This Section cites H.R. 3758 as the ``Senior Safe Act of 
2017''

Section 2. Immunity

    This section sets various forth definitions, including for 
the terms ``covered financial institution''--which means: (a) a 
credit union; (b) a bank; (c) an investment adviser; (d) a 
broker-dealer; (e) an insurance company; (f) an insurance 
agency; and (g) a transfer agent--and ``covered agency.''
    This section also sets forth that individuals who receive 
training are not liable for any civil or administrative 
proceeding if they disclose the exploitation of a senior 
citizen to a covered agency with reasonable care. In addition, 
covered financial institutions that provide training to 
employees are not liable for any civil or administrative 
proceeding arising from the individual's disclosure.

Section 3. Training

    This section outlines the training that is required for 
employees or financial institutions that interact with senior 
citizens. The training shall be maintained by the covered 
financial institution, shall instruct individuals how to 
identify suspected exploitation of a senior citizen, shall 
instruct individuals how to respect the privacy of customers, 
and shall be appropriate to the individual in the training. The 
training shall be provided no later than 1 year after 
employment.

Section 4. Relationship to State Law

    This section states that this Act shall be construed to 
preempt or limit any provision within state law, except in the 
case of State Law providing a greater level of protection.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H.R. 3758 does not repeal or amend any section of a statue. 
Therefore, the Office of Legislative Counsel did not prepare 
the report contemplated by clause 3(e)(1)(B) of rule XIII of 
the House of Representatives.

                                  [all]