PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 7, 2016
Foreign Investment and Economic Security Act of 2016
This bill amends the Defense Production Act of 1950 to provide for: (1) national security reviews of transactions involving the construction of a new facility in the United States by any foreign person (currently, national security reviews are conducted only for certain mergers, acquisitions, or takeovers by or with a foreign person); and (2) net benefit reviews of new construction, mergers, acquisitions, or takeovers by or with a foreign person to determine whether the transaction is of net benefit to the United States.
The bill makes net benefit reviews mandatory for transactions that meet specified requirements under the Clayton Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill requires the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), for purposes of carrying out net benefit determinations, to consider the effect of the transaction on: (1) employment, resource processing, the utilization of parts and services produced in or imported into the United States, and exports; (2) industrial efficiency, technological development, technology transfers, and product innovation; (3) competition within any U.S. industry or with other countries; (4) compatibility with national industrial, economic, and cultural policies; and (5) public health, safety, and well-being of U.S. consumers.
In the case of a net benefit determination concerning a foreign government-influenced transaction, CFIUS must consider additional factors including:
the governance and commercial orientation of the foreign person engaging in such transaction;
the extent to which the foreign person is owned, controlled, or influenced by the foreign government; and
adherence to U.S. law and corporate governance standards, engagement of the foreign country with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, and the likelihood of operation on a commercial basis.
The bill also revises the composition of CFIUS, for the purpose of carrying out net benefit determinations.
The bill requires final CFIUS determinations to be certified to Congress and referred to the President if a transaction will not be of net benefit to the United States. The bill prohibits transactions that the President determines are not of net benefit to the United States and bars judicial review of such determinations.
People & committees
Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3] · D–CT
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 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: Aug 12, 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.5665 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.5665 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.5665 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.5665 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.