The ZOMBIE Act inserts a new Section 303A into the Federal Election Campaign Act to force authorized campaign committees and leadership PACs of former federal candidates to disburse all remaining funds within a specified post‑election window, subject to narrow permitted uses and explicit prohibitions on transfers that would benefit the candidate or close associates. The bill also amends the law on permitted uses of contributions, and adds certification requirements to Lobbying Disclosure Act and Foreign Agents Registration Act filings requiring former candidates who register as lobbyists or foreign agents to attest that their committees have complied.
This matters for anyone who runs for federal office, operates or advises leadership PACs, or manages campaign compliance. The rule reduces the ability to hold campaign funds on hand for post‑election influence (lobbying, foreign work, or funding candidate‑branded nonprofits) and creates new compliance reporting hooks linking campaign finance rules to lobbying and FARA regimes.
Enforcement will rely on cross‑agency certification and ordinary criminal penalties for false statements, which raises practical and legal questions for compliance teams and regulators.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates Section 303A requiring authorized committees and leadership PACs of former candidates to disburse all remaining funds by the end of an applicable 6‑month period tied to state candidate filing deadlines, unless earlier terminated by a candidate’s registration under lobbying or FARA rules. It limits permitted post‑election uses and forbids transfers to candidate‑created or candidate‑linked organizations and most relatives.
Who It Affects
Authorized campaign committees and leadership PACs for federal candidates, compliance officers, campaign treasurers, former candidates who register as lobbyists or foreign agents, and charities that might receive leftover funds. State election filing windows indirectly control the disbursement clock.
Why It Matters
The bill closes a common path for post‑election influence by forcing a structural shrinkage of post‑campaign war chests and by making failure to comply a certification obligation when registering as a lobbyist or foreign agent—creating new enforcement touchpoints and compliance risks.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill adds a new section to the Federal Election Campaign Act that requires each authorized committee or leadership PAC of a candidate to disburse any funds remaining after an election within a limited period. Rather than set a fixed calendar deadline, it ties the disbursement window to the state law deadlines for qualifying as a candidate for the next election: the applicable disbursement period is six months beginning the day after the last date a person could file to enter the next election under state law.
The statute also ends the disbursement obligation earlier if the candidate becomes a registered lobbyist or an agent of a foreign principal requiring FARA registration.
On how committees must spend the money, the bill creates a two‑step rule. First, committees must pay outstanding obligations related to the committee’s operations.
Second, after satisfying those obligations, the remaining funds may only be returned to contributors or given to organizations described in section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (charities). The bill forbids giving funds during the disbursement period to charities that the candidate established, charities that bear the candidate’s name, or charities that employ, are run by, or receive services from the candidate or the candidate’s relatives.
The statute also bars disbursements to relatives except to satisfy committee obligations that are reportable or would be reportable if above $200.The bill changes the long‑standing list of permitted uses in section 313(a) of the FECA by making those uses subject to the new Section 303A. It adds parallel certification requirements into the Lobbying Disclosure Act and the Foreign Agents Registration Act: a former candidate who registers under those statutes must certify under penalty of perjury that each of their authorized committees and leadership PACs is in compliance with Section 303A.
The effective date ties implementation to the regularly scheduled November 2026 general election and applies to that election and subsequent federal elections.Practically, compliance teams will need to map state candidate filing deadlines to campaign account calendars, track operational obligations closely, and document any donor returns or charitable transfers to show they meet the statute’s narrow allowances. Former candidates who plan to lobby or act as foreign agents must ensure the required disbursements are complete before registering or be prepared to make the certification and face potential false‑statement exposure.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines the ‘applicable disbursement period’ as a six‑month window beginning the day after the last state filing date to qualify as a candidate for the next election for that office.
The disbursement obligation ends earlier if the candidate makes a lobbying contact requiring registration under the Lobbying Disclosure Act or becomes a FARA‑registered agent.
After paying committee operational obligations, remaining funds may only be returned to contributors or donated to organizations described in IRC section 170(c); political uses (including transfers to candidate‑linked nonprofits) are prohibited during the period.
The statute explicitly bans disbursing funds to charities established by or bearing the name of the candidate, or to organizations that employ or are run by the candidate or the candidate’s relatives; transfers to relatives are disallowed except for certain reported obligations.
The bill amends LDA and FARA filing forms to require a certification—under penalty of perjury—that the candidate’s committees and leadership PACs complied with the new disbursement rules.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Mandatory spend‑down and permitted uses for leftover campaign funds
This is the core operative text. It sets a six‑month disbursement period tied to state candidate filing deadlines and provides early stop‑gaps when a former candidate becomes a registered lobbyist or foreign agent. It prescribes a two‑tier ordering for disbursements—first satisfy committee obligations, then either return contributions or donate to section 170(c) charities—and enumerates strict prohibitions on transfers that would personally benefit the candidate (candidate‑established charities, organizations named for the candidate, or organizations that employ candidate or relatives). Practically, treasurers must distinguish ordinary committee obligations from discretionary transfers and keep contemporaneous records to document compliance.
Makes previously permitted uses subject to Section 303A
This narrow textual amendment places Section 313(a)’s list of permitted contributions and uses beneath the priority of Section 303A. In effect, the usual latitude campaigns have to reallocate funds post‑election is constrained by the new spend‑down rules. Compliance teams must now read Section 313(a) through the lens of Section 303A when determining whether a proposed post‑election disbursement is allowable.
Applies starting with the November 2026 general election
The bill attaches a clear implementation date: the November 2026 regularly scheduled general election and thereafter. That gives campaigns a defined transition period but also means committees for those elections must prepare to execute the new rules if the bill becomes law. The date also matters because the applicable disbursement period depends on state filing calendars for the next election cycle.
LDA registration requires certification of committee compliance
The bill amends the LDA’s registration elements to add a certification—under penalty of perjury—that each authorized committee and leadership PAC of the individual is in compliance with Section 303A. This creates an enforcement hook because false statements on LDA filings are criminally and civilly actionable, meaning that the timing and substance of campaign disbursements can become evidence in enforcement actions tied to lobbying registration.
FARA registration requires the same compliance certification
Parallel to the LDA change, this provision adds the Section 303A certification to FARA registration statements. Anyone who was a candidate and seeks to register under FARA must confirm their committees complied. Because FARA has its own statutory enforcement tools, this links campaign finance compliance to foreign‑agent enforcement and increases the cross‑agency visibility of post‑campaign fund movements.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Elections across all five countries.
Explore Elections 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
- Voters and government integrity advocates — they gain a statutory limitation on the use of leftover campaign funds to finance immediate post‑election influence activities.
- Charitable organizations that qualify under IRC section 170(c) — they become one of the only permissible recipients of leftover funds (subject to prohibitions), potentially increasing charitable inflows from spent‑down accounts.
- Opposing campaigns and political opponents — the forced spend‑down reduces the pool of funds a former candidate can retain for future influence or rapid political re‑entry, leveling the post‑election playing field.
- Regulators and investigators (FEC, DOJ, Department of Justice components enforcing FARA/LDA) — the added certification creates clear documentary hooks for oversight and potential enforcement.
Who Bears the Cost
- Former candidates and their authorized committees — they must liquidate funds within a constrained timeline, adjust budgets, and may lose strategic flexibility for staff, research, or reserve funds.
- Leadership PACs and political operatives — restrictions on transfers and the requirement to return contributions limit the permissible uses of retained war chests, potentially shrinking operational funding.
- Compliance departments and treasurers — they face new administrative work: mapping state filing calendars, documenting obligation payments, coordinating donor returns, and meeting cross‑statute certification duties.
- Charities linked to candidates or family members — the bill explicitly bars receiving funds during the disbursement period if the charity is candidate‑established, bears the candidate’s name, or employs the candidate/relatives, removing a resource stream for those entities.
- Enforcement agencies (FEC, district attorneys) — they may face increased workload and evidentiary complexity when assessing certifications and determining whether disbursements complied with the statute.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate aims—reducing the ability of former candidates to convert campaign coffers into immediate post‑election influence versus preserving the practical needs of campaigns to wind down operations and respect donor intent. Narrowing permitted uses and imposing a hard spend‑down reduces opportunities for soft influence but also forces rapid liquidation that can disrupt legitimate wind‑down obligations and push political spending into less transparent channels.
The bill’s core design is straightforward, but implementing it raises several practical and legal questions. First, enforcement relies heavily on the certification clauses in LDA and FARA filings and on pre‑existing reporting obligations; the text does not create a new, centralized auditing mechanism or specify civil penalties tied uniquely to 303A noncompliance.
That means oversight will be piecemeal—handled through routine FEC audits, LDA/FARA investigations, or false‑statement prosecutions—making predictable compliance testing difficult for committees.
Second, the interplay with state candidate filing calendars introduces administrative complexity and potential inequity: the six‑month clock will vary by state and office class (notably Senate class timing), so two similar campaigns could face materially different deadlines. The ban on transfers to candidate‑affiliated charities is blunt and simple to apply, but it also invites edge‑cases (e.g., charities with partial historical ties to a candidate or loosely affiliated board members) that will require careful factual work and could provoke litigation.
Finally, the statute constrains permitted post‑election uses of funds but does not directly address how donors or controllers might shift activity off‑platform—via independent committees, outside groups, or new entities—to achieve the same ends, creating an enforcement gap and a likely migration of influence activity to actors outside FECA’s direct reach.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.