Bill Overview
Title: No Chinese Communist SURPRISE Parties Act
Description: This bill requires issuers of securities to annually disclose whether the issuer has established or maintained an organization of the Chinese Communist Party, if an organization of the Chinese Communist Party has participated in the operations of the issuer, and whether the issuer's board of directors (1) owes a fiduciary duty to the issuer and shareholders, and (2) is subject to heightened scrutiny with respect to conflicted controller transactions.
Sponsors: Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-22]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by the No Chinese Communist SURPRISE Parties Act
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill targets issuers of securities, which would typically include a wide range of companies both within and outside of the United States that offer stock or bonds to investors.
- The requirement to disclose the influence of Chinese Communist Party organizations would primarily affect companies that have operations or affiliations in China, as these would be more likely to have such organizations influence their operations.
- The global market includes many multinational corporations who operate in or with China, potentially exposing a significant number of companies to these disclosure requirements.
- Shareholders of impacted companies will also be indirectly affected by this bill as it influences the transparency and perceived risks of their investments.
Reasoning
- Given the policy's focus on financial transparency related to the Chinese Communist Party's influence, the impacted population primarily includes multinational corporations, their shareholders, and indirectly, the employees and communities connected to these entities.
- The budget constraints suggest that while the policy aims to impact a large number of entities, active compliance monitoring and enforcement may be limited to the most exposed or high-profile cases.
- Since many Americans invest directly or indirectly in the stock market, changes in company operations due to this policy could influence shareholder value perception, thereby affecting self-reported wellbeing associated with financial security.
Simulated Interviews
Retired financial advisor (New York, NY)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the added transparency this policy brings.
- As a retiree with a diversified portfolio, understanding foreign influences on stocks is crucial to my peace of mind.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Software engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about how this might affect my company's operations and job security.
- However, I do see the importance of knowing where investments might be at risk.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Small business owner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't seem to affect my business or personal life.
- I find national policies affecting big companies do not trickle down to my level.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Financial analyst (Austin, TX)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having clear disclosures about foreign influence can improve investment advice I provide.
- It increases accountability which is good for market integrity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Manufacturing manager (Detroit, MI)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am worried this will complicate our partnership processes.
- On a personal level, it doesn't seem to affect my daily life much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Grad student in economics (Chicago, IL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this policy as an interesting case for how regulations can influence economic stability.
- As a student, I doubt this will have an immediate effect on me personally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Entertainment industry executive (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While transparency is usually good, I'm concerned about potential regulatory burdens.
- It could affect the competitive landscape in unpredictable ways.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Stockbroker (Miami, FL)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will help clients understand potential overseas risks better.
- It aligns with growing trends toward more ethical investment practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
CEO of a mid-sized tech firm (Dallas, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about regulatory impact on our expansion plans.
- But as a shareholder, I see value in increased transparency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
University professor in finance (Boston, MA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill represents a significant shift in corporate governance.
- Its impact on firms with CCP connections will be an interesting area for academic research.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- The compliance costs to the private sector, especially for multinational companies, should be considered.
- This bill could influence foreign relations with China due to the sensitive nature of the required disclosures.