Lawsuits must now reveal who's funding them—and it could reshape litigation finance

What it does

This bill requires parties in civil lawsuits to disclose in writing to the court and other parties the identity of any third party with a financial stake in the outcome—such as litigation funders, investors, or contingent-fee beneficiaries—and to produce the agreements creating those stakes. The disclosure must happen within 10 days of signing the agreement or when the lawsuit is filed, whichever is later. Loans, loan repayment with capped interest, and attorney's fees are exempt from disclosure.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is procedural disclosure—it amends the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (via 28 USC § 111) to require parties to reveal third-party financial interests in litigation. It does not restrict litigation, cap damages, or create immunity; it mandates transparency.

What the text implies

• Litigation funders and third-party litigation investors will face increased scrutiny and may face pressure to withdraw from cases where their involvement becomes visible to defendants and courts, potentially reducing capital available for contingent-fee litigation.
• Defendants will gain strategic information about plaintiffs' financial backing, enabling them to challenge funder conflicts of interest or argue that third-party interests are distorting settlement incentives.
• Courts will have explicit authority to police third-party beneficiary arrangements and may use disclosure to condition case management, discovery scope, or settlement approval on transparency.
• The exemption for attorney's fees and capped-interest loans preserves traditional contingency arrangements while targeting non-traditional litigation finance, creating a two-tier system.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens and defendants gain transparency about who is actually funding and profiting from lawsuits against them, reducing hidden conflicts of interest and enabling courts to police abuse. The bill does not restrict anyone's right to sue or settle; it only requires disclosure of financial interests already present in litigation. Transparency in civil procedure strengthens judicial accountability and fairness.

Named in the bill

U.S. District Courts, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 USC Chapter 111, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, litigation funders, third-party litigation investors

Where it stands

30 cosponsors: 30 Republicans.

• Feb 7, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Feb 7, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary”
• Nov 18, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

45 lobbying clients named this bill on 77 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $85,808,667 in lobbying spend. A filing names 10 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 99% of bills with at least one filing.

Darrell Issa, the sponsor, reported $335,200 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $1,500 of that came from 1 PAC tied to these lobbying clients.

• Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $54,660,000 on 3 filings
• Google Client Services LLC — $6,920,000 on 2 filings
• American Association for Justice — $3,610,000 on 2 filings
• American Property Casualty Insurance Association — $3,540,000 on 2 filings
• Fedex Corporation — $2,930,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 23, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.