PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 54.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 5, 2025
Break Up Suspicious Transactions of Fentanyl Act or the BUST FENTANYL Act
This bill revives a requirement for the President to identify foreign opioid traffickers and extends opioid trafficking sanctions to new categories of foreign persons (individuals and entities) whose actions support such trafficking.
Specifically, the bill revives through 2030 a requirement that the President annually submit a report to Congress identifying foreign opioid traffickers. (For those listed in the report, the President must select certain sanctions to impose on them, such as bans on loans, foreign exchange transactions, and property transactions.) The bill also specifies that such reports must prioritize the identification of Chinese nationals and entities involved in the shipment of fentanyl, fentanyl-related chemicals, and fentanyl manufacturing equipment to Mexico or any other country involved in the production of fentanyl trafficked to the United States.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill extends such foreign opioid trafficker sanctions to additional categories of foreign persons, including those that have knowingly (1) engaged in significant activities or financial transactions that materially contributed to opioid trafficking; or (2) provided financial, material, or technological support for such activities or transactions.
The bill also authorizes the President to impose these sanctions on foreign government entities, including government owned or controlled financial institutions, that are involved in activities that contribute to opioid trafficking. Additionally, the President may impose property-blocking sanctions on senior officials of these foreign government entities who knowingly facilitate such activities.
People & committees
Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID] · R–ID
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 54.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Risch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Risch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 24, 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 S.860 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.860 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.860 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.860 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.