Let me step in.
I have spent the last 17 years going after the people who killed Sergei Magnitsky and after the people who committed other similar types of human rights abuses and getting them added to Magnitsky acts in different countries. I've seen first-hand how it works.
What I've seen very clearly is that the sanctioned individuals, when they have some glimpse that they're going to be sanctioned, will then move money into the names of family members. It's not an unusual thing. It's almost a regular thing.
One of the reasons we're having this discussion right now and why, James, you put this together is that we've had nine years to look at what happened since the passage of the Magnitsky act, at what works and what doesn't work. I can say, with 100% certainty, that the bad guys look for ways out of their dilemma.
Most of the people who are sanctioned have a lot of money, and they move the money into the names of individuals. We saw this on many occasions with Sergei Magnitsky's killers when the Magnitsky act was first put in place, and we've seen this after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It's not an unusual thing. It's almost a pervasive thing for these people to move assets into the names of their family members, and those family members should not be then excused from this type of thing. As you've written in the law, there is a provision if somebody has not done this, but I would say that, in 99% of the cases, that's what happens.
This is an absolutely excellent proposal and, for what it's worth, it makes it much less profitable to be a human rights abuser or a kleptocrat if you know that your family members are going to get taken down with you.