IGO Anti-Boycott Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 867
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- International Affairs
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-01-31: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-27T16:00:51Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
This bill, titled the "IGO Anti-Boycott Act," aims to expand the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018—a law that restricts U.S. persons from participating in or supporting certain foreign-led boycotts—by including international governmental organizations (IGOs, such as the United Nations) alongside foreign countries. The goal is to prevent U.S. entities from complying with boycott requests from these organizations if they target U.S. allies or interests.
Key Provisions
- Expansion of Scope: The bill inserts the phrase "or international governmental organization" into key sections of the 2018 Act (sections 1772 and 1773, codified at 50 U.S.C. 4841 and 4842). This applies the Act's restrictions to boycotts initiated or enforced by IGOs, similar to those from foreign countries.
- Prohibitions on Compliance: U.S. persons (including businesses and individuals) are barred from:
- Refusing to do business with entities blacklisted by a boycotting foreign country or IGO.
- Discriminating against U.S. persons based on relationships with boycotted countries.
- Furnishing information about business relationships that could support boycott enforcement.
- Annual Reporting Requirement: The President must submit an annual report to Congress and make it publicly available, including:
- A list of foreign countries and IGOs that promote or enforce boycotts subject to the Act.
- Descriptions of those boycotts.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- The 2018 Anti-Boycott Act previously applied only to boycotts by foreign countries. This bill broadens it to explicitly include IGOs, ensuring the same penalties (civil and criminal) for non-compliance apply.
- It introduces a new mandatory annual report, which did not exist before, to increase transparency and oversight of boycott activities.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The executive branch (e.g., the President and State Department) will face new reporting obligations, potentially increasing administrative workload and requiring coordination to identify and describe relevant boycotts.
- On Citizens and Businesses: U.S. persons, especially companies involved in international trade, may need to adjust compliance practices to avoid penalties for engaging with IGO-led boycotts, which could affect operations in global markets.
- On International Relations: This could strain U.S. ties with IGOs perceived as fostering boycotts (e.g., against Israel), potentially leading to diplomatic tensions or challenges in multilateral forums, while strengthening protections for U.S. allies.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Persons and Businesses: Directly impacted by expanded compliance requirements and potential fines for violating boycott restrictions.
- International Governmental Organizations: Newly subject to the Act's prohibitions, which may limit their influence on U.S. entities.
- Foreign Countries: Existing targets of the law, now joined by IGOs in the reporting list.
- U.S. Government and Congress: Responsible for enforcement, reporting, and oversight, with Congress gaining better information on global boycott activities.
- U.S. Allies (e.g., Israel): Indirectly benefited through stronger protections against boycotts.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens enforcement tools under existing export control laws (part of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018), with potential for increased litigation if U.S. entities challenge IGO-related restrictions. Penalties remain unchanged but now extend to a broader range of actors.
- Constitutional: Could raise First Amendment concerns regarding free speech or association if boycott compliance is viewed as protected expression, though courts have generally upheld similar anti-boycott laws as valid foreign policy measures.
- Political: Signals U.S. commitment to countering boycotts in international forums, potentially polarizing debates on foreign policy and multilateralism, but it maintains the status quo on core prohibitions without introducing new substantive rules.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]
Cosponsors (24)
Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5], Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14], Rep. Ciscomani, Juan [R-AZ-6], Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Salazar, Maria Elvira [R-FL-27], Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2], Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2], Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Wilson, Joe [R-SC-2], Rep. Hamadeh, Abraham [R-AZ-8], Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36], Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25], Rep. Kustoff, David [R-TN-8], Rep. Jack, Brian [R-GA-3], Rep. Fleischmann, Charles J. "Chuck" [R-TN-3], Rep. Haridopolos, Mike [R-FL-8], Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8], Rep. Davis, Donald G. [D-NC-1], Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6], Rep. Gillen, Laura [D-NY-4], Rep. Flood, Mike [R-NE-1], Rep. Messmer, Mark [R-IN-8], Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Recent Actions
- 2025-01-31: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- 2025-01-31: Introduced in House
- 2025-01-31: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- IGO Anti-Boycott Act — issued 2025-01-31 — PDF (3 pages)