This bill imposes a funding condition on institutions of higher education that maintain a relationship with a Confucius Institute or a Chinese entity of concern. Beginning in the first DHS fiscal year that starts at least 12 months after enactment, those institutions become ineligible for DHS funds unless they terminate the relationship.
If the relationship is terminated, the institution becomes eligible to receive DHS funding again. The definitions of key terms—Chinese entity of concern, Confucius Institute, relationship, and institution of higher education—are set out to govern scope and enforcement.
The measure targets foreign influence in federally funded education by tying funding access to compliance with these terms.
At a Glance
What It Does
It bars DHS funding for HEIs that have a relationship with Confucius Institutes or Chinese entities of concern unless the relationship is terminated. It defines the relationship and related terms and specifies a funding-reinstatement path after termination.
Who It Affects
Institutions of higher education that host Confucius Institutes or receive support from Chinese entities of concern; DHS funding programs and their grant/award processes.
Why It Matters
It establishes a clear, enforceable standard for safeguarding federal education funding from foreign influence, signaling a shift in how research and academic collaborations linked to China are funded.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to withhold funding from colleges and universities that have formal ties to Confucius Institutes or to Chinese entities the bill designates as being of concern. A Confucius Institute is defined as a culture-and-education entity funded by the government of the People’s Republic of China, while a “Chinese entity of concern” is a Chinese university or college linked to military or security entities or funded by CCP or related organizations.
A key trigger is a relationship that involves contracts, in-kind donations, or gifts between the institution and such entities. Once enacted, the restrictions take effect in the first DHS fiscal year that begins 12 months after enactment.
To regain DHS funding, the institution must terminate the relationship. The bill thereby creates a straightforward threshold for eligibility based on the presence of these relationships, with a reinstatement pathway once terminated.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines four core terms: Chinese entity of concern, Confucius Institute, institution of higher education, and relationship (contracts, in-kind donations, or gifts).
A relationship with a Confucius Institute or Chinese entity of concern can make an institution ineligible for DHS funds.
Eligibility is restored only after the institution terminates the relationship.
The ineligibility triggers in the first DHS fiscal year beginning at least 12 months after enactment.
Termination of the relationship makes the institution eligible again for DHS funds.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This Act may be cited as the DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act. It establishes the legislative framing and sets the name for referencing the restrictions within DHS funding programs.
Definitions of key terms
The bill defines four terms critical to scope: (1) Chinese entity of concern (a PRC university or college meeting criteria tied to military-civil fusion, defense industrial base, national defense administration, CCP-linked funding, or security/police/intelligence support); (2) Confucius Institute (a cultural institute funded by the PRC government); (3) institution of higher education (as defined by the Higher Education Act); (4) relationship (contracts, in-kind donations, or gifts between an HEI and a Confucius Institute or Chinese entity of concern). These definitions determine who is subject to the funding restrictions.
Ineligibility for DHS funds
Beginning with the first DHS fiscal year that begins after the date that is 12 months after enactment, DHS must ensure that any HEI with a qualifying relationship is ineligible to receive DHS funds unless it terminates that relationship. This creates an enforceable condition on funding and a concrete incentive for institutions to sever connections with such entities.
Termination and reinstatement
Upon termination of the relationship described above, the HEI becomes eligible to receive DHS funds again. The mechanism provides a reinstatement path so that compliance is tied to the actual status of the relationship rather than a permanent loss of funding.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education 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
- DHS funding administration offices benefit from clearer eligibility criteria and more straightforward enforcement when reviewing award decisions.
- Universities that do not host Confucius Institutes or do not have relationships with Chinese entities of concern benefit from uninterrupted access to DHS funding, subject to ongoing compliance.
- Higher education compliance teams gain a concrete framework for evaluating international collaborations and ensuring funding eligibility.
- Policy and security-focused researchers in academia gain a more defined external environment for risk assessment related to foreign influence.
Who Bears the Cost
- Universities that currently host Confucius Institutes or maintain relationships with Chinese entities of concern face potential funding ineligibility and the need to terminate those relationships.
- DHS program offices incur enforcement and monitoring costs to verify eligibility and track terminated relationships.
- Universities that must terminate existing partnerships may incur transition costs, program disruption, or reputational considerations during compliance changes.
- Educational institutions may need to reallocate resources to restructure international partnerships and compliance operations.
- Confucius Institutes and related Chinese entities could see reduced access to U.S. higher education funding and collaboration opportunities.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing national security concerns and academic freedom: the bill aims to minimize foreign influence in federally funded education, but the rigidity of the restriction and the lack of explicit exemptions could disrupt valuable international collaborations and raise questions about proportionality and implementation.
The bill is explicit about what counts as a “relationship” and provides a broad but definable trigger for ineligibility. However, questions remain about edge cases—such as contracts with third-party partners, sub-recipients, or long-standing agreements that complicate immediate termination.
There is also a potential gap in how this interacts with existing multi-institution collaborations, joint programs, and funding streams outside DHS. The 12-month runway before the restriction takes effect could postpone immediate action in some cases, while the reinstatement mechanism presumes timely termination.
The measure does not specify exemptions or carve-outs for particular types of research or for certain categories of institutions, leaving room for interpretation and potential disputes about scope.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.