Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 28, 2025
Assisting Small Businesses Not Fraudsters Act
This bill prohibits individuals convicted of certain financial crimes from receiving assistance from the Small Business Administration (SBA).
Specifically, the bill prohibits individuals who have been convicted of a crime involving financial misconduct or a false statement with respect to certain COVID-19 loans (e.g., Paycheck Protection Program loans, Restaurant Revitalization Fund grants, and Shuttered Venue Operators grants) from receiving any financial assistance from the SBA (other than a disaster loan).
The prohibition includes SBA assistance to small businesses that have an owner, officer, director, or key employee who has been convicted of such a crime.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 0 (Roll no. 43). (text: CR H737)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H748)
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. 825.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H737-739)
Mr. Williams (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Small Business.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.825 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.825 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.825 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.825 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.