Overview
Title
To require the disclosure of foreign support provided to a recipient after the award of a research and development award, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The "GRANT Act of 2023" wants to make sure that if someone gets money to do science projects from the government and then gets more money or gifts from other big countries like China or Russia, they have to tell everyone about it. If they don't tell, they might get in trouble, like losing the money or facing other punishments.
Summary AI
H. R. 6642, titled the “Grant Recipient Accountability for Necessary Transparency Act of 2023” or the “GRANT Act of 2023”, requires recipients of research and development awards from governmental agencies to disclose any financial support or gifts from countries or entities deemed concerning, like China and Russia, after receiving their awards. The bill mandates that this information be shared with relevant agencies, stored in a public, searchable online database, and analyzed for security concerns. It imposes strict measures for non-compliance, including potential suspension of funding and legal actions, and ensures transparency by submitting annual reports on adherence to Congress.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, known as the "Grant Recipient Accountability for Necessary Transparency Act of 2023," or the "GRANT Act of 2023," seeks to increase transparency in the relationship between foreign entities and recipients of U.S. research and development awards. It aims to bolster safeguards against undue foreign influence by mandating that recipients of federal research funding disclose any subsequent support from foreign countries or entities deemed as concerns, such as China, Russia, and others specified in the bill. The bill emphasizes the need for post-award disclosures and outlines a structured process for enforcement, monitoring, and reporting compliance to Congress.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the prominent issues with the bill is its focus solely on disclosure, without offering specific measures to proactively address the reporting of substantial foreign gifts, particularly in the context of universities that were previously found lacking in their transparency. Furthermore, although the bill sets firm definitions for "countries of concern," it does not include a mechanism to adapt these definitions as global circumstances change, potentially rendering requirements outdated over time.
The bill's language is also complex, posing challenges for understanding among the general public and even stakeholders who need to comply. While the bill outlines multiple enforcement actions for non-compliance, this potentially creates a risk of inconsistent application across different agencies. Lastly, the establishment of a public database for disclosures raises concerns about the costs and management resources required, which are not addressed in the bill.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, this bill represents a move towards enhanced accountability and national security, aligning with broader national interests to safeguard intellectual property and innovation from foreign exploitation. By ensuring that foreign support to research entities is disclosed transparently, the bill aims to mitigate risks associated with foreign influences on strategic U.S. research sectors.
However, the financial implications of establishing and maintaining the comprehensive database infrastructure mandated by the bill could indirectly affect public funds if not managed efficiently.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Educational Institutions and Research Agencies: The bill places an increased administrative burden on universities and research institutions, requiring meticulous record-keeping and timely reporting of any foreign support. This could deter potential collaborations due to the perceived complexity and the risks of non-compliance leading to punitive measures.
Federal Agencies: Agencies will need to implement robust systems to track and enforce compliance, which might involve reevaluating their resource allocation and developing new monitoring systems to adhere to the bill's requirements. There is also a potential benefit for agencies as they gain comprehensive oversight and can ensure up-to-date and transparent records of foreign contributions.
Foreign Entities and Scholars: Entities from countries deemed as concerns may face increased scrutiny, potentially affecting international academic and research collaborations. Scholars participating in international projects might encounter additional bureaucratic processes, influencing their engagement with international peers.
Overall, while the bill appears to positively reinforce transparency and national security measures, it simultaneously introduces complex challenges that require careful consideration and management to avoid impeding legitimate collaborations and research advancements.
Financial Assessment
The bill, H. R. 6642, known as the “Grant Recipient Accountability for Necessary Transparency Act of 2023” or the “GRANT Act of 2023,” includes specific references to financial matters related to foreign contributions to research and development award recipients. While much of the text focuses on disclosure and compliance, there are noteworthy mentions of substantial financial amounts and implications.
Foreign Contributions
Section 2 of the bill indicates a significant influx of foreign support in the realm of academia, as the United States Department of Education disclosed that six universities received foreign gifts totaling more than $1.3 billion from countries such as China, Qatar, and Russia. This notable mention highlights the scale of foreign involvement in federally funded research programs, underscoring the bill’s intention to improve the transparency and accountability of such financial interactions.
Administrative and IT Costs
The bill sets forth requirements for establishing a public, searchable database of disclosed financial information from research and development award recipients. Although specific costs are not detailed within the text, it implicitly suggests potential administrative and IT-related expenditures to maintain a comprehensive online platform. This is an issue as highlighted in the concerns around significant IT and administrative costs that may arise due to this obligation. However, the bill does not provide explicit strategies for managing or offsetting these potential financial burdens, leaving agencies to navigate these requirements independently.
Compliance and Enforcement
Although various enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance are detailed in Section 3(g), such as withholding cash payments, denying fund usage, or recouping funding, the bill does not elaborate on any specific budgetary appropriations to facilitate these enforcement actions. The wide range of potential enforcement actions may lead to inconsistency in application across different agencies, which could involve financial implications concerning recovering awarded funds or administrative costs associated with initiating such measures.
Complex Definitions
The definition of "support" within the bill encompasses grants, financial support, and in-kind contributions, which could be complex to quantify and report. This complexity increases the compliance burden for recipients and raises concerns about precise and consistent reporting of what qualifies as foreign support. The ambiguity surrounding what must be reported may indirectly lead to financial impacts if institutions face penalties for non-compliance or misinterpretation of these definitions.
Overall, while the GRANT Act of 2023 does not directly appropriate funding or mandate significant new expenditures, it addresses the financial dealings related to foreign contributions in federally funded research and development. By mandating disclosure and creating mechanisms for accountability, the bill aims to safeguard against potential undue foreign influence and ensure financial transparency, albeit with considerable implications for compliance and administrative efforts.
Issues
The bill's lack of specific measures or actions proposed to address the issue of foreign gifts reporting by universities, even though significant foreign contributions from countries like China, Qatar, and Russia were found; this is addressed in Section 2.
The absence of a mechanism in Section 3 to update the list of 'countries of concern' to reflect changing geopolitical realities could lead to outdated compliance requirements.
The complexity and density of legal language in Section 3 could create barriers for the general public or stakeholders to understand compliance obligations.
There is a potential lack of enforcement mechanisms or consequences for failure to comply with foreign gift disclosure requirements, as outlined in Section 2, although various enforcement actions are detailed in Section 3(g).
Significant IT and administrative costs could arise from the requirement to create a searchable database and website for disclosed information, as mandated in Section 3(c), without explicit reference to cost management in the text.
Section 2 highlights that there is no mention of potential review or revision of current laws or regulations to ensure comprehensive coverage of foreign support and gifts across all relevant federal departments.
The potential for inconsistent application of enforcement actions across covered agencies is present, as Section 3 allows for varied responses to noncompliance without clear guidelines.
The definitions section in Section 3(h) defines 'support' to include various forms of financial or in-kind contributions, which could lead to complexities in determining what needs to be disclosed, exacerbating compliance challenges.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this bill is titled the "Grant Recipient Accountability for Necessary Transparency Act of 2023" or the "GRANT Act of 2023," which is the name by which this legislation may be referred to.
2. Findings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress has found that some universities did not report foreign gifts even though they received over $1.3 billion from countries like China, Qatar, and Russia. The Environmental Protection Agency's Inspector General also noted that there is no requirement for researchers to report foreign support after they receive a grant, though a government memorandum suggests making such disclosures mandatory both before and after grants are awarded.
Money References
- (2) The United States Department of Education found 6 universities of the 12 they investigated received gifts that amounted to more than $1,300,000,000 from foreign sources, including the People’s Republic of China, Qatar, and the Russian Federation.
3. Disclosure of support for research and development award recipients required Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires recipients of research and development awards from certain U.S. agencies to disclose any support they receive from countries or entities of concern, with specific reporting timelines. It also outlines the creation of a public database of disclosures and mandates annual compliance reports to Congress, while detailing enforcement actions for non-compliance.