What Does the Stop Insider Trading Act Actually Do?

The short answer. H.R. 7008 would bar members of Congress, their spouses and their dependent children from buying shares in individual public companies. It does not require them to sell what they already own; it requires 7 to 14 days of public notice before a sale. It passed the House 232-198 on 22 July 2026 and awaits the Senate.

Checked 2 October 2026. Last change to the facts below: the House vote of 22 July 2026. If those dates are far apart, the legislative position may have moved since this was last edited.

What exactly does it prohibit?

One thing: purchasing a security issued by a publicly traded company. The prohibition reaches the member, their spouse and their dependent children, which closes the most obvious route around a rule aimed at the member alone.

It does not reach ownership. A member who holds a large position in a company their committee oversees may keep holding it.

What does a member have to do to sell?

File notice with the Clerk of the House or the Secretary of the Senate at least 7 days and no more than 14 days before the sale. The window is the interesting part: notice too early is a stale signal, notice too late is no signal at all, and the bill picks a band rather than a deadline so that the disclosure is useful while the position is still open.

This is the reverse of the STOCK Act's existing rule, which requires disclosure within 45 days after a trade. One tells you what a member did six weeks ago; the other tells you what they are about to do.

What are the penalties?

The relevant ethics committee must impose a fee of the greater of $2,000 or 10% of the value of the investment, plus forfeiture of any profit realised on the sale. For comparison, the standard penalty for filing a STOCK Act disclosure late today is $200.

What is exempt?

Widely held investment funds — index funds, most mutual funds, diversified ETFs. The logic is that a member cannot plausibly move, or be tempted by, the price of an S&P 500 tracker.

Who is not covered?

The President and the Vice President. This is the most contested feature of the bill rather than an oversight: it was raised in debate and the exemption survived the vote. In May 2026 the President disclosed more than 3,600 buy and sell orders placed in the first quarter of the year.

Why did it pass on a near party-line vote?

Because it did not travel alone. The text that reached the floor also carried a requirement for photo identification in federal elections, which Democrats characterised as a poison pill attached to a measure that otherwise had broad bipartisan support. Thirteen Democrats voted for it anyway, mostly from competitive districts.

That matters for forecasting: the 232-198 margin measures the combined package, not the appetite for a trading ban on its own.

What are the criticisms?

The Campaign Legal Center argued the bill "fails to address the two inherent problems with congressional stock ownership" — the appearance of insider trading, and the ability to profit from an official position — because it permits existing holdings to stay in place. A ban on buying, with no requirement to sell, leaves every position acquired before the law untouched for as long as the member holds office.

What this page cannot tell you

Whether any of it becomes law. The Senate has not voted, the Senate's own bill goes further, and the two would have to be reconciled. Everything above describes a bill that has passed one chamber.

Educational information, not financial advice. Figures on this page are read from the source filings when the page loads rather than written into the article. Dated events — votes, appointments, filings — are written down with their date and source, because those do not change.