Protecting our Land Act

Bill Number

H.R. 458

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

International Affairs

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Last Updated

2025-02-28T17:47:48Z

AI-Generated Summary

H.R. 458: Protecting our Land Act

Purpose

This bill aims to safeguard U.S. national security by blocking foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism from buying public or private real estate within the United States. It seeks to prevent entities seen as threats from gaining ownership of land or property that could compromise U.S. security or the safety of its people.

Key Provisions

• Prohibition on Purchases: The President must instruct the heads of federal departments and agencies to create rules and regulations that ban the purchase of any public or private real estate in the U.S. by:
• Foreign adversaries.
• State sponsors of terrorism.
• Agents, instrumentalities, or any persons owned, controlled by, or affiliated with these entities.
• Definitions:
• Foreign adversary: Any foreign government or non-government entity involved in long-term patterns or serious actions that harm U.S. national security or the safety of U.S. persons (e.g., espionage, cyberattacks, or other threats).
• State sponsor of terrorism: Countries whose governments are designated by the U.S. Secretary of State for repeatedly supporting international terrorism, based on existing laws like the Export Control Reform Act or the Foreign Assistance Act.
• United States: Includes all states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, and other U.S. territories or possessions.
• The prohibition applies regardless of other laws, making it a broad override.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• This introduces a new, nationwide ban specifically on real estate purchases by defined threat actors, which did not previously exist in such a comprehensive form.
• It builds on current U.S. laws that already restrict dealings with state sponsors of terrorism (e.g., export controls and foreign aid restrictions) but expands them to explicitly cover property ownership.
• No exemptions or timelines for implementation are specified, shifting enforcement to federal rulemaking processes.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: Federal departments (e.g., Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security) will need to develop and enforce new regulations, potentially increasing administrative workload, monitoring of real estate transactions, and coordination with state/local authorities.
• Citizens: U.S. individuals and businesses in the real estate sector may face delays or complications in sales if buyers are flagged as affiliated with prohibited entities; it could stabilize property values in sensitive areas but limit market access for legitimate foreign investors.
• International Relations: Could escalate tensions with countries labeled as adversaries or terrorism sponsors (e.g., China, Iran, North Korea), signaling stronger U.S. protectionism; it might encourage reciprocal restrictions abroad, affecting U.S. investments overseas.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• U.S. Government: Executive branch agencies responsible for rulemaking and enforcement; Congress for oversight.
• Real Estate Industry: Buyers, sellers, developers, and agents dealing with international transactions, who may need to verify buyer backgrounds.
• Foreign Entities: Governments, companies, or individuals from adversary nations, facing barriers to U.S. property ownership.
• U.S. Citizens and Residents: Particularly those in border states, agricultural areas, or near military sites, where foreign ownership has been a concern; broader population through potential economic ripple effects on housing markets.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: May face challenges in courts over enforcement mechanisms, such as how affiliations are determined, potentially requiring clear guidelines to avoid arbitrary application; it overrides other laws but could conflict with international trade agreements.
• Constitutional: Raises questions about due process (fair procedures for designations) and equal protection (treating foreign entities differently), though national security exceptions often prevail under precedents like those in foreign affairs cases.
• Political: Reinforces a national security-focused agenda, appealing to concerns over foreign influence (e.g., farmland or infrastructure control), but could be criticized as overly broad or xenophobic, impacting bipartisan support in a divided Congress.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]

Recent Actions

• 2025-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
• 2025-01-15: Introduced in House
• 2025-01-15: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Protecting our Land Act — issued 2025-01-15 — PDF (3 pages)