S-2563-119
Held at the desk.
Sponsored by Todd Young (R-IN)
What it does
This bill would direct the Secretary of Commerce, working with other federal agencies and the Comptroller General, to conduct an interagency review of how competitive the United States is in attracting foreign direct investment from private companies in allied and partner countries ("trusted countries"). Within one year of enactment, the Secretary would submit a report to Congress with findings and recommendations for increasing that competitiveness, while maintaining existing security, labor, consumer, financial, and environmental protections. The review would specifically exclude matters related to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and would require two rounds of public comment before the report is finalized.
Who benefits
U.S. workers and communities in regions that could attract new foreign-funded manufacturing plants or service facilities ("greenfield" investments). Domestic businesses that could gain foreign capital partners. State and local economic development agencies seeking a federal framework to coordinate investment attraction efforts. Advanced technology sector firms that could benefit from reduced foreign trade barriers identified in the review. Policymakers and researchers who would gain a comprehensive, publicly available data resource on foreign investment trends. Allied-country companies seeking clearer guidance on U.S. investment conditions.
Who is hurt
Domestic companies that compete with foreign-owned firms and may face increased competition if foreign investment barriers are lowered. Taxpayers who bear the administrative cost of the interagency review and report, though that cost is likely modest. Advocacy groups focused on restricting foreign ownership of U.S. assets, whose preferred policies could be identified as "barriers" in the report. Workers in sectors where increased foreign investment could shift ownership structures or labor practices.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the United States has no comprehensive, government-wide assessment of what barriers prevent allied-country companies from investing here, and that this information gap costs American workers jobs. They contend that foreign direct investment from trusted-country firms supports millions of U.S. jobs — the Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates foreign-owned firms employed over 8 million Americans as of recent years — and that a data-driven review is a necessary first step to closing policy gaps. They further argue the bill explicitly protects existing security, labor, and environmental standards, ensuring the review cannot be used to justify weakening those protections.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill's framing — labeling certain policies as "barriers" to investment — could predetermine the report's conclusions and create political pressure to weaken regulations that serve legitimate public interests. They contend that the review's explicit focus on "removing unnecessary barriers" signals a deregulatory agenda dressed up as a neutral study, and that Congress already has access to substantial foreign investment data through existing agencies like the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, making a new interagency review duplicative and unlikely to produce actionable new insights.
Constitutional context
No significant constitutional tension is present. Congress has broad authority under the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) to regulate foreign commerce and direct executive agencies to study and report on economic conditions. Directing the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a review and submit a report is a well-established exercise of congressional oversight authority and does not raise major questions doctrine concerns under West Virginia v. EPA (2022), as the bill delegates no rulemaking authority to the agency.
Checks and balances
Congress gains information and policy recommendations through the mandated report; the executive branch (Secretary of Commerce) conducts the review but holds no new regulatory authority under this bill, and the public comment requirement provides a procedural check on the findings before they are submitted to Congress.
Historical precedent
A prior version of this bill, the Global Investment in American Jobs Act, was enacted in 2013 (P.L. 113-35), directing a similar Commerce Department review; this 2025 bill updates and reauthorizes that review process for current economic and technological conditions.