Employee Limits ON Profiteering Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 2824
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Government Operations and Politics
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-04-10: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- Last Updated
- 2025-05-22T20:57:13Z
AI-Generated Summary
H.R. 2824: Employee Limits ON Profiteering Act
Purpose
This legislation aims to prevent special government employees—temporary or part-time federal advisors—from personally benefiting from federal contracts, grants, or similar awards during their service. It seeks to reduce potential conflicts of interest and profiteering by restricting such awards to these employees and their close associates.
Key Provisions
- Prohibition on Awards: The federal government is barred from entering into or issuing federal awards (such as contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or other similar instruments) to special government employees or "covered third parties."
- Exception: The prohibition does not apply if the special government employee's only role is serving on an advisory committee (a group that provides advice to the government, as defined in federal law).
- Regulatory Update: Within 60 days of enactment, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)—the main set of rules for government purchasing—must be revised to implement this prohibition.
- Definitions:
- Special government employee: A person appointed to provide temporary advice or service to the government, working fewer than 130 days in a year (as defined in federal criminal code).
- Covered third party: Includes the spouse, child, or general partner of a special government employee; or any organization where the employee serves as an officer, director, trustee, general partner, or employee.
- Federal award: Broadly covers contracts, grants, and similar agreements, including those under special "other transaction" authority for flexible government deals.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Introduces a new outright ban on federal awards to special government employees and their affiliates, which was not previously in place.
- Requires prompt updates to the FAR, standardizing procurement rules across agencies to enforce the ban.
- Builds on existing ethics laws (like those in 18 U.S.C. § 202 for special employees) by adding a specific financial restriction, but carves out advisory committee roles to preserve expert input without compensation conflicts.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Agencies may face delays or added scrutiny in awarding contracts and grants, requiring them to screen for special government employee connections; this could streamline ethics compliance but increase administrative workload during the initial FAR revision.
- On Citizens: Limits opportunities for individuals and small organizations tied to government advisors to receive federal funding, potentially affecting research, consulting, or community projects; however, it promotes fairer competition for awards.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could indirectly affect U.S. collaborations with foreign experts serving as special employees by restricting their or their entities' access to U.S. funding.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Special Government Employees: Primarily impacted, as they and their families, partners, or affiliated organizations lose eligibility for federal awards (except in advisory roles).
- Federal Agencies and Procurement Officials: Must adapt processes to comply with the new rules, including FAR revisions.
- Advisory Committees and Experts: Unaffected in their advisory capacities, allowing continued use of outside expertise without financial entanglements.
- Businesses and Non-Profits: Organizations linked to special employees may need to restructure leadership or partnerships to remain eligible for federal funding.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens federal ethics frameworks by closing a potential loophole for indirect profiteering, aligning with broader anti-corruption statutes; enforceable through FAR, with civil or administrative penalties for violations.
- Constitutional: No direct challenges anticipated, as it regulates government spending and employee conduct without infringing on free speech or due process; the advisory exception balances access to expertise.
- Political: Positions as a good-government reform to enhance transparency and public trust in federal hiring and contracting; could spark debate on whether it overly restricts talent recruitment for short-term roles, potentially influencing future ethics legislation.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (3)
Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47], Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7], Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]
Recent Actions
- 2025-04-10: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- 2025-04-10: Introduced in House
- 2025-04-10: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Employee Limits ON Profiteering Act — issued 2025-04-10 — PDF (3 pages)