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 · Jan 28, 2025
Stop Chinese Fentanyl Act of 2025
This bill subjects certain Chinese entities and government officials to potential sanctions related to opioid trafficking and requires the President to conduct certain preliminary analyses before regulating economic transactions in the event of a national emergency related to international drug trafficking.
Specifically, for the purposes of the Fentanyl Sanctions Act, the bill changes the definition of foreign opioid trafficker to specify that the term includes (1) Chinese entities involved in the production or sale of synthetic opioids or related pharmaceutical ingredients that fail to take steps to detect or prevent opioid trafficking; and (2) certain senior Chinese government officials that aid and abet opioid trafficking, including through intentional inaction. Under current law, the President must impose certain sanctions on individuals and entities identified as foreign opioid traffickers.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Further, the bill extends through 2029 an existing requirement that the President report to Congress annually on identified foreign opioid traffickers and any sanctions imposed on them. (This requirement expired in December 2024.)
The bill also requires the President to take additional steps in issuing regulations under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) pursuant to a declared national emergency related to international drug trafficking. (IEEPA authorizes the President to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national emergency.) Under the bill, the President must evaluate the costs and benefits of issuing economic regulations for the purpose of resolving the drug trafficking emergency and publish a discussion of such costs and benefits.
People & committees
Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6] · R–KY
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 407 - 4 (Roll no. 220). (text: CR H3728-3729)
House roll call 220 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 407 - 4 (Roll no. 220).
House roll call 220 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3741-3742)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 747.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3728-3731)
Mr. Baumgartner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-19, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 119-19, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 49 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and 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 Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and 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 Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and 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 Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and 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: 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.747 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.747 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.747 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.747 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.