Foreign Investment, CFIUS, and Homeland Security: An Overview (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (11 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised March 29, 2013 |
| Report Number |
RS22863 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
James K. Jackson, Specialist in International Trade and Finance |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Revised March 30, 2011 (9 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised Feb. 4, 2010 (9 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised Nov. 5, 2009 (9 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium April 17, 2008 (6 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
The President is generally seen as exercising broad discretionary authority over developing and implementing U.S. direct investment policy, including the authority to suspend or block investments that 'threaten to impair the national security.' Congress is also directly involved in formulating the scope and direction of U.S. foreign investment policy and some Members are urging the President to be more aggressive in blocking certain types of foreign investments. Such confrontations reflect vastly different philosophical and political views between members of Congress and between Congress and the Administration over the role foreign investment plays in the economy and the role that economic activities should play in the context of U.S. national security policy. In July 2007, Congress asserted its own role in making and conducting foreign investment policy when it adopted and the President signed P.L. 110-49, the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007. This law broadens Congress' oversight role and it explicitly includes the areas of homeland security and critical infrastructure as separately identifiable components of national security that the President must consider when evaluating the national security implications of a foreign investment transaction. The act may well draw Congress into a greater dialogue, and possibly greater conflict, with the Administration over efforts to define the limits of the broad rubric of national economic security. This report will be updated as warranted by events.
