PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 27, 2025
Agricultural Risk Review Act of 2025
This bill makes changes to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), including by requiring CFIUS to determine whether a national security review is necessary for reportable agricultural land transactions that are referred by the Department of Agriculture (USDA). (CFIUS oversees the national security risks of certain foreign investment in the United States. CFIUS has the authority to review covered transactions, which include mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business; certain investments in businesses involved in critical technologies, critical infrastructure, or sensitive personal data; and certain real estate transactions.)
Specifically, the bill directs CFIUS to, after receiving notification from USDA, determine (1) whether a reportable agricultural land transaction is a covered transaction, and (2) whether CFIUS should initiate a national security review or take another action with respect to the transaction.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Reportable agricultural land transaction means a transaction (1) that USDA has reason to believe is a covered transaction, based on information from or in cooperation with the intelligence community; (2) that involves the acquisition of an interest in agricultural land by a foreign person of China, North Korea, Russia, or Iran; and (3) with respect to which a foreign person is required to submit a report to USDA regarding their agricultural land transactions.
The bill also expands CFIUS to include the Secretary of Agriculture for covered transactions that involve agricultural land, agricultural biotechnology, or the agriculture industry (e.g., agricultural transportation, storage, and processing).
People & committees
Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2865)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2865)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1713.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2865-2866)
Mrs. Wagner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 99.
Committee on Foreign Affairs discharged.
Committee on Foreign Affairs discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-129, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-129, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 48 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 13, 2026. 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.1713 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.1713 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.1713 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.1713 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.