Criminalizes official gratuities to public agents

Summary#

The No Gratuities for Governing Act of 2025 would amend section 666 of title 18 of the United States Code; it would not create a separate law or agency. Its stated goal is to clarify the federal offense involving illegal gratuities connected to programs receiving federal funds. The bill is introduced and not law; its passage and start date are uncertain.

  • It would create a criminal offense for knowingly and purposefully giving, offering, promising, demanding, seeking, receiving, or accepting a personal gratuity worth at least $1,000 for or because of an agent’s official act, when the related organization or government transaction involves at least $5,000.
  • The offense would apply to agents of organizations, state and local governments, Tribal governments, and their agencies—but only if a separate circumstance in section 666 is met.
  • A person convicted of the new offense could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years, or both. The bill does not state a fine amount.
  • It would raise the maximum prison term for the existing offense in section 666(a) from 10 years to 15 years.
  • The bill does not ban all gifts to public or organizational agents. Its new offense has specific knowledge, purpose, value, transaction, and other conditions.

What it means for you#

  • People giving or offering gratuities: The bill could make you subject to criminal penalties if you knowingly and purposefully give, offer, or promise a gratuity meeting the bill’s thresholds and conditions.
  • Agents of organizations and governments: You could face the new offense for knowingly and purposefully seeking or accepting a qualifying gratuity personally for or because of an official act.
  • Organizations and governments: The bill does not require you to create a new office or process. It could expose agents to the new federal offense when the required conditions are met.
  • People covered by the existing offense: The maximum prison term for the existing section 666(a) offense would increase from 10 to 15 years. The supplied bill text does not reproduce that offense’s full rules.

Money#

No public cost estimate is in the available material.

  • The bill authorizes fines for the new offense, but gives no fine amount.
  • It provides no estimate for enforcement, prosecution, or other public costs.
  • It does not appropriate money or change a tax or fee.

What is unclear#

  • The bill makes the new offense depend on a circumstance in section 666(c), but the supplied material does not include that provision’s text. Because the parent statute was not supplied, its current requirements and the full change to current law could not be verified.
  • The bill does not define “anything of value,” “official act,” or “personally” in the supplied text.
  • It does not explain how the new offense would interact with other laws or how cases would be investigated and prosecuted.
  • It does not provide a start date, enforcement-cost estimate, or estimate of how many cases might be affected.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the bill is that it would expressly criminalize certain substantial gratuities tied to official acts, rather than leaving that conduct to be addressed only under other rules.
  • The $1,000 gratuity and $5,000 transaction thresholds, along with the requirement of knowing and purposeful conduct, limit the new offense to cases meeting those conditions.
  • The bill applies the new rule to agents of organizations as well as state, local, and Tribal governments.

Case against#

  • One concern is that the bill increases the maximum prison term for the existing offense to 15 years without explaining the reason or expected effect in the supplied material.
  • The new offense uses terms the bill does not define, including “official act.” Unclear boundaries could make it harder for people to know what conduct is covered.
  • The missing text of section 666(c) prevents readers from judging exactly which organizations and transactions would be covered.