The REPORT Act directs senior national security officials — the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the FBI Director, and the head of the National Counterterrorism Center when relevant — to produce joint reports to specific congressional committees after acts of terrorism in the United States. Reports must be unclassified (with an optional classified annex), posted publicly, and delivered within a statutory schedule tied to the completion of the primary investigation.
This bill centralizes post-incident reporting requirements, forces agencies to identify security gaps and propose legal or practice changes, and creates a periodic reporting option for Congress. For oversight staff, compliance officers, and security planners, the measure reshapes how post-incident findings are packaged, who owns the narrative, and what material becomes publicly available — while carving out explicit exceptions to protect ongoing prosecutions and intelligence sources.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires DHS, DOJ, and the FBI — and the NCTC when appropriate — to submit an unclassified report (with an optional classified annex) to six named congressional committees after a domestic act of terrorism, and to post the unclassified report on a public website. Reports are due no later than one year after the primary investigative agency completes its inquiry; agencies may aggregate reports into quarterly submissions.
Who It Affects
Federal national-security and law enforcement agencies responsible for investigating terrorist incidents, the named congressional oversight committees (Homeland Security, Judiciary, and Intelligence in both chambers), and any Member of Congress who requests access to classified annexes. State and local entities that participated in investigations may be drawn into reporting and recommendations.
Why It Matters
It formalizes a single, joint reporting product across agencies and creates a public record of facts, identified gaps, and policy recommendations — increasing transparency and creating a consistent oversight feed for Congress and the public. That standardization can accelerate reform proposals but also raises trade-offs with investigative security and interagency coordination.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The REPORT Act makes reporting after domestic terrorist incidents a joint, accountable activity. When an act of terrorism occurs, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the FBI Director must prepare a report for six specified congressional committees; the National Counterterrorism Center participates where appropriate.
The bill borrows the statutory definition of "act of terrorism" from 18 U.S.C. 3077(1), so the scope aligns with existing federal criminal definitions rather than creating a new statutory standard.
Timing is structured around investigative completion: agencies must submit their unclassified report, which may be accompanied by a classified annex, within one year after the primary agency finishes its investigation. Agencies can choose to bundle multiple required reports into a quarterly submission to Congress.
The statute also requires the unclassified product to be posted on a publicly accessible website and makes both the unclassified report and any classified annex available to any Member of Congress upon request.On substance, the law directs reports to include (1) the factual narrative of the incident as known at submission, (2) identification of homeland- or national-security gaps that could prevent similar events, and (3) recommendations for steps — including changes to law enforcement practice or statutory law — to improve security. The bill builds in a narrow withholding rule: if disclosing particular facts would jeopardize an ongoing investigation or prosecution, the responsible official may omit those facts but must notify the specified committees of the decision.The reporting obligation is temporary: it sunsets five years after enactment.
The text also contains a savings clause that explicitly prevents the NCTC from acquiring investigatory or prosecutorial authority as a result of this reporting requirement — it can contribute analysis but not take over investigations or prosecutions. There is no enforcement mechanism, fine, or criminal penalty in the statute for missed reports; the regime relies on executive compliance and congressional oversight to enforce delivery.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute requires reports to be submitted to six named committees: Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, Senate Judiciary, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, House Homeland Security, House Judiciary, and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Reports are due no later than one year after the primary government agency completes its investigation of the terrorist act, creating a deadline tied to investigative closure rather than incident date.
Each report must be unclassified and posted to a public website; agencies may attach a classified annex and must make both the unclassified report and annex available to any Member of Congress on request.
The report must (a) state known facts at the time of submission, (b) identify homeland or national security gaps, and (c) propose recommendations — including suggested changes to law enforcement practice or legislation.
The entire reporting regime expires five years after enactment, and the bill expressly states that the NCTC does not gain prosecutorial or investigative powers under this authority.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Labels the measure the "Reporting Efficiently to Proper Officials in Response to Terrorism Act of 2025" or "REPORT Act." This is purely nominal but signals congressional intent to streamline which officials receive post-incident reports.
Scope of covered incidents
Adopts the term "act of terrorism" by reference to 18 U.S.C. 3077(1), so the reported incidents track the federal criminal definition rather than an open-ended policy standard. It also enumerates the committees designated to receive reports, which is important operationally because it locks in which oversight actors will get the primary product.
Who must report, timing, and public posting
Designates the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the FBI Director as the principal reporting officials, with the head of the NCTC joining when appropriate. Reports must be delivered to the six named committees no later than one year after the investigation's completion and must be posted on a publicly accessible website. Agencies may combine multiple such reports into quarterly submissions to Congress, a flexibility intended to manage workload and release cadence.
Mandatory components: facts, gaps, recommendations
Requires each report to contain a factual statement of the incident as known at submission, an identification of security gaps that might prevent future attacks, and specific recommendations — including possible changes to law enforcement practice or statutory law. That triad shifts post-incident reporting from narrative-only to prescriptive, forcing agencies to propose remedies alongside recounting events.
Permitted withholding to protect investigations
Allows withholding of information that would jeopardize ongoing investigations or prosecutions; the official who withholds must notify the appropriate congressional committees. The statute preserves the obligation to report any remaining non-sensitive content. This carve-out recognizes investigative security needs but requires committees be informed when material is omitted.
Temporary nature and limits on NCTC authority
Sunsets the reporting mandate five years after enactment, framing the program as a time-limited initiative or pilot. The savings clause clarifies that NCTC participation in reporting does not grant it prosecutorial or investigative powers, keeping the center in an analytic/coordination role and preserving traditional authorities within DOJ and the FBI.
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
- Designated congressional committees (Senate and House Homeland Security, Judiciary, and Intelligence): Receive a standardized, joint product after incidents that eases oversight, lets staff compare findings across events, and provides a public record to base legislative or appropriations responses.
- Members of Congress (including minority members): Gain statutory access to both the unclassified report and any classified annex on request, increasing individual oversight capabilities and reducing dependence on ad hoc briefings.
- Public and transparency advocates: Obtain public-facing accounts of terrorist incidents and agency recommendations via mandated website publication, improving civic visibility into post-incident findings and proposed reforms.
- State and local first responders and planners: Benefit from consolidated federal assessments and recommended changes that can be adapted into training, resource allocation, or interagency exercises.
- Policy analysts and compliance officers at agencies: Get clearer deliverables — the bill forces agencies to convert after-action material into a specific set of findings and reform proposals suitable for legislative or administrative follow-up.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and FBI: Face increased reporting workload, coordination demands, and potential reputational costs if reports reveal procedural failures; may need to divert analyst and legal staff to produce the statutorily required products.
- National Counterterrorism Center: Must allocate analytic resources to contribute to reports where appropriate without acquiring investigatory powers; bureaucratic friction may rise over scope and authorship of joint products.
- Investigators and prosecutors: May bear indirect costs when reports or public postings require redaction reviews to avoid jeopardizing prosecutions, adding legal review steps and slowing public disclosure.
- Congressional support staff and committees: While committees gain information, they will need capacity to process, secure, and act on classified annexes and to follow up on recommendations, increasing oversight workload.
- Taxpayers / federal budget: Implementation requires website hosting, administrative coordination, and staff time; the bill contains no appropriation, effectively creating an unfunded reporting mandate that agencies must absorb.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill aims to enhance transparency and congressional oversight by forcing timely, public-facing post-incident reports, but it simultaneously risks undermining investigations and prosecutions if disclosure is mishandled; striking an operational balance between openness and protective secrecy is the central, unresolved dilemma the statute creates.
The bill raises several operational and legal questions that the text does not answer. First, the deadline is tied to the "completion of the investigation" by the primary agency, but the statute does not define when an investigation is "complete," and multi-agency probes (FBI, state/local partners, NCTC analysis) complicate that trigger.
Agencies may disagree about which entity is the primary investigator, creating procedural delay or disputes over the start of the one-year clock. Second, the NCTC is included "as appropriate," but the statute does not specify the criteria for NCTC participation or how analytic products contributed by NCTC will be coordinated with prosecutorial materials controlled by DOJ and the FBI.
The statute also puts public transparency and prosecutorial/investigative security in direct tension. Public posting of an unclassified report pushes agencies to release facts and recommendations, yet the withholding carve-out is broad enough to redound to nearly any ongoing prosecution.
The bill requires committee notification when information is withheld but does not prescribe timelines, dispute resolution mechanisms, or a process for post-closure release of withheld material. Finally, there is no funding, no compliance enforcement mechanism (no penalties for missed filings), and no standard template for what constitutes an adequate identification of "gaps" or an actionable "recommendation," so comparability and quality control across reports are left to interagency practice rather than statutory design.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.