Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
This bill prohibits United States persons from purchasing, selling, or otherwise supporting publicly traded securities (and related derivatives) of Chinese entities the Treasury, with State and potentially Defense, determines operate in China’s defense, related materiel, or surveillance technology sectors or are owned/controlled by such entities.
It requires Treasury/OFAC to expand the Non‑SDN Chinese Military‑Industrial Complex Companies List within 180 days to cover supporters, owners, successors, and financial-service providers tied to that complex.
The bill also requires that when sanctions are imposed under one applicable statute or executive order, they be imposed under other applicable authorities unless waived by the President, and it creates a 20‑day congressional notice/report process for presidential national security waivers and terminations of sanctions.
Substantive, economically impactful sanctions language increases opposition from financial sector and complicates bipartisan coalition building despite security rationale.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive prohibitions and assigns administrative tasks to Treasury/OFAC, but it is uneven in drafting detail: it furnishes term definitions and timelines in places while leaving significant definitional, enforcement, fiscal, and operational details to future regulation or unspecified processes.
Liberals emphasize human‑rights and safeguards for savers.
Liberals emphasize human‑rights and safeguards for savers.
Likely broadly supportive of restricting U.S. financing of Chinese military and surveillance firms for human rights and security reasons.
Would want transparency, protections for U.S. savers, and safeguards against harming civilian supply chains or workers.
Some concern about due process and extraterritorial financial impacts could temper enthusiasm.
Cautiously favorable to the national security goal but concerned about implementation and market consequences.
Wants clear definitions, phased implementation, interagency coordination, and Congressional oversight to avoid unintended economic disruption.
Generally strongly supportive because the bill tightens financial pressure on Chinese military and surveillance actors.
May nonetheless press for firmer enforcement and limits on presidential waiver usage to avoid undermining sanctions.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive, economically impactful sanctions language increases opposition from financial sector and complicates bipartisan coalition building despite security rationale.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize human‑rights and safeguards for savers.
Substantive, economically impactful sanctions language increases opposition from financial sector and complicates bipartisan coalition buil…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive prohibitions and assigns administrative tasks to Treasury/OFAC, but it is uneven in drafting detail: it furnishes term definitions and t…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.