The Good Government Act of 2025 adds a new subchapter to chapter 131 of title 5, U.S. Code that sharply limits the types of financial instruments Members of Congress — and their spouses and dependent children — may hold while serving. The bill defines “covered financial instruments” broadly to include securities, security futures, commodities, and economically equivalent synthetic interests, and then requires Members to either divest those holdings or place them into an approved qualified blind trust within set deadlines.
This is a preventive ethics statute: it prohibits purchase, sale, or continued ownership of covered instruments during a Member’s term, creates specific certification, reporting, and trustee-notice obligations, and establishes enforcement tools (disgorgement and recurring civil penalties tied to a Member’s pay). The measure centralizes oversight with the House and Senate ethics committees, requires GAO audit follow-up, and narrows certain exemptions (for diversified mutuals/ETFs and U.S. Treasuries).
Compliance, trust administration, and valuation will be immediate practical issues for Members and for the supervising ethics offices charged with implementation.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill bars Members of Congress and their spouses/dependent children from holding, buying, or selling defined ‘covered financial instruments’ while the Member serves, unless those instruments are divested or placed into a supervising-ethics-approved qualified blind trust. It sets short deadlines for certification and transfer, provides limited, time-capped extensions, and requires public posting of certifications, trust agreements, asset schedules, and enforcement actions.
Who It Affects
Current and incoming U.S. Senators and Representatives and their spouses and dependent children; trustees and financial institutions that form and manage qualified blind trusts; the House and Senate ethics committees, which gain explicit rulemaking and enforcement authority; and financial advisers and asset managers who handle divestitures or trust transfers.
Why It Matters
The bill converts much of the current ethics guidance around blind trusts into statutory obligations with civil penalties and disgorgement, narrowing safe harbors and increasing transparency. For compliance officers and wealth managers, it creates near-term operational demand for qualified blind trusts and a new audit trail; for ethics offices, it requires new procedures, public reporting, and enforcement resources.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a new Subchapter IV defining the universe of “covered financial instruments.” That term expressly includes securities, security futures, commodities, and economically equivalent synthetic positions—whether held directly or indirectly through funds, trusts, employee benefit plans or deferred compensation tied to investment performance. The bill excludes diversified mutual funds or ETFs, U.S. Treasury securities, compensation from a spouse’s primary occupation, and funds held in government employee retirement plans.
For Members who are already serving when the law takes effect, the statute requires a certification to the applicable supervising ethics office within 30 days that either no covered instruments are owned by the Member (or family), or that each covered instrument will be divested or placed in a qualified blind trust. The operative deadline to complete the divestment or trust placement is 120 days after enactment, with narrow extensions available: total extension time cannot exceed 180 days and no single extension can exceed 45 days.
New Members must follow the same pattern starting from the date they take office: 30-day certification, 120-day divest/place deadline, and the same extension limits.The bill also builds a 180-day post-service cooling-off window that stops a Member (and their spouse/dependent child) from dissolving a qualified blind trust, regaining control of trust assets, or otherwise controlling a covered financial instrument from the time they take office through 180 days after they leave. Trustees must notify the Member and the supervising ethics office if an interested party learns the contents of the trust, if the initial property’s value falls below $1,000, or if the trustee divests initial trust property.
Supervising ethics offices must post on public websites certifications, trust agreements, asset schedules, extension descriptions, and records of civil penalties.Enforcement is handled by the appropriate supervising ethics office. The office must notify Members of violations, provide a hearing opportunity, and allow time to cure noncompliance.
The bill authorizes disgorgement of profits from violations and recurring civil penalties equal to the monthly equivalent of a Member’s annual pay, assessed beginning 30 days after notice and every 30 days thereafter until the violation is resolved. Supervising ethics committees get explicit rulemaking authority to implement the subchapter and to publish relevant materials, and the Comptroller General must audit compliance and report within two years.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill prohibits a Member of Congress, and any spouse or dependent child, from holding, purchasing, or selling a covered financial instrument during the Member’s term.
Current Members must certify within 30 days of enactment and divest or transfer covered holdings into an approved qualified blind trust within 120 days (extensions allowed up to 180 total days, single extensions no more than 45 days).
“Covered financial instruments” includes securities, security futures, commodities, and economically equivalent synthetic interests (including derivatives and warrants), and covers interests held indirectly via funds, trusts, employee benefit plans, or deferred-compensation arrangements.
Enforcement tools include disgorgement of any profit from unlawful transactions and recurring civil penalties equal to the monthly equivalent of a Member’s annual pay, assessed every 30 days after a 30-day cure/notice period.
A Member (and family) may not dissolve or otherwise control a qualified blind trust holding covered instruments from the date the Member takes office until 180 days after they leave office, and GAO must audit compliance within two years.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions and scope of covered instruments
This section defines the key terms: ‘covered financial instrument’ (broadly covering securities, security futures, commodities, and economically equivalent synthetic instruments) and clarifies how indirect holdings are treated (through funds, trusts, employee plans, or deferred-compensation agreements). It also lists narrow exclusions — diversified mutual funds or ETFs, U.S. Treasuries, compensation from a spouse’s main job, and government employee retirement plan holdings — and instructs that meeting ESG criteria alone does not convert an instrument into a covered instrument.
Blanket prohibition during service
This short provision creates the statutory prohibition: during a Member’s term, neither the Member nor their spouse or dependent child may hold, buy, or sell any covered financial instrument, subject only to the divestment/placement scheme in the next section. It converts conduct previously managed by guidance into an explicit statutory bar, which triggers the compliance and enforcement machinery that follows.
Divestment, blind-trust placement, extensions, and cooling-off
This is the operational core. Current Members get 30 days to certify and 120 days to divest or place covered assets into a supervising-ethics-approved qualified blind trust; incoming Members follow the same timetable measured from the date they assume office. The supervising ethics office can grant reasonable extensions but caps them (45 days per extension, 180 days total). Subsections also allow mixing spouse/dependent assets into the Member’s qualified blind trust, require a 180‑day post-service restriction on dissolving or controlling such trusts, and limit post-service control over covered instruments.
Trustee and Member reporting; annual compliance certification
Trustees must notify the Member and supervising ethics office if an interested party learns trust holdings, if initial property value drops below $1,000, or when initial trust property is divested. Members must file copies of trust agreements, asset transfer lists, trustee notices, and dissolution notices within 30 days of each event. Separately, Members must submit an annual certification of compliance to the relevant ethics committee, creating a recurring public record and an audit trail for enforcement and GAO review.
Enforcement and committee authority
Supervising ethics offices issue notices of violation and must provide a hearing opportunity and a chance to achieve compliance. Remedies include disgorgement of profits from unlawful transactions and civil penalties: a recurring fine equal to the monthly equivalent of a Member’s annual pay, assessed beginning 30 days after notice and every 30 days thereafter. The House and Senate ethics committees receive express authority to issue implementing rules, grant extensions when warranted, and publish decisions, notices, and the rationale for penalties.
GAO audit and technical updates
The bill requires the Comptroller General to audit compliance and report to the supervising committees within two years. It also updates cross-references in chapter 131 and adjusts a Lobbying Disclosure Act definition to align with the amended chapter, ensuring consistency across disclosure rules and definitions used for filing and lobbying reporting.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government 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
- Constituents and the public — They gain a clearer statutory barrier against potential insider-driven or interest-driven market activity by Members, backed by disgorgement and recurring penalties and public disclosure of trust agreements and asset schedules.
- Ethics watchdogs and journalists — The statute forces timely, public posting of certifications, trust agreements, asset schedules, extension descriptions, and civil-penalty records, creating a searchable paper trail for oversight.
- Supervising ethics committees — They receive explicit statutory authority to create implementing rules, issue extensions, and publicly document enforcement actions, reducing uncertainty about their powers.
- Qualified blind-trust providers and trust administrators — The new demand for approved qualified blind trusts creates market opportunities for trustees and custodians who can meet the statutory and supervisory-office approval standards.
- Competing investors — By removing potential advantages from Members and their immediate families holding certain active financial interests, the measure aims to level the playing field in markets where privileged information or influence may have been a factor.
Who Bears the Cost
- Members of Congress and their families — They must divest, restructure holdings, or place assets in approved qualified blind trusts on a rapid timetable, potentially triggering transaction costs, capital gains events, or involuntary sales at inopportune market prices.
- Financial advisers and asset managers — These professionals must execute divestitures, restructure deferred-compensation vehicles, or design qualified blind trusts under supervisory-office standards, increasing workload and legal/compliance costs.
- Trustees and custodians — Entities that form and manage qualified blind trusts will face new administrative duties (trust establishment, notifications, public reporting) and legal exposure if trustee notices or procedures are not flawless.
- House and Senate ethics committees and staff — Implementing the statute requires drafting rules, approving trusts, processing certifications and extension requests, posting documents publicly, and conducting enforcement actions, all of which demand staff time and resources.
- Markets and counterparties to forced divestitures — Rapid, coordinated divestments by multiple Members could create localized liquidity pressure in particular securities or sectors and generate transaction friction.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between preventing conflicts of interest through preemptive removal of active financial interests and imposing intrusive, rapid, and potentially costly constraints on Members’ private finances and families; solving the first problem risks creating severe administrative and economic burdens, privacy concerns, and legal challenges that could undermine the statute’s intent or produce uneven enforcement across chambers.
The bill is strict in scope but light on standardized implementation detail. It creates the new legal obligation to move covered instruments into ‘‘qualified blind trusts’’ but leaves key certification, approval, and trustee-qualification standards to the House and Senate ethics committees.
That delegation will likely produce differing interpretations and approval criteria between the two chambers unless the committees coordinate on uniform guidance. Practical bottlenecks are real: forming compliant blind trusts quickly can require valuations, legal work, and trustee vetting, and the statute’s short deadlines plus limited extension windows could force sales at unfavorable prices or prompt requests for many extensions.
The inclusion of synthetic positions and certain deferred‑compensation arrangements broadens the compliance perimeter but also raises complexity around valuation, identification, and indirect ownership tracing.
The enforcement regime is robust on paper — disgorgement plus recurring fines pegged to a Member’s pay — but raises due process and proportionality questions. Civil penalties equal to a monthly share of annual pay, assessed every 30 days, could quickly become punitive and create perverse incentives (for example, resignation to avoid repetitive fines, or litigation to delay enforcement).
Privacy and family autonomy tensions also remain: the statute reaches spouses and dependent children and requires public posting of trust agreements and asset schedules, which may disclose sensitive financial details. Finally, the bill anticipates GAO audit follow-up, but that downstream review won’t prevent immediate operational frictions or litigation over how ‘‘qualified blind trust’’ is defined and applied.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.