Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prevention Central Reporting International Models topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates and former bankers urge central reporting, mandate controls and look to Australia and UK for models to stop scams at source
Summary
Witnesses from Stop Scams Alliance and former bank security leaders recommended a central repository for fraud reports, government‑level takedown of malicious URLs and mandatory bank controls; they cited Australia, the UK and Singapore as examples where coordinated action reduced reported losses.
Ken Westbrook of the Stop Scams Alliance and Ken Pala, a former online‑security director for MUFG Union Bank, told the Senate committee California could reduce scam losses by centralizing reporting, requiring bank anti‑scam controls and emulating international measures.
Westbrook said a central repository into which financial institutions report fraud—capturing data such as device identifiers, IP addresses, sender/receiver information and transaction details—would be a "game changer" for near‑real‑time trend detection and law enforcement follow‑up. He cited national anti‑scam centers abroad and argued the U.S. lacks a similar, centralized capacity. "It would be a game changer if financial institutions in The US were able to report fraud to a central repository accessible by law enforcement authorities and financial institutions," Westbrook said.
He also presented international examples: Australia’s removal of malicious websites and a government‑facilitated allow‑list for legitimate financial advertisers, Britain’s large‑scale takedowns by GCHQ and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s removal of fake investment sites—steps Westbrook credited with measurable reductions in some scam categories.
Ken Pala urged banks to inventory scam losses for a minimum 90‑day period, create executive‑level scam prevention strategies, and deploy controls across the payment lifecycle. Using a "left‑of‑boom / boom / right‑of‑boom" framework, Pala recommended left‑of‑boom measures such as confirmation of payee, behavioral biometrics, transaction anomaly detection and stricter account opening controls; at boom time banks should provide real‑time warnings and have fraud teams intervene; right‑of‑boom actions include recall attempts and encouraging victims to report to law enforcement and IC3.
Both witnesses pointed to regulatory regimes in the UK and Australia that require or incentivize banks, telcos and platforms to implement anti‑scam rules; Westbrook noted Australia reported a decline in some scam losses after systematic takedowns and ad authentication steps.
They urged California policymakers to consider pilot programs for a central reporting repository, fund local task‑force replication, require stronger bank controls and work with tech companies on large‑scale removal of malicious online infrastructure.
