Secret Service gains power to investigate digital-asset crimes; FinCEN data stays 10 years.

What it does

This bill expands the Secret Service's authority to investigate money laundering, structured transactions, and unlicensed money transmitting (adding 18 U.S.C. § 1960 to their investigative mandate), extends FinCEN's record-retention requirement from 5 to 10 years, increases the threshold for international financial institution reporting from 6 to 10 years under North Korea sanctions law, and requires the GAO to study how well law enforcement can identify and deter money laundering in cyber crimes.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is to expand Secret Service investigative jurisdiction over digital-asset crimes and extend financial data retention periods. It is a law-enforcement and regulatory tool, not a market intervention or private benefit.

What the text implies

• Extending FinCEN record retention from 5 to 10 years means financial institutions must store transaction data longer, increasing compliance costs and data-breach risk exposure for those institutions and their customers.
• Adding § 1960 (unlicensed money transmitting) to Secret Service authority may create jurisdictional overlap with existing FinCEN and FBI authority, potentially duplicating investigations or creating enforcement gaps depending on coordination.
• The GAO study on section 6102 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 may reveal that current law-enforcement capacity is insufficient to use expanded authorities effectively, making the expansion symbolic rather than operationally impactful.
• Longer data retention and expanded investigative authority may disproportionately affect legitimate cryptocurrency and digital-asset businesses that operate in gray regulatory zones, increasing compliance burden and legal exposure.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Citizens gain potential protection against cyber-enabled money laundering and fraud (law enforcement gains tools to pursue digital-asset crimes), but also face expanded surveillance authority and longer data retention by financial institutions, creating a trade-off between security and privacy.

Who stands to gain

• law enforcement agencies (expanded investigative authority and budget justification)
• financial institutions (potential compliance consulting and data-management services)

Named in the bill

United States Secret Service, FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network), 18 U.S.C. § 1960 (unlicensed money transmitting), 31 U.S.C. § 5312 (financial institution definition), Otto Warmbier North Korea Nuclear Sanctions and Enforcement Act of 2019, Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020, Government Accountability Office (GAO), House Committee on Financial Services, Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

Where it stands

3 cosponsors: 2 Democrats, 1 Republicans.

• Oct 31, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Oct 31, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary and House Committee on Financial Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a…”
• Jan 22, 2026 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Jan 22, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 54 - 0”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.