RepublicanBill · S. 2048· Senate(119-S-2048)

PRC Military and Human Rights Capital Markets Sanctions Act of 2025

Rep. Ricketts
Age: 62 years
Nebraska
Introduced
6/12/2025
Last activity
6/12/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Sponsored by
Pete Ricketts
Cosponsors
Republican - 1Democrat - 0
Finance and Financial Sector
  1. Introduced
  2. In Committee

What this bill would do

This bill, known as the "PRC Military and Human Rights Capital Markets Sanctions Act of 2025," aims to prohibit the purchase of certain securities from various covered entities. The President is required to compile and maintain a public list of these entities, which include various sanctioned Chinese entities and those related to military-industrial complexes or forced labor. Once identified, United States persons are prohibited from purchasing, selling, or holding specific publicly traded securities related to these entities. The Act mandates that United States persons must divest of these securities within specific timeframes after the bill's enactment or identification. Violations of these rules can result in significant civil and criminal penalties.

Yes

  • Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+4

    The bill mandates a single, publicly available list of covered entities to increase market transparency.

  • Does this give the federal government more power?+3

    The bill expands the President's authority to identify and prohibit securities trading.

  • Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated?+3

    The bill addresses human rights abuses related to forced labor, which can impact racial equity.

The opposite· 3 of 4

  • Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?-2

    The significant civil and criminal penalties could pose risks to individuals if not strictly enforced.

  • Would middle-income households be better off under this?-2

    The requirement to divest assets within strict timelines may negatively impact retail investors.

  • Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?-2

    The mandatory divestment requirements may impose financial burdens and transaction costs on individual investors.