A Republican bill with 27 Republican cosponsors · See all 27 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 330.
Waiting for a floor vote in the other chamber
Passed one chamber and is on the other chamber's calendar.
The calendar is a queue, not a date. The majority leadership decides what comes to the floor and when; much of what is placed on it is never called, and a bill that is never called simply expires with the Congress.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- Awaiting Senate
- On Senate calendar
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
This Act, known as the "No Tax Dollars for Terrorists Act," establishes a policy to oppose foreign assistance provided to the Taliban by other countries and nongovernmental organizations. The Secretary of State is tasked with developing a strategy to discourage this assistance while supporting Afghan women and girls and relocating at-risk Afghans. The bill requires several detailed reports to Congress regarding assistance to the Taliban, the status of the Afghan Fund, and direct cash assistance programs. Additionally, it mandates the immediate suspension of foreign assistance to any entity determined to have assisted the Taliban. Finally, the Act rescinds unobligated balances from various Afghanistan reconstruction funds to be used for deficit reduction.
Yes
- Scored +5
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill includes efforts to relocate eligible, fully vetted, at-risk Afghans and allies to the United States or third countries.
- Scored +5
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill rescinds unobligated reconstruction balances to be applied to deficit reduction.
- Scored +4
Would women be better off under this?
The bill requires a strategy to support Afghan women and girls suffering under Taliban edicts.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Does this send more money or help to other countries?
The bill mandates the suspension of foreign assistance to entities providing aid to the Taliban.
- Scored -2
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The loss of reconstruction and assistance funds could negatively impact low-income populations in Afghanistan.
- Scored -2
Is this likely to lift people out of poverty?
The rescission of various reconstruction funds may reduce aid available for economic stability in Afghanistan.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Support for Afghan Women and Girls: The strategy developed by the Secretary of State will include efforts to support women and girls suffering under Taliban edicts in a manner that does not support the Taliban (Section 2(c)(1)).
-
Relocation of At-Risk Individuals: The strategy includes efforts to relocate eligible, fully vetted, at-risk Afghans and Afghan allies to the United States or third countries (Section 2(c)(1)).
-
Protection of Funds: The bill requires the development of controls to ensure that funds in the Afghan Fund are not diverted to or misused by the Taliban (Section 4(b)(2)(E)).
-
Prevention of Cash Diversion: The Secretary of State is required to implement oversight to prevent the Taliban from accessing cash assistance under direct cash assistance programs (Section 3(b)(6)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Suspension of Foreign Assistance: The Secretary of State must immediately suspend all foreign assistance being sent to any country or nongovernmental organization that has provided assistance to the Taliban (Section 2(d)).
-
Loss of Reconstruction Funding: The Act rescinds all unobligated balances for various reconstruction activities in Afghanistan, such as those for security forces, economic support, and international disaster assistance, transferring those funds to the general fund for deficit reduction (Section 4(c)(1)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill includes efforts to relocate eligible, fully vetted, at-risk Afghans and allies to the United States or third countries. Would women be better off under this? — The bill requires a strategy to support Afghan women and girls suffering under Taliban edicts. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The loss of reconstruction and assistance funds could negatively impact low-income populations in Afghanistan.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill rescinds unobligated reconstruction balances to be applied to deficit reduction.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this send more money or help to other countries? — The bill mandates the suspension of foreign assistance to entities providing aid to the Taliban.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The rescission of various reconstruction funds may reduce aid available for economic stability in Afghanistan.
- 2/10/2026
- Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Risch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 330.
- 1/29/2026
- Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- 6/24/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
- 6/23/2025
- The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2843-2844)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2843-2844)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 260.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2843-2845)
- Mr. Burchett moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 6/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/3/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/28/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/9/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
- 4/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/22/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/16/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 1/14/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/13/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 1/9/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- 14 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Lauren BoebertRepublican · Colorado
Vern BuchananRepublican · Florida
Andy BiggsRepublican · Arizona
James BairdRepublican · Indiana
Eric BurlisonRepublican · Missouri
Tom BarrettRepublican · Michigan
Michael BaumgartnerRepublican · Washington
Dan CrenshawRepublican · Texas
Elijah CraneRepublican · Arizona
Monica De La CruzRepublican · Texas
Warren DavidsonRepublican · Ohio
Randy FineRepublican · Florida
Marjorie GreeneRepublican · Georgia
Abraham HamadehRepublican · Arizona
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
Michael LawlerRepublican · New York
Nancy MaceRepublican · South Carolina
Michael McCaulRepublican · Texas
Cory MillsRepublican · Florida
Richard McCormickRepublican · Georgia
Addison McDowellRepublican · North Carolina
Ralph NormanRepublican · South Carolina
August PflugerRepublican · Texas
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York
Derrick Van OrdenRepublican · Wisconsin
Randy WeberRepublican · Texas