Bill · H.R. 10076· House(119-HR-10076)
Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026
- Introduced
- 8/10/2026
- Last activity
- 8/10/2026 — Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, Financial Services, Ways and Means, Rules, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Sponsored by
- Michael McCaul
- Cosponsors
- - 11 - 12
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, aims to impose strict sanctions and other economic measures against the Russian Federation. It targets Russian officials, financial institutions, state-owned entities, securities, investments, and energy sectors to penalize the government for its actions. Additionally, the legislation increases import duties on goods from Russia and on countries that purchase Russian crude oil or natural gas or help Russia evade sanctions. The bill also extends the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 until the year 2031. Finally, most provisions of this act will sunset five years after being enacted.
Yes· 3 of 5
Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?+7
Coordinates sanctions with the G7 and EU to target shared adversaries.
Does this give the federal government more power?+6
Expands presidential authority to impose sanctions and duties on foreign entities.
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?+5
Targets foreign actors conducting malicious electronic attacks and cyberattacks on allies.
The opposite· 3 of 12
Is this likely to lower the price at the pump?-5
Restrictions on Russian gas and oil imports could potentially increase energy costs.
Does this make trade with other countries easier?-4
Imposes significant duties on imports from Russia and third-party countries that evade sanctions.
Would high-income households be better off under this?-3
Prohibits new investments in the Russian Federation for US persons.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 102(e)(2)(D): This provision targets foreign persons who engage in activities that undermine Ukraine's military readiness, democratic processes, territorial integrity, or commit serious human rights abuses against Ukrainian citizens. This can be viewed as positive because it holds bad actors accountable for harming innocent people and destabilizing the region.
-
Section 114(a): This section provides explicit exceptions for humanitarian assistance, ensuring that sanctions do not apply to the provision of agricultural commodities, food, medicine, medical devices, or humanitarian purposes. This is a positive outcome because it protects vulnerable populations from suffering due to broader economic sanctions.
-
Section 114(j): This provision ensures that sanctions do not apply to persons providing provisions to a vessel for the safety and care of the crew, the protection of human life, or to avoid environmental damage. This is a common-sense protection for ordinary workers and the environment.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 112(a): This section requires the President to increase the rate of duty for all goods imported into the United States from the Russian Federation to a rate of up to 500 percent ad valorem. This could be considered a burden for everyday people because it may drive up the costs of certain imported goods and energy products.
-
Section 113(a): This provision increases the rate of duty up to 100 percent on all goods imported into the United States from specific foreign countries that purchase Russian crude oil or natural gas or facilitate sanctions evasion. This could negatively impact American consumers by increasing the prices of everyday goods imported from those nations.
-
Section 107: This section prohibits new investments and the exportation of certain services to the Russian Federation by any United States person. This could create financial burdens or disruptions for American workers and businesses that previously relied on trade or operations involving that region.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Billionaires-3Good For Business Owners-3Good For High Income Households-3Good For High Net Worth Individuals-3Good For Ultra High Net Worth Individuals-3Good For Immigrants-2Good For Low Income Households-2Good For Middle Class Households-2
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Improves International Alliances+7Improves Cybersecurity Defense+5Increases Foreign Aid+5Improves International Trade-4
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+6
- Economy And Finance
- Reduces Inflation-3Improves Economic Growth-2
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Reduces Fossil Fuel Production+3Reduces Gas Prices-5
- 9/16/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/15/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/10/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 8/10/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, Financial Services, Ways and Means, Rules, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 17 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jake AuchinclossDemocrat · Massachusetts
Andy BarrRepublican · Kentucky
Don BaconRepublican · Nebraska
Ken CalvertRepublican · California
Ed CaseDemocrat · Hawaii
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey
Daniel GoldmanDemocrat · New York
Maggie GoodlanderDemocrat · New Hampshire
Steny HoyerDemocrat · Maryland
Chrissy HoulahanDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Marcy KapturDemocrat · Ohio
Thomas KeanRepublican · New Jersey
Jennifer KiggansRepublican · Virginia
Nathaniel MoranRepublican · Texas
Scott PetersDemocrat · California
Mike RogersRepublican · Alabama
Michael TurnerRepublican · Ohio
Jill TokudaDemocrat · Hawaii
Gabe VasquezDemocrat · New Mexico
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia
Joe WilsonRepublican · South Carolina
Ann WagnerRepublican · Missouri