S.1012 - Security and Oversight for International Landholdings Act of 2025; SOIL Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
The Security and Oversight for International Landholdings Act of 2025 (SOIL Act) aims to increase oversight of foreign direct investment in agricultural land and real estate near military installations in the United States. It amends the Defense Production Act of 1950 and the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act of 1978. The bill mandates reviews by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) for certain agricultural real estate transactions and real estate acquisitions near military installations involving entities from non-market economy countries or countries posing a national security risk.
Furthermore, the SOIL Act prohibits federal agencies from providing assistance to entities with agricultural real estate holdings owned by individuals or entities from countries deemed a national security risk. It also expands disclosure requirements for foreign agricultural land holdings, including leases longer than 5 years, and requires the Secretary of Agriculture to prepare annual reports on these holdings, including detailed analyses by country and sector.
In short, this bill seeks to tighten regulations and increase transparency regarding foreign ownership and control of agricultural land and real estate near military facilities, primarily targeting countries perceived as economic or national security threats.
Expected Effects
The SOIL Act will likely increase scrutiny of foreign investment in US agricultural land and real estate near military installations. This could deter some foreign investment, particularly from countries identified as potential adversaries.
The increased reporting requirements will provide more comprehensive data on foreign land ownership, potentially informing future policy decisions. It may also lead to increased costs for foreign investors due to compliance requirements and potential delays from CFIUS reviews.
Finally, the prohibition on federal assistance could impact agricultural operations with foreign ownership from targeted countries, potentially affecting their competitiveness.
Potential Benefits
- Enhanced National Security: Increased oversight of land near military installations reduces potential security risks.
- Protection of Agricultural Resources: Greater scrutiny of foreign ownership safeguards domestic food production.
- Increased Transparency: Public reports on foreign land holdings provide valuable data for policymakers and the public.
- Reduced Economic Espionage: Prevents potential adversaries from gaining undue influence through land ownership.
- Support for Domestic Farmers: Limiting foreign subsidies could level the playing field for American farmers.
Potential Disadvantages
- Reduced Foreign Investment: Stricter regulations could deter beneficial foreign investment in agriculture.
- Increased Bureaucracy: Expanded CFIUS reviews and reporting requirements may create administrative burdens.
- Potential for Retaliation: Targeted countries may retaliate with similar restrictions on US investments abroad.
- Compliance Costs: Foreign investors face higher costs due to increased scrutiny and reporting.
- Limited Scope: The focus on specific countries may not address all potential risks associated with foreign land ownership.
Constitutional Alignment
The SOIL Act appears to align with the US Constitution, particularly Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and provide for the common defense. The Act's focus on national security and regulating foreign investment falls within these enumerated powers.
There are no apparent violations of individual liberties or rights protected by the Bill of Rights. The Act does not discriminate based on religion, speech, or other protected characteristics. It primarily regulates economic activity related to land ownership.
However, the Act's potential impact on international trade and relations could raise questions about the balance between national security and economic cooperation, but these concerns do not necessarily indicate a constitutional violation.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).