No GRIFT Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 16, 2026
Bottom line
The No GRIFT Act aims to restrict DOJ grant funding to nonprofit organizations that are heavily reliant on federal funds and pay their executives compensation exceeding the Attorney General's salary, promoting fiscal accountability.
What it actually does
This bill prohibits nonprofit organizations from receiving grants from the Department of Justice (DOJ) if, in the most recently concluded taxable year, more than 50% of their revenue came from DOJ grants AND they compensated any officer or employee more than the annual salary of the Attorney General. It also requires nonprofits applying for DOJ grants to submit a certification of their eligibility to the Attorney General.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill ensures taxpayer money intended for public service is not diverted to excessive executive compensation at organizations heavily funded by the Department of Justice. They contend it promotes fiscal responsibility and ensures grant funds are used efficiently for their intended purposes, rather than enriching individuals.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that this bill could inadvertently harm effective nonprofit organizations by imposing arbitrary salary caps that do not account for the specialized expertise required for certain roles, especially in high-cost-of-living areas. They may also contend it could make it difficult for smaller, specialized nonprofits to attract top talent, potentially hindering their ability to deliver critical services.
The bill is exceptionally short and clear, making it very accessible for a quick and thorough understanding.
Section 2(a) and 2(c)
Ineligibility for DOJ Grants Based on Revenue and Executive Compensation
This provision establishes that a nonprofit organization cannot receive a Department of Justice grant for a fiscal year if two conditions are met: first, over 50% of its revenue in the prior taxable year came from DOJ grants, and second, it paid any officer or employee more than the Attorney General's annual salary in that same prior taxable year. This aims to prevent organizations heavily reliant on federal funds from paying executives what is deemed an excessive salary.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures that taxpayer dollars are used responsibly and that organizations heavily dependent on federal grants prioritize program delivery over high executive salaries. They believe it aligns compensation practices with public service values.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that this provision could hinder the ability of some nonprofits to attract and retain highly skilled leaders, especially those with specialized expertise in complex legal or social justice fields. They may contend that a blanket salary cap, tied to a government official's salary, doesn't account for market rates or the unique demands of managing large, impactful organizations.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire for fiscal accountability and responsible use of taxpayer funds with the potential challenge for nonprofits to attract top talent at competitive market rates, especially for complex roles requiring significant expertise.