Overview

Title

To prohibit the awarding of contracts and grants to companies beneficially owned by special Government employees, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

S. 1365 says that if a person works for the government and owns at least a little bit of a company, that company can't get special jobs or money from the government for a whole year after the person stops working for the government. This is to make sure everything is fair and honest.

Summary AI

S. 1365 aims to prevent U.S. executive agencies from awarding contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements to companies owned by individuals who are special Government employees. If any such individuals own at least 5% of a company's shares, the company is ineligible for federal contracts unless the individual stops being a special Government employee for at least 365 days after the bill becomes law. This measure intends to prevent conflicts of interest in the allocation of federal resources.

Published

2025-04-09
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2025-04-09
Package ID: BILLS-119s1365is

Keywords AI

special government employees contracts and grants prohibition conflicts of interest federal contracts beneficial ownership executive agencies securities exchange act of 1934 implementation challenges compliance enforcement code of federal regulations

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
507
Pages:
3
Sentences:
12

Language

Nouns: 166
Verbs: 29
Adjectives: 28
Adverbs: 7
Numbers: 25
Entities: 31

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.26
Average Sentence Length:
42.25
Token Entropy:
4.76
Readability (ARI):
23.21

AnalysisAI

Overview of the Bill

The bill titled the "No Federal Payments to Companies Controlled by Special Government Employees Act of 2025" seeks to prevent executive agencies from awarding contracts, grants, or making related payments to companies that are beneficially owned by individuals classified as special Government employees. This prohibition applies unless the individual in question ceases their role as a special Government employee and remains free of such a designation for at least one year following the bill's enactment. The bill includes definitions of key terms such as "company," "covered beneficial owner," and "special Government employee," referencing external regulations and statutes for clarity.

Significant Issues

One of the primary issues with the bill is the ambiguity surrounding the definition of "special Government employee." Without a clear explanation, stakeholders might find it challenging to ascertain who is affected by the bill. This lack of clarity could lead to misunderstandings and misapplications of the law. Additionally, the bill refers to external regulations and statutes to define essential terms. Changes to these external laws could affect the bill's clarity and effectiveness over time.

Another noteworthy concern is the bill's reliance on the term "immediately ceases," which lacks a precise, measurable timeframe. Without this clarity, those enforcing the law could interpret the requirement differently, leading to inconsistent application and challenges in compliance.

The bill also does not specify the mechanisms or enforcement strategies to ensure that contracts or grants are not awarded to the companies in question. This lack may lead to implementation challenges and hinder effective compliance.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

For the general public, this bill aims to ensure that federal funds are not directed to companies that could have conflicts of interest due to their ownership by special Government employees. While this could promote fairness and transparency in government contracting, the lack of clear definitions and mechanisms might dilute the intended benefits.

Specific stakeholders, such as companies owned by special Government employees, may find themselves significantly affected. They might be precluded from engaging in potentially lucrative federal contracts or grants unless they satisfy the bill's conditions. This restriction could have financial implications for these companies and their employees.

On the positive side, the bill could level the playing field, ensuring that companies without governmental ties have equal opportunities to engage in federal contracting. It could also foster public trust by reducing potential conflicts of interest in government spending.

Overall, while the bill's intentions to prevent conflicts of interest in governmental dealings are evident, its success is threatened by ambiguities and the potential for varied interpretations. Addressing these issues could enhance the bill's effectiveness and ensure that it benefits the public and aligns with its objectives.

Issues

  • The definition of 'special Government employee' and its implications are not clear to a lay reader without further context or explanation, which is crucial for understanding who the bill affects. (Section 2)

  • The mechanism and enforcement strategies for deterring the awarding of contracts or grants to companies owned by special Government employees are not clearly outlined, raising concerns about implementation and compliance. (Section 1, Section 2)

  • The provision relies on external regulations and statutes, which might lead to issues if these external references change over time, affecting the bill's effectiveness and clarity. (Section 2)

  • The term 'immediately ceases' lacks a clear, measurable timeframe for action, which could lead to interpretational differences and enforcement challenges. (Section 2)

  • The exact process for determining whether someone is a 'beneficial owner of the company' is not fully detailed in the text, creating potential ambiguities that could impact the bill's enforceability. (Section 2)

  • The act's title focuses on preventing federal payments to certain companies but lacks details on specific mechanisms for achieving this, which might lead to implementation challenges. (Section 1)

  • The rule's dependence on the date of enactment, which is unspecified, could lead to confusion about the timeline for compliance and the immediate effects of the law. (Section 2)

  • The short title of the act is specific but may not clearly convey the overall content or scope of the bill, potentially leading to misunderstandings about its purpose among the public. (Section 1)

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 short title of this Act is the "No Federal Payments to Companies Controlled by Special Government Employees Act of 2025."

2. Prohibition on awarding of contracts and grants to companies beneficially owned by special Government employees Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Executive agencies are not allowed to give contracts, grants, or payments to companies owned by certain former government employees, unless these employees stop being government employees for at least a year. The section also defines important terms such as "company," "covered beneficial owner," "equity security," "executive agency," and "special Government employee."