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 07 · Reported to House · Dec 1, 2023
Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act of 2023
This bill, in the event of a threat to U.S. interests by China, (1) requires additional reporting on the domestic and foreign financial activity of specified Chinese officials, and (2) prohibits certain financial transactions with specified Chinese officials.
Upon a determination by the President that such a threat exists, the bill requires the Department of the Treasury to (1) report to Congress on funds held by certain members of the Chinese Communist Party, including the total amount of funds, a description of the funds, and a list of related financial institutions; and (2) brief Congress on how these funds were acquired and any illicit or corrupt means employed to acquire or use the funds.
After such a report is made, Treasury must prohibit significant transactions between U.S. financial institutions and these individuals (and their immediate family, if appropriate). The bill provides exceptions for intelligence, law enforcement, and national security activities. The President may waive the prohibition under certain circumstances.
People & committees
Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] · R–AR
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 H5042-5043)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5042-5043)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 554.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5042-5046)
Mrs. Kim (CA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 236.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-292.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 118-292.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 41 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: May 27, 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.554 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.554 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.554 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.554 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.