H.R. 1724 (119th)Bill Overview

No Dollars to Uyghur Forced Labor Act

International Affairs|AsiaChina
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Feb 27, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill bars Department of State and USAID funds from supporting programs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region that knowingly use goods made wholly or partly in Xinjiang or by listed "covered entities." The Secretary of State may grant specific authorizations if partners provide written assurances of non-use and compliance systems, with 15-day notice to relevant congressional committee leaders. The Secretary must submit annual reports for three years detailing violations, enforcement challenges, and improvement plans.

Why people may split

Liberals focus on human-rights impact; conservatives on waiver and diplomacy risks

Watch point

Narrow human-rights framing and no new spending make House passage relatively straightforward by content alone.

This bill bars Department of State and USAID funds from supporting programs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region that knowingly use goods made wholly or partly in Xinjiang or by listed "covered entities." The Secretary of State may grant specific authorizations if partners provide written assurances of non-use and compliance systems, with 15-day notice to relevant congressional committee leaders.

The Secretary must submit annual reports for three years detailing violations, enforcement challenges, and improvement plans.

Definitions reference the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and the Tariff Act standard for forced labor.

Passage45/100

Relatively narrow, low-cost human-rights measure increases chances, but foreign-policy sensitivities and Senate procedure reduce likelihood.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention25/100

Liberals focus on human-rights impact; conservatives on waiver and diplomacy risks

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agencies · WorkersStates

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesReduces federal funding indirectly supporting products linked to forced labor in Xinjiang.
  • WorkersSignals U.S. human rights accountability and pressure against forced labor practices.
  • Potential benefitIncentivizes contractors and partners to improve supply-chain due diligence and certifications.
Likely burdened
  • StatesIncreases administrative and compliance costs for the State Department, USAID, and contractors.
  • Potential burdenCould delay or complicate delivery of overseas assistance where supply chains are opaque.
  • Potential burdenMay force program redesigns or cancellations if partners cannot provide required assurances.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals focus on human-rights impact; conservatives on waiver and diplomacy risks
Progressive90%

Likely supportive because the bill aims to prevent U.S.-funded activities from enabling forced labor and abuses.

They will welcome the reporting requirements but worry exceptions or weak verification could undermine effectiveness.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable as a targeted measure to avoid funding forced-labor-tainted goods, but cautious about implementation challenges and unintended program disruptions.

Wants clear guidance, cost estimates, and limited, well-justified exceptions.

Leans supportive
Conservative75%

Likely supportive of tougher measures on China's human-rights abuses and supply chains, but wary of expanding executive discretion and new bureaucratic compliance costs.

May prefer broader or stricter restrictions instead of narrow waivers.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood45/100

Relatively narrow, low-cost human-rights measure increases chances, but foreign-policy sensitivities and Senate procedure reduce likelihood.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Enforceability and verification of supply-chain claims
  • Administrative burden on USAID/State contractors
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals focus on human-rights impact; conservatives on waiver and diplomacy risks

Relatively narrow, low-cost human-rights measure increases chances, but foreign-policy sensitivities and Senate procedure reduce likelihood.

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for No Dollars to Uyghur Forced Labor Act.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis