Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/386

Last Updated: July 17, 2026

Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025

HR. 386, 119th Congress — read as touching Commercial Banks.

The sponsor

Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$105,400 raised

20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

95% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Trade" section, p. 816-818 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

February 10, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 (HR 386). A bill that reeks of protectionism and bureaucratic inefficiency. Let's dissect its implications for my interests.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill aims to restrict the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from increasing the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights basket, effectively limiting China's growing influence on global currency markets. The objective is to maintain US dominance and prevent China from further expanding its economic reach.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct US representatives at the IMF to oppose any increase in the renminbi's weight unless China meets specific conditions, including compliance with Article VIII of the Articles of Agreement, no currency manipulation reports, and adherence to OECD export credit rules. This creates a de facto veto power for the US over China's economic ambitions.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The primary stakeholders are:

1. The Chinese government: facing restrictions on its economic expansion. 2. The IMF: forced to accommodate US interests. 3. Global investors: potentially impacted by reduced liquidity and increased volatility in currency markets. 4. Myself: as a major investor in emerging markets, I see this bill as a threat to my profits.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has significant implications for global economic governance:

1. **Protectionism**: By restricting China's influence, the US is attempting to maintain its dominance over global currency markets. 2. **Market volatility**: Reduced liquidity and increased uncertainty may lead to market instability, affecting my investments. 3. **Economic nationalism**: This bill reinforces a trend of economic nationalism, which could lead to retaliatory measures from other nations, further fragmenting global trade.

In conclusion, HR 386 is a misguided attempt to stifle China's economic growth and maintain US dominance. As a rational actor, I will continue to monitor this bill's progress and adjust my investment strategies accordingly. The potential impact on my wealth and influence demands careful consideration.

Recommendation: My think tank, the "Free Market Initiative," will publish a policy brief highlighting the inefficiencies of this bill and advocating for a more laissez-faire approach to global economic governance. We will also engage in targeted lobbying efforts to ensure that lawmakers prioritize the interests of investors like myself.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process to become an actual law. This one, HR 386, is called the Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to require the United States to oppose any increase in the weight of the Chinese renminbi (RMB) in the Special Drawing Rights basket of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Remember when we learned about the IMF and its role in global economic stability? Yeah, that's what this bill is trying to address.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill instructs the Secretary of the Treasury to tell the US Governor and Executive Director at the IMF to vote against any increase in the RMB's weight unless certain conditions are met. These conditions include:

* China must be in compliance with its obligations under Article VIII of the Articles of Agreement of the Fund (which we covered in 8th grade, by the way). * There must not have been a report submitted in the past 12 months finding China guilty of currency manipulation. * China must adhere to the rules and principles of the Paris Club and the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits.

If these conditions are met, the Secretary of the Treasury can submit a written report to Congress certifying that it's okay to increase the RMB's weight. This provision is set to sunset after 10 years.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main parties affected by this bill are:

* The United States government (specifically, the Department of the Treasury and the IMF) * China (obviously) * Other countries that use the Special Drawing Rights basket * International trade organizations and financial institutions

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have significant implications for global economic stability and US-China relations. By opposing an increase in the RMB's weight, the US is essentially trying to limit China's influence on the global economy. However, this move could also be seen as protectionist and potentially harm US trade relationships with other countries.

Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "Wait, what's the IMF again?" or "What's the Special Drawing Rights basket?" Let me remind you: we covered all this in 8th grade civics class. It's not that complicated.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 - sounds innocent enough, right? Wrong! This bill is a Trojan horse, folks, and I'm here to decode the real agenda behind it.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

On the surface, this bill appears to be about opposing an increase in the weight of the Chinese renminbi (RMB) in the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). But what's really at play here? The US government is trying to exert control over China's growing economic influence. They're attempting to limit China's ability to manipulate its currency, which would give them an unfair trade advantage.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

Section 2 of the bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the US Governor and Executive Director at the IMF to oppose any increase in the RMB's weight in the SDR basket unless China meets certain conditions. These conditions include:

1. Compliance with Article VIII of the Articles of Agreement of the Fund (basically, following international monetary rules). 2. No reports of currency manipulation within the past 12 months. 3. Adherence to the Paris Club and OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits (more international agreements).

But here's the catch: these conditions are already part of existing law! This bill is merely reiterating what's already in place. So, what's the real purpose?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The main players affected by this bill are:

1. China: By limiting their ability to increase the RMB's weight in the SDR basket, the US government is attempting to curb China's growing economic influence. 2. The IMF: As a global financial institution, the IMF will be impacted by the US government's opposition to an increased RMB weight. 3. American businesses and workers: By limiting China's ability to manipulate its currency, the US government claims it's protecting American jobs and industries.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

Now, here's where things get interesting:

1. **Trade wars**: This bill could escalate tensions between the US and China, potentially leading to a trade war. 2. **Global economic instability**: By limiting China's ability to participate in the SDR basket, this bill could create uncertainty in global financial markets. 3. **US dollar dominance**: The real agenda behind this bill might be to maintain the US dollar's status as the world's reserve currency.

Folks, don't be fooled by the innocent-sounding title of this bill. There are hidden agendas at play here. Wake up and smell the conspiracy!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got a real doozy for you tonight! The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 - sounds like a real mouthful, doesn't it? (wink) But trust me, this one's a big deal. It's all about standing up to those sneaky elites in Beijing and defending American freedom... or at least, that's what they want you to think.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is supposedly designed to prevent China from manipulating its currency, the renminbi, to gain an unfair trade advantage over the United States. (Gasp) Can you believe it? The Chinese government, trying to cheat us out of our hard-earned dollars! (Sarcasm alert) Oh wait, I forgot - we're the ones with a $23 trillion national debt and a trade deficit that's through the roof... but I digress.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill instructs the US Treasury Secretary to oppose any increase in the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights basket of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) unless China meets certain conditions. These conditions include complying with IMF obligations, not manipulating its currency, and adhering to rules on export credits. Sounds reasonable, right? (Smirk) Yeah, because we all know how well international agreements work out for us.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main stakeholders here are the US government, China, and the IMF. But let's be real - this bill is really about posturing and trying to look tough on China. It's a classic case of "we're gonna stand up to those Commies" rhetoric, designed to get your blood pumping and distract you from the fact that our own economic policies are a mess.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** So what does this bill really mean? Well, if passed, it could potentially limit China's influence in international trade and finance. But let's not kid ourselves - this is just a symbolic gesture. The real impact will be on American businesses that rely on trade with China. (Whispers) You know, the ones that actually create jobs and drive economic growth? Yeah, they might get hurt by this bill.

But hey, who needs economic reality when you've got patriotic grandstanding? This bill is all about scoring points with the base and pretending to care about American workers. Meanwhile, the elites in Washington will keep on doing what they do best: serving their corporate masters and lining their own pockets. (Wink) That's just how the game is played, folks.

So there you have it - a summary of the Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025. It's a bill that's all about freedom... or at least, the illusion of it. Stay vigilant, America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, masquerading as policy. Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 is a masterclass in posturing, pretending to address China's alleged currency manipulation while actually doing nothing meaningful. The bill's primary objective is to create the illusion of action, allowing lawmakers to claim they're "tough on China" without actually risking any real confrontation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill instructs the Secretary of the Treasury to oppose an increase in the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights basket of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), unless China meets certain conditions. These conditions are a joke, as they're based on certifications that can be easily gamed or ignored. The real purpose is to create a paper trail, allowing politicians to claim they've taken action.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: lawmakers seeking re-election, lobbyists for industries affected by Chinese trade practices, and the Treasury Department, which will have to pretend to take this bill seriously. China, of course, will ignore this posturing, as it has with similar bills in the past.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this bill is negligible, as it's designed to be a symbolic gesture rather than actual policy. The IMF will likely continue to make decisions based on its own interests and those of its member countries, rather than being swayed by this toothless legislation. China will continue to manage its currency as it sees fit, and the US will continue to whine about it without taking meaningful action.

In short, this bill is a classic case of "legislative lupus" – a disease characterized by an excessive desire for self-aggrandizement, coupled with a complete lack of actual policy acumen. The symptoms are clear: politicians seeking to score cheap points, lobbyists pushing their own agendas, and voters being fed empty promises.

Diagnosis: Terminal stupidity, with a side of cowardice. Prognosis: More of the same pointless posturing from Congress, while China continues to laugh all the way to the bank.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: HR 386 - Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 aims to prevent the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from increasing the weight of the Chinese renminbi in its Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket unless China meets certain conditions related to currency manipulation, trade practices, and adherence to international rules.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the US Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the US Governor and Executive Director at the IMF to oppose any increase in the renminbi's weight in the SDR basket unless China:

1. Complies with its obligations under Article VIII of the IMF Articles of Agreement. 2. Has not been found to have manipulated its currency within the preceding 12 months, as reported by the US Treasury Department or other designated agencies. 3. Adheres to the rules and principles of the Paris Club and the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits.

The bill also includes a sunset provision, which would render Section 2 ineffective 10 years after enactment.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* The People's Republic of China (PRC) * The International Monetary Fund (IMF) * US businesses and industries that trade with China * Global financial markets and investors

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If enacted, this bill could:

1. Influence the IMF's decision-making process on SDR basket composition, potentially limiting China's growing economic influence. 2. Pressure China to reform its currency practices and adhere to international standards. 3. Affect US-China trade relations, as China may view this legislation as an attempt to constrain its economic growth. 4. Have broader implications for global financial markets, as changes to the SDR basket could impact currency values and exchange rates.

Overall, HR 386 aims to promote transparency and accountability in China's currency practices while protecting US economic interests.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill, bro. HR 386 is all about keepin' it real with China's currency game.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill's main goal is to make sure the US doesn't let China get away with manipulatin' its currency, dude. The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 aims to prevent the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from increasin' the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket unless China plays by the rules.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill instructs the US Treasury Secretary to tell the US Governor and Executive Director at the IMF to oppose any increase in the renminbi's weight in the SDR basket. But, there's a catch, bro – this opposition only happens if China meets certain conditions:

1. China must comply with its obligations under Article VIII of the IMF Articles of Agreement. 2. There can't be any reports of currency manipulation by China in the past 12 months. 3. China must adhere to the rules and principles of the Paris Club and the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits.

If these conditions are met, the US will chill with the renminbi's increased weight in the SDR basket. Otherwise, it's a hard no from the US, dude.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects:

* China: The obvious one, bro. China's currency manipulation habits are under scrutiny. * IMF: The International Monetary Fund has to deal with the US opposition to the renminbi's increased weight in the SDR basket. * US Treasury Department: They're responsible for instructing the US Governor and Executive Director at the IMF to oppose or support the renminbi's increased weight.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If this bill becomes law, it could:

* Limit China's ability to manipulate its currency and gain an unfair trade advantage. * Encourage China to play by international rules and norms. * Affect global trade dynamics, as a stronger renminbi could impact the competitiveness of Chinese exports.

However, bro, there are also potential risks. If China doesn't comply with the conditions, it could lead to:

* Increased tensions between the US and China. * Potential disruptions in global trade and finance.

Anyway, dude, that's HR 386 in a nutshell. It's all about keepin' China honest and makin' sure they play by the rules.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025: A Bill Born from Protectionist Interests**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Chinese Currency Accountability Act of 2025 (HR 386) aims to restrict the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) ability to increase the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket, a move that would further legitimize China's currency on the global stage. The bill seeks to hold China accountable for its alleged currency manipulation practices and adherence to international trade rules.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill instructs the US Treasury Secretary to oppose any increase in the renminbi's weight in the SDR basket unless China meets three conditions: (1) compliance with Article VIII of the IMF's Articles of Agreement, (2) no reported currency manipulation within the past 12 months, and (3) adherence to the Paris Club and OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits. The bill also includes a sunset provision, rendering it ineffective after 10 years.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The primary stakeholders are China, the IMF, and US industries that compete with Chinese exports. The bill's sponsors and cosponsors have received significant donations from industries that would benefit from protectionist policies, such as manufacturing and agriculture. Notably, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has been a vocal supporter of this legislation.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The bill's passage could lead to increased tensions between the US and China, potentially disrupting global trade relationships. By restricting the renminbi's inclusion in the SDR basket, the bill may limit China's ability to further internationalize its currency, which could have implications for global economic stability.

**Monied Interest Analysis** A review of campaign finance records reveals that key sponsors and cosponsors of HR 386 have received substantial donations from industries that stand to benefit from protectionist policies. For example, Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI), a primary sponsor, has received significant contributions from the NAM and other manufacturing interests. Similarly, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a cosponsor, has received donations from agricultural groups.

**Committee Capture** The bill's referral to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations raises concerns about committee capture. The committee's ranking member, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), has received significant contributions from industries that would benefit from protectionist policies, including manufacturing and finance.

In conclusion, HR 386 is a bill driven by protectionist interests, with key sponsors and cosponsors having received substantial donations from industries that stand to benefit from its passage. The bill's provisions may lead to increased tensions between the US and China, potentially disrupting global trade relationships.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$105,400

19 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$105,400

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

PHELAN, BRENT J

2 transactions

$11,600

CASCARILLA, CHARLES

1 transaction

$6,600

CASCARILLA, MARISSA

1 transaction

$6,600

FISHER, KENNETH

1 transaction

$6,600

FISHER, SHERRILYN

1 transaction

$6,600

GROW, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

ROBINSON, ROBERT S

1 transaction

$6,600

BEAMAN, LEE

1 transaction

$6,600

RICKETTS, J. PETER

1 transaction

$6,600

UIHLEIN, RICHARD

1 transaction

$5,800

BECKETT, JOHN

1 transaction

$5,000

BECKHAM, JEFFREY

1 transaction

$5,000

WEAVER, TIMOTHY J

1 transaction

$5,000

BROPHY, DAN

1 transaction

$3,500

BROPHY, CARLEEN

1 transaction

$3,500

PETRELLI, JOSEPH L.

1 transaction

$3,300

GREWAL, PAUL

1 transaction

$3,300

JOHN, POWELL

1 transaction

$3,300

SMITH, KRISTIN

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]

ID: M001204

Top Contributors

PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS CORP

OrganizationDURYEA, PA

$2,500

Sep 18, 2024

COTLER, YUDACUFSKI, HUEBNER

OrganizationSAINT CLAIR, PA

$1,000

Apr 23, 2024

DOWD, JOHN J

SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA

$6,600

Mar 25, 2024

PEYKOFF, ANDY

NIAGARA BOTTLING, LLC • CEO

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$6,600

Mar 22, 2024

DOWD, JOHN J

SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA

$6,600

Sep 18, 2024

ROWAN, MARC J

APOLLO MANAGEMENT • MANAGEMENT

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 23, 2023

ROWAN, CAROLYN

CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION • OWNER

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 23, 2023

RICH, BRIAN R MR. JR

GILBERTON COAL CO. • EXECUTIVE SALES

IndividualCONSHOHOCKEN, PA

$6,600

Oct 24, 2024

VOLPE, ELLEN M

SELF • HOMEMAKER

IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA

$5,800

May 31, 2023

VOLPE, CHARLES J

EXCALIBUR INSURANCE MGMT • PRESIDENT

IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA

$5,800

May 31, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 51 nodes and 23 connections (44 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $115,500

Top Donors - Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 harmed.

−Commercial Banksconfidence 0.80
Section 2 implies potential restrictions on international financial transactions involving China, which could affect commercial banks' operations and profitability, particularly those with significant exposure to Chinese markets or trade finance activities.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Trade

Very Strong

Vector: 63%

Pages: 816-818AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 386 directly targets China's currency manipulation and trade practices—core elements of Project 2025's assessment of Communist China's economic aggression—by conditioning IMF SDR weight increases on compliance with international trade and currency rules."

Key themes:currency manipulationtrade accountabilityIMF SDR influenceeconomic aggressionconditional market access

Trade

Very Strong

Vector: 62%

Pages: 816-818AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly addresses China's currency manipulation and trade practices, which are central to Project 2025's characterization of Communist China's economic aggression and trade policy challenges."

Key themes:currency manipulationtrade protectionismeconomic aggressionIMF SDR policyinternational compliance

— 783 — Trade tariffs.17 A conservative Administration might do well to look at such a tax as part of its trade agenda. CHALLENGE #2: COMMUNIST CHINA’S ECONOMIC AGGRESSION AND QUEST FOR WORLD DOMINATION18 Among all of its bilateral trade relationships, America’s relationship with Com- munist China is the most fraught with difficulty. The problem is not just that the relentlessly mercantilist and protectionist trade policies that China has pursued ever since its accession to the WTO in 2001 have led to chronic, massive, and ever-expanding trade deficits. Communist China’s economic aggression in the traditional trade policy space is further facilitated by equally aggressive industrial policies and technology transfer–forcing policies that are designed to shift the world’s manufacturing and supply chains to Communist Chinese soil. The Chinese Communist Party’s policy goal is to propel the Chinese economy, but its broader goal is to strengthen Communist China’s defense industrial base and associated warfighting capabilities. That China unabashedly seeks to supplant America as the world’s dominant economic and military power is not in dispute. Rather, it is a prominent feature of Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping’s rhet- oric. Xi has promised that the deed will be done by 2049, the 100-year anniversary of the Communist takeover of the Mainland.19 In light of Communist China’s broader geopolitical and military agenda, the American President who takes office in January 2025 must view the U.S.–China trade relationship and associated policy reforms within the context of the broader existential threat posed by Communist China. The question is whether that next President should seek to decouple economically and financially from Communist China as America’s first best response to China’s unrelenting aggression or con- tinue efforts to negotiate with an authoritarian country and brutal dictatorship with a well-established reputation for failing to abide by any agreements it enters. Institutionalized Aggression. Table 5 depicts more than 50 types of policy aggression institutionalized by the CCP across six different categories of such aggression. Viewed as whole, the extent of Communist China’s aggression is breathtaking. At the trade policy level, Communist China relies heavily on a wide range of mercantilist and protectionist tools to protect its own markets and unfairly exploit foreign markets. These instruments of Communist Chinese trade aggression include high tariffs and nontariff barriers, currency manipulation, a heavy reli- ance on sweatshop labor and pollution havens, the dumping of unfairly subsidized exports, and widespread counterfeiting and piracy: Communist China is the world’s largest source of counterfeit and pirated products. In addition, Communist Chinese enterprises benefit from preferential policies that have burdened world markets with subsidized overcapacity. The resultant glut — 784 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise of Communist Chinese exports in turn depresses world prices and pushes foreign rivals out of the global market—steel is a major example.20 Industrial policy tools that further reinforce Communist China’s mercantilist and protectionist trade policies include numerous direct and indirect subsidies to boost exports and the consolidation of heavily subsidized state-owned enterprises into “national champi- ons” that can compete with foreign companies in both domestic and global markets. Communist China also uses a predatory “debt trap” model of economic develop- ment aid that proffers substantial financing to developing countries in exchange for their willingness to mortgage their natural resources and allow Communist China access to their markets. The practical effect of this debt trap model is to give Com- munist China a competitive edge internationally that stems from its preferential access to relatively lower-cost commodities needed in the manufacturing process. These commodities range from bauxite, copper, and nickel to rarer commodities such as beryllium, titanium, and rare earth minerals. As a complement to this debt trap gambit and to exploit its commanding share of a wide range of critical raw materials that are essential to the global supply chain and production of high-technology and high-value-added products, Com- munist China strategically uses protectionist export restraints, including export quotas and export duties. These export restraints thereby restrict access to raw materials such as rare earth, tungsten, and molybdenum that are essential in the high-technology production space. The result is to drive up world prices and thereby put pressure on American and other foreign downstream producers to move their operations, technologies, and jobs to Communist China. American industries that have been affected by Communist China’s export restraints range from steel, chemicals, and electric cars to wind turbines, lasers, semiconductors, and refrigerants. Technology-Forcing Policies. Table 6, extracted from the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy’s report on Communist China’s economic aggression,21 provides a summary of the various policies the Chinese Communist Party uses to force the transfer of the West’s technologies to Communist Chinese soil. Formally, Communist Chinese industrial policy seeks to promote the “diges- tion, absorption, and re-innovation” of technologies and intellectual property (IP) from around the world.22 As noted in Table 6, this policy is carried out, for example, through state-spon- sored IP theft—coercive and intrusive regulatory gambits to force technology transfer, typically in exchange for limited access to the Chinese market. Commu- nist China’s looting of American technology is further enhanced by “information harvesting” conducted by Communist Chinese nationals who infiltrate U.S. uni- versities, national laboratories, and other centers of innovation. Strategic sectors targeted by Communist Chinese economic espionage have included electronics, telecommunications, robotics, data services, pharmaceuticals, mobile phone

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 642-644AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section address China-related economic concerns, but HR 386 focuses on IMF SDR basket weight and currency manipulation, while the Project 2025 text centers on pension investment prohibitions, disclosure requirements, and multiemployer plan reforms. The thematic overlap is limited to general China economic policy and financial oversight."

Key themes:Chinafinancial oversightinvestment restrictionstransparency

— 609 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l DOL should exercise its oversight of the FRTIB to prohibit investments in China. l Congress should enact legislation prohibiting investment of the TSP in China. PENSION REFORMS. Public Pension Plan Disclosure. Residents of states that responsibly manage their public pension plans (pension plans for State and local government employ- ees) should not be responsible for bailing out states that do not do so. Money is ultimately fungible, so federal aid to States can effectively be used to free up other State funds for pension contributions. Although the federal government does not impose funding rules on public pension plans, these plans should be required to disclose the fair market value of plan assets and liabilities (using the Treasury yield curve as the discount rate) on an annual basis. In the aggregate, these plans were underfunded on a market basis by $6.501 trillion as of Fiscal Year (FY) 2021, even though the plans reported underfunding of only $1.076 trillion using overly optimistic assumptions. l Disclose the fair market value of plan assets and liabilities. Congress should require public pension funds to disclose the fair market value of plan assets and liabilities (using the Treasury yield curve as the discount rate) on an annual basis. Multiemployer Plans. At the request of multiemployer union pension plans, the government has given such plans much more lenient rules and discretion over funding than it has given to single-employer plans. Multiemployer plans have been severely mismanaged, and the plans have abused the discretion and deference given them by federal law and enforcement agencies to make promises that they cannot keep. As a result, these plans are generally severely underfunded, with $757 billion in aggregate underfunding, and a funding level of just 42 percent. The Biden Admin- istration has provided a massive taxpayer bailout to some of these plans, but without any needed reforms. Even worse, it gave out funds in excess of what the law allows. l Congress should reform multiemployer pensions to give participants in these plans the same protections as those in single-employer plans. Liabilities should be measured similarly to single-employer plans. Workers should be able to earn benefits at any employer in the plan, but liabilities should be divided amongst employers, instead of the current illusory joint and several liability under which no one is ultimately responsible for making up underfunding. Troubled plans should be prohibited from — 610 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise making new pension promises. More timely and detailed reporting should be imposed. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Cor- poration (PBGC) insures benefits for private sector pension plans, with separate single-employer and multiemployer insurance programs. l The PBGC’s annual report must be submitted on time, and with timely data that uses fair-market value principles to calculate the PBGC’s finances. The PBGC has been submitting portions of statutorily required annual reports many months late and using out-of-date data. And PBGC's data on plans is almost five years old. These problematic practices make it difficult for Congress to become aware of serious problems in the insurance programs, which received a bailout of over $85 billion in the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act. The PBGC should use existing statutory authority to protect workers, retirees, employers, and taxpayers by closely monitoring and taking appropriate remedial action with regard to badly run and underfunded multiemployer union pension plans, including termination where appropriate. The PBGC's refusal to use such authority helped cause its multiemployer program deficit to go from less than $500 million in 2008 to over $65 billion in 2017. l Congress should increase the variable rate premium on underfunding and eliminate the per-participant cap in order to appropriately take into account risk and limit the degree to which well-funded pension plans must subsidize underfunded plans. Reforms should proportionately reduce the fixed per-participant premium to ease the burden on well-funded plans and also increase premiums on multiemployer plans to match single-employer plans. Improving Access to Employee Stock Ownership Plans. Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) are ERISA-covered employee retirement savings plans that allow employees to receive compensation in the form of equity in their employer business. These arrangements enable employees to formally partici- pate as investors in how their employers’ businesses are run. And they also align employer–employee incentives by giving employees a greater financial stake in the success of their employers. With over half of small businesses owned by business owners over the age of 55, ESOPs also create advantageous succession oppor- tunities that support the continuity of local businesses and regional economic

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 642-644AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on restricting China's influence in the IMF's SDR basket based on currency practices, while the Project 2025 policy centers on prohibiting U.S. federal pension investments in China and reforming public pension disclosure and funding. Both address China-related economic concerns but operate in different domains (international finance vs. domestic pension policy), resulting in only tangential alignment."

Key themes:China economic policyfinancial accountabilityinvestment restrictionsinternational financial institutions

Department of the Treasury

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 736-738AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section involve the Treasury Department taking action to counter China's economic influence, but they target different mechanisms (IMF SDR weighting vs. CFIUS reform) and share only a broad strategic goal rather than specific policy details."

Key themes:China economic influenceTreasury Department authorityInternational financial institutions

— 703 — Department of the Treasury l The U.S. should also examine increasing or decreasing its ownership levels in these institutions in order to achieve maximum leverage. CHINA AND OTHER GEOPOLITICAL THREATS Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. The interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States should realign its priorities to meet the United States’ current foreign policy threats, especially from China. On October 20, 2022, the Treasury Department, which chairs CFIUS, adopted the first-ever CFIUS Enforcement and Penalty Guidelines50 on the committee’s national security risk mitigation requirements. However, there are no clear rules that guide CFIUS on mitigation monitoring, nor is there a published penalty sched- ule to standardize accountability when CFIUS pursues a civil money penalty for violators. In addition, Treasury—as chair of the committee—runs an opaque pro- cess that biases committee procedure toward corporate interests and away from national security interests. Finally, the committee’s jurisdiction does not extend over greenfield investments that Chinese state-owned enterprises have historically pursued in the United States, which leaves America vulnerable to an instrument of Chinese economic statecraft. Given these issues, the next steps for CFIUS should be to develop a more coherent—and transparent—mitigation monitoring program to complement the enforcement guidelines, give CFIUS agencies in charge of national security con- cerns an equal voice at the table, and petition Congress to amend the law to cover Chinese greenfield investments. CFIUS should publish a penalty schedule for violations of CFIUS reporting and mitigation requirements. Publishing a penalty schedule for CFIUS violations will reduce the discretion of the committee to waive penalties or impose mere “wrist slap” costs on violators of the law. Additionally, a standardized penalty schedule would likely increase the deterrence of CFIUS enforcement by reducing the per- ception among parties to covered transactions that they can avoid enforcement by the committee or secure special exceptions based on appeals to the commit- tee’s discretion. As a legal matter—and in application by CFIUS—mitigation monitoring has developed as the Wild West. There are no clear rules that guide the entire com- mittee on mitigation monitoring, nor is there the same level of oversight or accountability within and among the agencies as applies when CFIUS reviews a transaction or when it pursues a civil money penalty. Indeed, it is a credit to transaction parties and the professionalism of the governmental officials and con- tractors who conduct mitigation monitoring on behalf of the government that, by and large, mitigation monitoring has worked adequately during the last several decades. But dependency on the personality and capabilities of individuals creates unnecessary risk both for CFIUS and for transaction parties.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Davidson, Warren

Repealing Big Brother Overreach Act

119/hr/425

DPA Modernization Act of 2026

119/hr/7688

Biological Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2025

119/hr/6624

Back to All Bills