H.R.2265 - No Foreign Election Interference Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.2265, the "No Foreign Election Interference Act," aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to penalize tax-exempt organizations that contribute to political committees after receiving funds from foreign nationals. The bill introduces penalties for such contributions and revokes the tax-exempt status of organizations that make more than two disqualified contributions. It targets organizations described in section 501(c) of the tax code with gross receipts exceeding $200,000 or assets exceeding $500,000.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill would be to deter tax-exempt organizations from accepting foreign funds and using them for political contributions. This could lead to a decrease in foreign influence in U.S. elections. Organizations found in violation could face significant financial penalties and ultimately lose their tax-exempt status.
Potential Benefits
- Reduces foreign influence in U.S. elections.
- Increases transparency in political contributions.
- Strengthens the integrity of the electoral process.
- Discourages tax-exempt organizations from accepting foreign funds for political activities.
- Provides additional enforcement mechanisms against foreign election interference.
Potential Disadvantages
- May disproportionately affect smaller tax-exempt organizations.
- Could lead to increased compliance costs for tax-exempt organizations.
- Potential for politically motivated enforcement.
- May face legal challenges based on freedom of speech.
- Could create a chilling effect on legitimate international collaborations.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the Constitution is complex. While it aims to protect the integrity of elections, which aligns with the government's responsibility to ensure a fair democratic process, it also potentially touches on First Amendment rights related to freedom of speech and association. The government has a legitimate interest in preventing foreign interference in elections, but any restrictions must be narrowly tailored to avoid infringing on protected rights. The bill's focus on financial penalties and revocation of tax-exempt status may be seen as a less restrictive means of achieving this goal compared to direct restrictions on speech.
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).