In a recent episode of the award-winning Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, Alan Kaplinsky was joined by Nick Bourke, Kate Griffin, and Ballard Spahr partner Joseph Schuster to discuss a groundbreaking new report from the Aspen Institute Financial Security Program: United We Stand: A National Strategy to Prevent Scams.

The episode builds on Nick and Kate's prior appearance on the podcast last July, when the report was still in development. Now finalized, the report offers one of the most comprehensive frameworks to date for addressing what has become a systemic threat to American households and the broader financial system.

The Scope of the Problem: A Systemic Threat

Frauds and scams are no longer isolated consumer protection issues. According to the report, U.S. households are losing an estimated $196 billion annually to scams — roughly $1 billion every couple of days. One in five American adults reports having lost money to an online scam.

As Nick Bourke explained, today's scams are:

· Technology-enabled

· Highly organized and industrialized

· Often operated by transnational criminal organizations

· Accelerating due to AI and faster payment systems

The so-called scam "lifecycle" includes four stages:

1. Lead – Hooking the victim

2. Deceive – Building trust (often through impersonation or relationship-building)

3. Bleed – Extracting funds

4. Clean – Laundering proceeds, often through cryptocurrency or offshore channels

Different sectors see only fragments of this lifecycle; social media platforms may see the "lead," financial institutions the "bleed," and law enforcement the "clean." That fragmentation allows criminals to scale operations while defenders remain siloed.

Why Scams Are Rising Despite Heavy Investment

As Kate Griffin noted, industry and government are investing heavily in prevention. Yet scams continue to grow.

Why?

· Fragmentation across sectors: No single actor sees the entire attack sequence.

· Outdated reporting infrastructure: Federal systems at agencies like the FBI and FTC remain manual and technologically antiquated.

· Regulatory uncertainty: Financial institutions and technology platforms face unclear expectations about what data they can use and share.

· Speed of modern payments: Faster money movement means faster losses.

Joseph Schuster emphasized that many financial institutions are strongly incentivized to prevent fraud as they often bear reputational and financial risk when scams succeed. But legal ambiguity, especially under statutes like the Fair Credit Reporting Act, can chill data-sharing and innovation.

Core Recommendations from the Aspen Report

The report outlines both high-level national reforms and granular operational improvements with more than 180 specific ideas.

1. Elevate Scam Prevention to a National Priority

The report calls for:

· A designated federal lead (or "czar") to coordinate strategy

· A whole-of-government approach

· Clear national goals and metrics

Without centralized leadership, enforcement and regulatory actions remain fragmented.

2. Modernize Law Enforcement Reporting Systems

Federal reporting portals, including Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), the FBI's complaint systems, and the FTC's databases, require modernization. The report recommends:

· Streamlined, automated reporting

· Backend data interoperability across agencies

· Advanced analytics and AI tools for enforcement

3. Establish Clear Duties to Act Paired with Safe Harbors

One of the most important themes discussed was the need for:

· Clear expectations for banks, telecom companies, and digital platforms

· Safe harbors that protect companies when sharing scam intelligence in good faith

Countries like Australia have already codified such frameworks. The U.S. has yet to establish similarly coordinated standards.

4. Build a Cross-Sector Information-Sharing Ecosystem

Effective scam prevention requires:

· Exchange of scam indicators (malicious URLs, compromised phone numbers, device patterns)

· Interoperable information-sharing platforms

· Privacy-preserving architecture

· Legal clarity to mitigate antitrust and consumer reporting concerns

Joseph noted that industry appetite for collaboration is strong but clarity and guardrails are essential.

5. Consider a U.S. National Anti-Scam Center

The report explores the idea of a centralized "front door", potentially something like stopscams.gov, that would:

· Serve as a national reporting hub

· Provide victim resources

· Facilitate coordination among law enforcement

· Support public education campaigns

Social Media and Platform Responsibility

The discussion also addressed the evolving role of digital platforms.

Scam activity frequently originates through:

· Paid advertisements

· Dating applications

· Direct messaging

· Fake investment websites

Compared to banks, social media companies operate within a less clearly defined regulatory structure. Courts are increasingly developing theories of "platform liability," but statutory clarity is lacking.

The report urges policymakers to define reasonable expectations for platforms — paired with safe harbors and practical tools that empower prevention rather than merely assign blame.

What Happens Next?

The key question: who implements this strategy? Kate Griffin emphasized that this is a whole-of-society problem requiring coordinated action by:

· Federal leadership

· Congress