Congress ties college funding to severing Chinese research ties—with opaque waiver process.

What it does

This bill bars U.S. colleges and universities from receiving Department of Homeland Security funding if they maintain relationships (contracts, agreements, donations, or gifts) with Confucius Institutes, Chinese entities involved in military research or defense, or China's Thousand Talents Program—unless they sever those ties. The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant one-year waivers on a case-by-case basis if an institution has robust safeguards against unauthorized access to sensitive research and the relationship serves U.S. national security interests or poses no security risk.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is a funding eligibility restriction tied to foreign institutional relationships, framed as a national security measure. It does not establish new agencies, appropriate funds, or create affirmative programs—it conditions existing DHS funding on severing ties to named Chinese entities.

What the text implies

• The definition of 'relationship' includes in-kind donations and gifts with no minimum value threshold, potentially capturing minor academic exchanges or visiting scholar arrangements and creating compliance burden for institutions to audit all incoming donations.
• The waiver process requires consultation with the Director of National Intelligence but does not mandate public disclosure of waiver justifications, creating a closed-door national security determination that may lack transparency or consistent standards across institutions.
• Institutions may face pressure to terminate legitimate academic partnerships (e.g., collaborative research with non-military Chinese universities) if those universities are later designated as 'entities of concern' or if the institution cannot definitively prove the absence of military-civil fusion ties.
• The 12-month implementation delay and annual reporting requirement create a rolling compliance regime; institutions must continuously monitor and report relationships, potentially chilling new partnerships even before the funding restriction takes effect.

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

Who it affects

The bill protects U.S. research security and academic independence from potential foreign espionage or coercion by restricting funding to institutions with ties to Chinese military-linked entities—a legitimate public-safety concern. However, the broad definition of "relationship" (including in-kind donations) and the one-year waiver structure create uncertainty for institutions and may chill legitimate academic exchange, and the waiver process lacks transparent criteria, potentially allowing pol

Named in the bill

Department of Homeland Security, Confucius Institutes, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Director of National Intelligence, U.S. institutions of higher education, House Committee on Homeland Security, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Where it stands

5 cosponsors: 5 Republicans.

• Jan 31, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Jan 31, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Homeland Security and Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence”
• Apr 9, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Apr 9, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended)”
• May 7, 2025 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 266 - 153 (Roll no. 120).”

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

Money around this bill

2 lobbying clients named this bill on 4 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $830,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 53 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 41% of bills with at least one filing.

August Pfluger, the sponsor, reported $1,070,325 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Fdd Action — $530,000 on 2 filings
• University of Michigan — $300,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.