The No More SCAMS Act requires the President to stand up a Federal Fraud Interagency Task Force (the Task Force) to investigate fraud involving Federal dollars, coordinate among agencies and state/local partners, develop prevention practices, and pursue recovery of misused funds. The bill sets short statutory timelines for establishment and appointments, specifies qualifications for the Director and members, and imposes annual reporting and GAO review.
This matters to agency leaders, Inspectors General, grant and procurement compliance teams, and private contractors because it centralizes coordination of fraud work across major departments, creates new reporting obligations, and could increase cross‑agency investigations and recovery efforts without providing a discrete funding authorization or new prosecutorial powers.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill directs the President to create a Federal Fraud Interagency Task Force within 90 days and to appoint a Director and agency members within 180 days. It charges the Task Force with investigating fraud involving Federal dollars, sharing data across agencies and with state/local law enforcement, developing fraud‑prevention best practices, and facilitating recoveries.
Who It Affects
Covered agencies listed in the bill (State, Treasury, Defense, DOJ, Interior, Labor, HHS, HUD, Transportation, Energy, Education, VA, DHS) plus any other agencies the President designates; agency OIGs and compliance offices; federal contractors and grantees subject to fraud investigations; and state and local law enforcement partners that coordinate on cases.
Why It Matters
The Act consolidates an interagency coordination function that currently happens through OIGs, DOJ task forces, and ad hoc working groups. For compliance officers and legal teams, it signals likely increases in cross‑agency information requests, joint investigations, and emphasis on recovery metrics reported to Congress.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a standing Federal Fraud Interagency Task Force to be set up quickly after enactment. The President must establish the Task Force within 90 days and appoint a Director and agency members within 180 days; the Director serves a four‑year term and must have at least ten years’ experience in fraud investigation or federal law enforcement.
Membership comes from specified 'covered agencies' and should include subject matter experts in financial management, grants and procurement, auditing, forensic accounting, payment integrity, and fraud risk management.
Operationally, the Task Force's responsibilities are investigative coordination, liaison with state and local law enforcement, dissemination of best practices and training for fraud prevention, and the facilitation of data and resource sharing to speed investigations and recover funds. The bill instructs the Task Force to integrate existing federal initiatives rather than supplant them, but it does not grant new criminal or civil enforcement powers; investigations and prosecutions continue to be handled through normal prosecutorial channels.On oversight, the Director must deliver an annual report to the President and to the congressional oversight committees named in the bill.
That report must quantify investigations, prosecutions referrals, and monies recovered; describe covered‑agency contributions; analyze fraud trends by sector and agency; and give agency‑specific recommendations. Separately, the Comptroller General must perform an annual audit of the Task Force’s operations and spending.
The statute defines 'fraud' and enumerates covered agencies, while allowing the President to add other agencies.Notably, the bill is procedural: it focuses on structure, roles, and reporting rather than funding details or new legal authorities. It steps up centralized coordination and metrics but leaves practical questions—resourcing, data‑sharing authorities, and the Task Force’s relationship to OIGs, DOJ, and existing interagency initiatives—largely to implementation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The President must establish the Task Force within 90 days of enactment and appoint a Director and agency members within 180 days.
The Director serves a 4‑year term and must have at least 10 years of experience in fraud investigation or Federal law enforcement.
Members must come from the bill’s listed 'covered agencies' (12 named departments) and be subject‑matter experts in areas such as grants, procurement, forensic accounting, or fraud risk management; the President may add other agencies.
The Task Force must investigate fraud involving Federal dollars, coordinate with state and local law enforcement, promulgate best practices and training, and facilitate interagency data and resource sharing to recover funds.
The Director must submit an annual report to the President and designated congressional committees with metrics (investigations, referrals, recoveries, trend analysis), and the GAO must audit the Task Force annually.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the statute as the 'No More SCAMS Act' (No More Shielding Corruption and Misuse in Spending Act). This is purely nominative but indicates the legislative intent to emphasize fraud prevention and recovery.
Establishment, Director, and membership
Requires the President to form the Federal Fraud Interagency Task Force within 90 days and to appoint a Director and members within 180 days. The Director must meet a 10‑year experience threshold and serves for four years; members must be subject‑matter experts drawn from each 'covered agency.' Practically, these deadlines force quick staffing decisions and give the White House control over leadership and composition, which will shape priorities and interagency relationships.
Core duties and operational scope
Sets the Task Force’s substantive responsibilities: investigating fraud involving Federal dollars, coordinating with state/local law enforcement, creating prevention best practices and training, and facilitating interagency data/resource sharing. The section directs integration with existing federal initiatives, so implementation will involve negotiating overlaps with OIGs, DOJ fraud units, and other cross‑cutting efforts rather than replacing them.
Reporting requirements and external oversight
Mandates an annual report from the Director to the President and to House and Senate oversight committees with specified contents (counts of investigations, prosecutions referrals, recoveries; agency contributions; trend analysis; agency‑specific recommendations). It also requires the Comptroller General to conduct an annual audit of Task Force operations and spending. Those reporting and audit obligations create measurable accountability but also introduce administrative workload and expectations around metrics that agencies must satisfy.
Definitions and covered agencies
Defines 'fraud' narrowly as intentional deception to obtain value or surrender a legal right and lists the covered agencies (State, Treasury, Defense, DOJ, Interior, Labor, HHS, HUD, Transportation, Energy, Education, VA, DHS) while allowing the President to designate additional agencies. The explicit list clarifies who must contribute members but leaves flexibility for expansion, which could broaden the Task Force’s footprint over time.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Taxpayers — a centralized coordination mechanism and mandatory annual metrics are designed to increase identification and recovery of misspent Federal funds, which could improve overall payment integrity.
- State and local law enforcement — the bill formalizes coordination with federal investigators, improving information flow and joint case development on multijurisdictional fraud schemes.
- Agency OIGs, auditors, and compliance teams — shared best practices, training, and data‑sharing can reduce duplication of effort and strengthen detection capacity if the Task Force genuinely integrates existing resources.
- Congressional oversight committees — the required annual reports and GAO audits provide structured, comparable information to evaluate fraud trends and agency performance.
- Financial investigations and forensic accounting practitioners — the statute creates sustained demand for expertise in cross‑agency investigations and recovery work.
Who Bears the Cost
- Covered federal agencies — they must assign personnel, share data, and support investigations and reporting, which consumes staff time and resources that may not be separately funded.
- Department and agency compliance and legal teams — increased audits, investigations, and recommendations will require more internal compliance work, document production, and coordination with the Task Force.
- Federal contractors and grantees — heightened oversight and interagency information sharing will likely increase scrutiny, potential audits, and the risk of referrals for enforcement actions.
- The executive branch (White House) — rapid timelines for establishment and appointments create administrative and coordination burdens on the Office of the President and designated lead offices.
- GAO and congressional staff — the bill imposes recurring audit and report review obligations that require time and resources to analyze and act on the Task Force’s findings.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether centralized, fast‑moving coordination will deliver materially better fraud detection and fund recovery without creating duplication, politicization, or privacy risks: concentrating authority and metrics can improve accountability and scale up investigations, but it also risks imposing unfunded burdens on agencies, sparking turf fights with OIGs and DOJ, and expanding data sharing without clear safeguards.
The bill centralizes coordination but leaves key implementation questions open. It mandates structure, duties, and reporting but does not appropriate funds or grant new investigatory or prosecutorial authorities; the Task Force must rely on existing agency authorities and resources.
That raises the risk that the Task Force becomes a coordination hub without the resources to act at scale, unless Congress provides funding or agencies reassign existing capacity.
The statute also creates likely overlap with existing bodies—agency OIGs, DOJ fraud units, pandemic/relief fraud task forces, and cross‑agency initiatives already investigating similar schemes. Managing duplication, settling jurisdictional boundaries, and avoiding counterproductive interagency competition will require detailed memoranda of understanding and clear operational protocols.
Finally, accelerating data sharing across agencies and with state/local partners improves detection but heightens privacy and civil‑liberties stakes; the bill does not spell out safeguards, access controls, or limits on data use, leaving those choices to implementation decisions that could vary across administrations.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.