PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 7, 2017
Fight Russian Corruption Act
This bill amends the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 to require the Department of State to establish the Office of Anti-Corruption relating to Illicit Russian Financial Activities in Europe. Such office shall: (1) analyze financial networks of the Russian Federation operating in European countries that relate to real estate, energy, media, infrastructure, and other sectors; and (2) train U.S. liaison officers to serve in key U.S. diplomatic and consular posts in such countries to cooperate with foreign partners in uncovering and prosecuting illicit Russian financial activity.
The bill authorizes the State Department to provide assistance to European countries to combat corruption, including to support: (1) activities of such office; (2) foreign programs focused on investigative journalism and independence of the media environment to expose Russian corruption; and (3) activities in Europe related to anti-corruption, anti-propoganda, and anti-Russian malign influence.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The State Department shall seek to work with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to: (1) elevate anti-corruption as an element of NATO's Readiness Action Plan, (2) task the NATO Assistant Secretary General for Intelligence and Warning with monitoring Russian influence in NATO member states, and (3) prioritize the combating of Russian influence under the NATO-European Union framework.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence shall submit a National Intelligence Estimate on: (1) purchases made in the last five years by individuals and entities of key sectors in European countries, particularly purchases that provide monopolistic control of a sector; and (2) the individuals and entities making such purchases, including any links to the Russian Federation.
People & committees
Rep. Suozzi, Thomas R. [D-NY-3] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.2820 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.2820 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.2820 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.2820 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.