Stop Corrupt Gratuities Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 29, 2026
Bottom line
The bill expands federal anti-corruption law to explicitly criminalize gratuities to state, local, and Indian tribal officials, aiming to enhance accountability and integrity in government.
What it actually does
This bill amends Title 18, United States Code, specifically Section 666, to establish new federal criminal penalties for giving or receiving illegal gratuities involving State, local, and Indian tribal government officials. It targets situations where an official is rewarded for past actions related to business or transactions valued at $5,000 or more, without requiring proof of a prior explicit agreement, which distinguishes it from bribery.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill closes a significant loophole in federal anti-corruption law, ensuring that state and local officials, like their federal counterparts, are prohibited from accepting rewards for official actions, even if there was no explicit quid pro quo agreement beforehand. This measure is seen as crucial for strengthening public trust and combating subtle forms of influence peddling that can erode governmental integrity.
Opponents contend
Opponents might contend that existing state and local laws are already sufficient to address gratuities, and expanding federal jurisdiction into this area could lead to federal overreach, potentially federalizing minor local issues or creating a chilling effect on legitimate interactions between officials and the public. Concerns may also be raised regarding the broad interpretation of 'reward' and the potential for prosecutorial abuse.
The bill text is very short and can be read quickly, but a full understanding of its implications requires familiarity with existing federal bribery and gratuity statutes.
Section 2(a)(3), inserting new subsection (b) into 18 U.S.C. 666
Prohibiting Gratuities to State, Local, and Indian Tribal Officials
This provision makes it a federal crime for an agent of a state, local, or Indian tribal government (or an organization receiving federal funds) to solicit, demand, accept, or agree to accept anything of value with the intent to be rewarded for business or transactions involving $5,000 or more. It also criminalizes giving, offering, or agreeing to give anything of value with the intent to reward such an agent in connection with similar transactions. Violations are punishable by fines, imprisonment for up to 2 years, or both.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision extends a crucial anti-corruption tool, already applicable to federal officials, to state and local levels, where significant public funds and decisions are made. It helps prevent subtle forms of corruption where officials are rewarded for past favorable actions, even without a prior explicit agreement, thereby enhancing integrity in government.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that this provision federalizes an area traditionally handled by state and local ethics and criminal laws, potentially leading to an overburdening of federal courts and prosecutors with cases that could be handled locally. They may also express concern that the definition of 'reward' could be broadly interpreted, potentially criminalizing innocent gestures or gifts.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the desire to combat corruption at all levels of government with concerns about federal overreach into state and local affairs and the potential for broad interpretation of 'gratuity' versus legitimate gifts or recognition.
Section 2(b)
Conforming Amendments to Section 666 Headings and Table of Sections
This section makes several technical changes to the headings within 18 U.S.C. 666 and to the entry for section 666 in the table of sections for chapter 31 of title 18. Specifically, it changes the main section heading from 'Theft or bribery' to 'Theft, bribery, or gratuities' and adds descriptive titles to subsections (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) for clarity and to reflect the inclusion of gratuities.
The bill amends the existing subsection (a) of 18 U.S.C. 666 to refer to the redesignated subsection (c) for the 'circumstance described,' and then further amends the redesignated subsection (c) to ensure that the 'covered circumstance' (i.e., the organization, government, or agency receiving Federal funds of $10,000 or more) applies to both the original bribery provisions in subsection (a) and the new gratuity provisions in subsection (b).
Section 2(a)(1) and Section 2(a)(4), modifying subsection (a) and the redesignated subsection (c)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to ensure proper jurisdictional application without repeating the 'covered circumstance' language in the new subsection. It's a technical necessity rather than an evasive tactic.
Case for: Supporters argue that these technical amendments are crucial to correctly establish federal jurisdiction over the new gratuity offense, ensuring it applies only to entities receiving federal funds, consistent with the original intent of 18 U.S.C. 666.
Case against: Critics might argue that by linking the gratuity offense to the federal funding threshold, the bill still creates a broad federal reach into state and local matters, even if the mechanism is technically sound, potentially drawing federal attention to cases that could be handled locally.
Estimated impact: Ensures the new gratuity offense falls under federal jurisdiction for entities receiving $10,000 or more in federal funds, significantly expanding the scope of federal anti-corruption enforcement to a wide array of state, local, and tribal entities.