PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S5161-5163)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 14, 2016
Combating Global Corruption and Ensuring Accountability Act of 2016
This bill directs the the Department of State to: (1) submit an annual report describing the status of corruption in foreign countries and assessing each country's anti-corruption efforts; and (2) annually publish on a publicly accessible website a four-tiered ranking based upon a government's efforts to comply with the minimum anti-corruption standards prescribed in the bill.
The bill states that a government is complying with such standards if it:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
has enacted and judicially enforces laws, and has established structures and practices, that prohibit corruption;
prescribes punishment for grand corruption that is commensurate with the punishment for serious crimes;
prescribes punishment for petty corruption that provides a sufficient deterrent and reflects the nature of the offense; and
is making sustained anti-corruption efforts.
The State Department shall, prior to the obligation of any foreign assistance (except acute humanitarian and disaster assistance) to a tier 3 or tier 4 country:
conduct a corruption risk assessment and create a corruption mitigation strategy for all foreign assistance programs to that country,
require the inclusion of anti-corruption clauses for all foreign assistance contracts and grants,
require disclosure of the beneficial ownership of all entities receiving foreign assistance funding, and
establish a mechanism for investigating allegations of misappropriated foreign assistance funds or equipment.
The State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development shall consolidate existing reports with anti-corruption components into one online, public platform.
The State Department and the Department of Defense shall submit a strategy that details (1) how the U.S. government will incorporate corruption risk assessments during security sector assistance with foreign security forces, and (2) how security sector assistance will improve security sector governance.
The bill expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) identifying the true beneficial owners of companies formed in the United States or abroad and the property that has been removed from a country in connection with corrupt activities is an important part of combating corruption; and (2) the President should develop a comprehensive approach to requiring such beneficial ownership information for companies formed in the United States or abroad.
People & committees
Sen. Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S5161-5163)
Introduced in Senate
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: 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 S.3210 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 S.3210 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 S.3210 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 S.3210 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.