The bill amends Title 5 to make avoidance of national-security harms an explicit component of the fiduciary duties governing the Thrift Savings Fund (TSP). It directs the Secretary of Labor, working with Defense, Justice, Homeland Security, and Treasury, to issue implementing regulations and establishes a process for reviewing investment holdings and proxy votes for national-security compliance.
The measure also bans investments in entities based in the People’s Republic of China from the TSP mutual fund window.
Beyond new standards and rulemaking, the bill creates a short-term liability shield for fiduciaries who implement the national-security duty, requires periodic reporting to Congress about reviews and enforcement outcomes, and codifies presumptions and definitions (including lists of foreign entities and a definition of “covered votes”) to guide compliance. Those features will reshape how the TSP Board, asset managers, and mutual fund vendors screen holdings and execute stewardship actions.
At a Glance
What It Does
It adds a clause directing fiduciaries to prevent TSP investments and related voting from harming U.S. national security, directs the Secretary of Labor to write standards and a review process, and requires annual reporting on compliance reviews. The bill also bars funds accessible through the TSP mutual fund window from holding securities of entities based in the People’s Republic of China.
Who It Affects
The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board and its fiduciaries, the Department of Labor and its interagency partners (DOD, DOJ, DHS, Treasury), mutual fund window administrators, asset managers that service the TSP, and companies on U.S. export-control and national-security-related entity lists.
Why It Matters
This is a statutory grafting of national-security considerations onto retirement-fund fiduciary duties, creating a template for other public retirement plans. For investment operations it will mean new screening, proxy-vote review workflows, consultation with national-security agencies, and a narrower investable universe for some TSP options.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts a new subsection into 5 U.S.C. §8477 that requires fiduciaries of the Thrift Savings Fund to act, to the maximum extent practicable, so that fund investments and the exercise of voting rights do not harm U.S. national security. That is more than a statement of purpose: the statute ties decision-making about asset holdings and votes directly to potential national-security impacts and authorizes regulatory implementation.
To operationalize that duty the bill requires the Secretary of Labor, within one year, to issue regulations in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, and the Treasury and the Attorney General. Those regulations must set compliance standards for both investment holdings and the exercise of voting rights; create a review process for voting decisions; and provide factors that indicate when a vote or an investment would fail the national-security test.
The text builds in specific presumptions—most notably that investments in entities on the Chinese military companies list and the Commerce Department’s entity list are non-compliant—and it defines a set of covered actions (major transactions and certain board elections) that trigger heightened scrutiny.The bill also changes reporting and oversight: it directs Labor to produce a public-facing mechanism for reviewing proxy votes (and clarifies that such reviews are distinct from actually casting votes) and to submit an annual report to congressional committees starting two years after enactment detailing which investments and votes were reviewed and enforcement outcomes. Separately, it amends TSP mutual-fund-window rules to prohibit any mutual fund accessible through that window from including securities of entities based in the People’s Republic of China (or subsidiaries).
Finally, the bill gives fiduciaries temporary immunity from personal monetary liability for breaches tied to the new national-security requirement until January 1, 2027, after which ordinary liability rules apply.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Deadline for rulemaking: the Secretary of Labor must, within 1 year of enactment and in consultation with DOD, DOJ, DHS, and Treasury, issue regulations implementing the national-security duty for TSP investments and votes.
Temporary liability shield: fiduciaries are insulated from personal monetary damages or civil penalties for breaches tied to the new national-security clause until January 1, 2027.
Presumptive exclusions: the regulations must treat investments in entities on the 'Communist Chinese military companies' list and the Commerce Department’s BIS entity list (and their parents/subsidiaries/affiliates) as presumptively noncompliant with the national-security duty.
Covered-vote triggers: a vote is subject to review if it would approve transactions that could cause an entity to breach a federal contract worth more than $10,000,000, materially reduce production/capex/R&D of defense-relevant goods or emerging/foundational technologies, or outsource such assets to a 'covered country'; election of directors with recent ties to listed entities is likewise treated as a covered vote.
Mutual fund window ban: any mutual fund made available through the TSP mutual fund window may not include securities of entities based in the People’s Republic of China or subsidiaries of those entities.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s name: TSP Fiduciary Security Act of 2025. This is purely nominative and does not change substance.
Congressional findings
Sets the legislative framing: TSP beneficiaries include federal civilian and uniformed-service personnel and the Board’s duty includes a duty not to harm national security. Findings operate as interpretive guideposts for regulators and courts but impose no independent legal obligations.
Adds national-security constraint and temporary fiduciary immunity
Adds subsection (b)(1)(D) directing fiduciaries to prevent TSP investments and related voting rights from harming national security 'to the maximum extent practicable.' The bill also adds a subsection (e)(9) that shields fiduciaries from personal monetary liability or civil penalties for breaches tied to that new clause until January 1, 2027. Practically, the Board and fiduciaries will have a statutory mandate to incorporate national-security risk into investment and stewardship policies while enjoying a two-plus-year safe harbor from personal financial exposure.
Rulemaking, presumptions, covered votes, and reporting
Mandates that the Secretary of Labor issue regulations within one year that establish standards for determining whether an investment or vote would harm national security and create a review process for voting decisions. The bill prescribes presumptions—most prominently that holdings in entities on the Chinese military companies list and the Commerce Department’s entity list (and related affiliates) do not meet the national-security standard. It defines 'covered votes' broadly to include approvals of major transactions (mergers, sales, joint ventures, restructurings) that would cause contract breaches above a $10 million threshold, materially reduce defense-relevant production/capex/R&D, or outsource critical or emergent technology to enumerated 'covered countries.' The amendments also require the Secretary of Labor to report annually (starting two years after enactment) to specific congressional oversight committees on what was reviewed and enforcement outcomes.
Reviewing votes is not the same as casting votes
Amends §8438 to state that reviewing the exercise of voting rights for compliance with the national-security clause does not itself count as exercising those voting rights. That carve-out protects the review process from being treated operationally as an active vote, which affects how the Board documents and accounts for stewardship activities.
Prohibits PRC-based entities in the TSP mutual fund window
Adds an explicit ban on mutual funds available via the TSP mutual fund window holding securities of entities based in the People’s Republic of China or their subsidiaries. This creates a hard exclusion for that distribution channel, distinct from the regulatory review framework that applies to the core TSP funds and proxy votes.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Uniformed service members and federal civilian employees who are TSP participants — the bill aims to reduce the Fund’s exposure to companies the government deems a national-security risk, which supporters will argue protects mission-critical supply chains and federal-contract integrity.
- Department of Defense and other national-security agencies — the statute creates a formal mechanism for these agencies to inform investment and voting standards and to flag transactions or board changes that could weaken defense-industrial capacity.
- Domestic firms in defense-relevant industries — by restricting investments that could enable outsourcing or technology transfers to covered countries, the bill could lower competitive pressure from certain foreign competitors in areas the statute identifies as critical.
Who Bears the Cost
- The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board and its fiduciaries — they must develop policy, implement screens and proxy-review workflows, coordinate with multiple agencies, and manage legal risk after the temporary immunity expires.
- Asset managers and mutual fund-window providers servicing the TSP — they will need to screen portfolios against the BIS/entity lists and the People’s Republic of China geographic prohibition, potentially alter fund lineups, and face operational turnover and compliance costs.
- TSP participants broadly — restricting the investable universe and introducing active exclusion screens can increase tracking error and transaction costs, which may, over time, affect net returns compared with unconstrained benchmarks.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between maximizing long-term retirement returns for TSP participants and using a large public retirement fund as an instrument of national-security policy: protecting supply chains and denying capital to adversary-linked firms can reduce certain systemic risks but also narrows investment choices and may lower financial returns — the bill asks fiduciaries to prioritize national-security effects where practicable, a judgment that will force trade-offs between financial and non-financial objectives.
The bill attempts to turn national-security judgments—often made by intelligence, defense, or export-control agencies—into bright-line constraints for a retirement fund. That raises several practical questions.
First, key terms—'harm the national security of the United States' and what constitutes an unacceptable 'outsourcing' or 'significant reduction' in production—are left for the Secretary of Labor to define in regulations. The regulatory process will therefore determine how expansive the duty becomes, how deferential courts will be to agency judgments, and whether the presumptions supplied in the bill become effectively dispositive.
Second, the reliance on external lists (the Chinese military companies list and the BIS entity list) and a defined set of 'covered countries' simplifies screening but also creates operational brittleness: entity-list additions and removals are frequent, and designating additional 'covered countries' requires interagency consultation. Investment managers will face persistent turnover and tracking costs, and index funds or commingled vehicles may be hard to reconcile with the prohibition in the mutual fund window.
Finally, the temporary fiduciary immunity changes the short-term incentives for the Board and managers but creates a cliff: fiduciaries who rely on the safe harbor may face new litigation and liability risk after January 1, 2027 if the regulatory framework or Board decisions are later challenged.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.