PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 · Jan 14, 2025
Combating Global Corruption Act of 2025
This bill requires the Department of State to address corruption in foreign governments.
The State Department must annually publish a ranking of foreign countries based on their government's efforts to eliminate corruption. Corruption, for the purposes of the bill, is the unlawful exercise of entrusted public power for private gain, including by bribery, nepotism, fraud, or embezzlement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill outlines the minimum standards that the State Department must consider when creating the ranking. These considerations include, for example, whether a country has criminalized corruption, adopted measures to prevent corruption, and complied with the United Nations Convention against Corruption and other relevant international agreements. Tier one countries meet the standards; tier two countries make some efforts to meet the standards; tier three countries make de minimis or no efforts to meet the standards.
If a country is ranked in the second or third tier, the State Department must designate an anti-corruption contact at the U.S. diplomatic post in that country to promote good governance and combat corruption.
The State Department must also evaluate whether there are foreign persons (individuals or entities) engaged in significant corruption in all third-tier countries for the purpose of potential imposition of sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. The State Department must annually provide Congress with a list of those persons that the President has sanctioned pursuant to this evaluation, the dates sanctions were imposed, and the reasons for imposing sanctions.
People & committees
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] · D–TN
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 the Judiciary, 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 the Judiciary, 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: Sep 19, 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.385 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.385 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.385 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.385 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.