PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 5, 2025
Reporting on Investments in Foreign Adversaries Act or the RIFA Act
This bill requires private institutions of higher education (IHEs) with specified assets or investments involving foreign countries or entities of concern to file annual investment disclosure reports. The bill applies to a private IHE with (1) assets in excess of $6 billion, or (2) investments of concern in excess of $250 million.
Specifically, the bill requires such a private IHE to file a disclosure report with the Department of Education (ED) for a year in which the IHE purchases, sells, or holds one or more investments of concern. Investment of concern means any specified interest (e.g., stock or debt) with respect to a foreign country of concern (e.g., North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran) or a foreign entity of concern (e.g., a foreign entity that is designated as a foreign terrorist organization).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, the bill requires ED to establish and maintain a publicly available and searchable database with these disclosure reports.
The bill requires ED to investigate possible violations of this bill and outlines the various penalties for each violation. Penalties may include losing eligibility for federal student financial aid.
People & committees
Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 9, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1023 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1023 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1023 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1023 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-05 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed RIFA Act would require certain large nonpublic colleges and universities to report investments tied to designated foreign countries or entities. Reports would cover direct and indirect investments and be publicly available. Institutions that violate the requirements could face court enforcement and substantial fines; repeated violations could also cause temporary loss of eligibility for the federal programs covered by the bill.
A specified institution shall file a disclosure report in accordance with subsection (b) with the Secretary on each July 31 immediately following any calendar year in which the specified institution purchases, sells, or holds (directly or indirectly through any chain of ownership) one or more investments of concern.
such institution is not a public institution
are made publicly available (in electronic and downloadable format), including any information provided in such reports
The Secretary shall impose a fine on an institution that is compelled to comply with a requirement of this section pursuant to paragraph (2)
An institution that, for 3 consecutive institutional fiscal years, violates any requirement of section 117A shall— (i) be ineligible to participate in the programs authorized by this title for a period of not less than 2 institutional fiscal years
Section 1 would name the legislation the Reporting on Investments in Foreign Adversaries Act, or RIFA Act.
This Act may be cited as the Reporting on Investments in Foreign Adversaries Act or the RIFA Act.
Section 2 would add a new investment-reporting section to the Higher Education Act of 1965. Its definition of an institution incorporates an existing statutory definition and excludes one category identified only by a cross-reference.
Part B of title I of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1011 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 117 the following: 117A. Investment disclosure report
The term institution means an institution of higher education (as such term is defined in section 102, other than an institution described in subsection (a)(1)(c) of such section).
Coverage would be determined each calendar year. A nonpublic institution would qualify if its year-end assets, excluding assets used directly for its tax-exempt purpose, exceed $6 billion, or its year-end investments of concern exceed $250 million. The bill would apply specified existing tax-law rules to the asset-value terms.
The term specified institution, as determined with respect to any calendar year, means an institution if— (i) such institution is not a public institution; and (ii) the aggregate fair market value of— (I) the assets held by such institution at the end of such calendar year (other than those assets which are used directly in carrying out the institution’s exempt purpose) is in excess of $6,000,000,000; or (II) the investments of concern held by such institution at the end of such calendar year is in excess of $250,000,000.
the terms aggregate fair market value and assets which are used directly in carrying out the institution’s exempt purpose shall be applied in the same manner as such terms are applied for the purposes of section 4968(b)(1)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Investments of concern would include ownership or profit-sharing interests, debt, and contracts or derivatives tied to those interests or debt, involving a foreign country or entity of concern. Derivatives are financial instruments whose value depends on an underlying asset.
The term investment of concern means any specified interest with respect to any of the following: (i) A foreign country of concern. (ii) A foreign entity of concern.
The term specified interest means, with respect to any entity— (i) stock or any other equity or profits interest of such entity; (ii) debt issued by such entity; and (iii) any contract or derivative with respect to any property described in clause (i) or (ii).
Countries of concern would include nations covered by an existing federal statute. The Secretary could also designate countries whose conduct is determined to harm U.S. national security or foreign policy, after consultation with the Defense Secretary, State Secretary, and Director of National Intelligence.
The term foreign country of concern means the following: (A) Any covered nation defined in section 4872 of title 10, United States Code. (B) Any country the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence, determines, for purposes of this section, to be engaged in conduct that is detrimental to the national security or foreign policy of the United States.
The definition of foreign entities of concern would incorporate an existing statutory definition and include foreign entities on a separately referenced federal list. The supplied text does not name the entities.
The term foreign entity of concern has the meaning given such term in section 10612(a) of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act (42 U.S.C. 19221(a)) and includes a foreign entity that is identified on the list published under section 1286(c)(8)(A) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (10 U.S.C. 22 4001 note; Public Law 115–232).
A covered institution would have to report by July 31 following each calendar year in which it bought, sold, or held at least one investment of concern. This would include investments held indirectly through any chain of ownership.
A specified institution shall file a disclosure report in accordance with subsection (b) with the Secretary on each July 31 immediately following any calendar year in which the specified institution purchases, sells, or holds (directly or indirectly through any chain of ownership) one or more investments of concern.
Each report would list the previous year's investments of concern and give their total year-end market value, the total value of investments sold measured at the time of sale, and total capital gains from those sales.
Each report to the Secretary required by subsection (a) shall contain, with respect to the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which such report is filed, the following information: (1) A list of the investments of concern purchased, sold, or held during such calendar year. (2) The aggregate fair market value of all investments of concern held as of the close of such calendar year. (3) The combined value of all investments of concern sold over the course of such calendar year, as measured by the fair market value of such investments at the time of the sale. (4) The combined value of all capital gains from such sales of investments of concern.
An institution's covered interest in a fund that pools investors' money would itself count as an investment of concern if the fund holds an investment of concern. An exception would apply if the Secretary certifies that the fund holds none.
a specified interest acquired by a specified institution in a regulated investment company, exchange traded fund, or any other pooled investment that holds an investment of concern shall be treated as an investment of concern and shall be reported pursuant to paragraph (2)(A).
such specified interest shall not be subject to subparagraph (A) if the Secretary certifies, pursuant to paragraph (2)(B), that such pooled investment is not holding an investment of concern.
The Secretary would have to establish reporting and certification procedures for pooled investments after consulting the Treasury Secretary and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Secretary, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Securities and Exchange Commission, shall establish procedures under which a pooled investment described in paragraph (1)— (A) shall be reported in accordance with the requirements of subsection (b); and (B) may be certified under paragraph (1)(B) as not holding an investment of concern.
Assets held by a related organization, as defined in existing tax law, would generally count as the institution's assets, but could not count for more than one covered institution. Assets neither intended nor available for an institution's benefit would be excluded unless the institution controls the organization or the organization falls within the specified tax-law category.
assets held by any related organization (as defined in section 4968(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) with respect to a specified institution shall be treated as held by such specified institution, except that— (1) such assets shall not be taken into account with respect to more than 1 specified institution; and (2) unless such organization is controlled by such institution or is described in section 509(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to such institution, assets which are not intended or available for the use or benefit of such specified institution shall not be taken into account.
For these requirements, debt would be valued at its principal amount—the underlying amount owed—rather than its trading price.
For purposes of this section, the fair market value of any debt shall be the principal amount of such debt.
The Secretary would be allowed to issue implementing regulations or guidance after consulting the Treasury Secretary and the Securities and Exchange Commission, including guidance for investment funds.
The Secretary, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Securities and Exchange Commission, may issue such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations or other guidance providing for the proper application of this section with respect to certain regulated investment companies, exchange traded funds, and pooled investments.
Before submitting a required report, an institution would have to appoint and maintain a compliance officer. That officer must be a current employee or legally authorized agent and personally certify accurate compliance with reporting requirements.
Any specified institution that is required to submit a report under subsection (a) shall designate, before the submission of such report, and maintain a compliance officer, who shall— (1) be a current employee or legally authorized agent of such institution; and (2) be responsible, on behalf of the institution, for personally certifying accurate compliance with the reporting requirements under this section.
By May 31 of the calendar year after enactment, the Secretary would have to establish a public website database of reports and their contents. Reports would have to be downloadable, identifiable, comparable, searchable, and sortable, with each report added within 30 days after receipt.
Beginning not later than the May 31 of the calendar year following the date of enactment of the RIFA Act, the Secretary shall— (1) establish and maintain a searchable database on a website of the Department, under which all reports submitted under this section— (A) are made publicly available (in electronic and downloadable format), including any information provided in such reports; (B) can be individually identified and compared; and (C) are searchable and sortable; and (2) not later than 30 days after receipt of a disclosure report under this section, include such report in such database.
The Secretary, acting through the Department's General Counsel, would investigate possible violations. If an investigation indicates knowing or willful noncompliance, the Secretary would have to request a civil lawsuit, and the Attorney General would have to bring it to seek a court order compelling compliance.
The Secretary (acting through the General Counsel of the Department) shall conduct investigations of possible violations of this section by institutions and, whenever it appears that an institution has knowingly or willfully failed to comply with a requirement of this section (including any rule or regulation promulgated under such section), shall request that the Attorney General bring a civil action in accordance with paragraph (2).
a civil action shall be brought by the Attorney General, at the request of the Secretary, in an appropriate district court of the United States, or the appropriate United States court of any territory or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, to request such court to compel compliance with the requirement of this section.
An institution compelled to comply through that court process would have to reimburse the federal government's full investigation and enforcement costs and would also face the applicable fine.
An institution that is compelled to comply with a requirement of this section pursuant to paragraph (2) shall— (A) pay to the Treasury of the United States the full costs to the United States of obtaining compliance with the requirement of this section, including all associated costs of investigation and enforcement; and (B) be subject to the applicable fines described in paragraph (4).
For a first knowing or willful violation followed by court-compelled compliance, the fine would be 50% to 100% of the sum of the institution's year-end investments of concern and the value of such investments sold during that calendar year. Sales would be valued at the time of sale.
The Secretary shall impose a fine on an institution that is compelled to comply with a requirement of this section pursuant to paragraph (2) as follows:
In the case of a specified institution that knowingly or willfully fails to comply with a requirement of this section with respect to a calendar year, and that has not previously knowingly or willfully failed to comply with such a requirement, the Secretary shall impose a fine on the institution in an amount that is not less than 50 percent and not more than 100 percent of the sum of— (i) the aggregate fair market value of all investments of concern held by such institution as of the close of such calendar year; and (ii) the combined value of all investments of concern sold over the course of such calendar year, as measured by the fair market value of such investments at the time of the sale.
After an institution has received the first-violation fine, a knowing or willful violation for an additional calendar year followed by court-compelled compliance would carry a fine of 100% to 200% of the same combined measure for that additional year: year-end holdings plus investments sold, valued at sale.
The Secretary shall impose a fine on an institution that is compelled to comply with a requirement of this section pursuant to paragraph (2) as follows:
In the case of a specified institution that has been fined pursuant to subparagraph (A) with respect to a calendar year, and that knowingly or willfully fails to comply with a requirement of this section with respect to any additional calendar year, the Secretary shall impose a fine on the institution with respect to any such additional calendar year in an amount that is not less than 100 percent and not more than 200 percent of the sum of— (i) the aggregate fair market value of all investments of concern held by such institution as of the close of such additional calendar year; and (ii) the combined value of all investments of concern sold over the course of such additional calendar year, as measured by the fair market value of such investments at the time of the sale.
The bill would add compliance to program participation agreements under the Higher Education Act. Violations for three consecutive institutional fiscal years would make an institution ineligible for the programs covered by that title for at least two institutional fiscal years. To regain eligibility, it would have to demonstrate compliance with all requirements for at least two institutional fiscal years after the year it became ineligible.
Program participation agreement Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094) is amended by adding at the end the following: (30) (A) An institution will comply with the requirements of section 117A. (B) An institution that, for 3 consecutive institutional fiscal years, violates any requirement of section 117A shall— (i) be ineligible to participate in the programs authorized by this title for a period of not less than 2 institutional fiscal years; and (ii) in order to regain eligibility to participate in such programs, demonstrate compliance with all requirements of such section for not less than 2 institutional fiscal years after the institutional fiscal year in which such institution became ineligible.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 9, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 5, 2025. It does not establish what happened after those recorded actions.
Source snapshot updated 2025-10-09T03:26:16Z. 2025-02-05: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-05. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No narrow preferential benefit warranting a finding was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. Its coverage rules and reporting exceptions define the general reporting framework. This conclusion is limited to this version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 9, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI