Foreign Registration Obligations for Nonprofit Transparency Act; FRONT Act
Summary
The Foreign Registration Obligations for Nonprofit Transparency Act (FRONT Act) aims to amend the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938. It seeks to treat certain tax-exempt organizations receiving funding from foreign principals of countries of concern as agents of a foreign principal. This would require these organizations to register and disclose their activities under FARA.
The bill defines 'foreign countries of concern' to include China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela, as well as any other country designated by the Secretary of State. It also outlines what constitutes a 'foreign principal of a foreign country of concern.'
The Act modifies reporting requirements for organizations covered under the new provisions, compelling them to provide detailed statements of their activities resulting from foreign funding.
Expected Effects
The FRONT Act will likely increase transparency regarding the influence of foreign entities on tax-exempt organizations operating in the U.S. It will require organizations receiving funds from specific foreign countries to register as foreign agents, subjecting them to greater scrutiny.
This could lead to increased compliance costs for affected organizations. It may also deter some foreign funding of U.S. based nonprofits.
Potential Benefits
- Increased transparency regarding foreign influence in U.S. organizations.
- Potential reduction in undue influence from foreign governments of concern.
- Greater accountability for tax-exempt organizations receiving foreign funding.
- Enhanced national security by identifying potential foreign agents.
- Provides the public with more information about the activities of these organizations.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for increased compliance costs for affected organizations.
- Possible chilling effect on legitimate foreign funding of U.S. nonprofits.
- Risk of unfairly targeting organizations based on their funding sources.
- May create additional bureaucratic burden for the Department of Justice.
- Potential for mission creep and overreach in defining 'countries of concern'.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is complex. While Congress has broad authority to regulate foreign relations and require disclosures, the First Amendment protects freedom of association and expression. The Act's impact on these freedoms would need to be carefully considered.
The government's power to compel disclosure is not unlimited, and must be balanced against the rights of individuals and organizations to engage in political speech and advocacy. The definition of 'foreign principal of a foreign country of concern' could be challenged as overly broad or vague.
Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, which could be used to justify aspects of this bill.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).