
A House bill to ban lawmakers from trading stocks stalls on whether to include crypto. Spanberger says yes, Roy says no. STOCK Act enforcement is weak.
The US House of Representatives is pushing a bill to ban lawmakers from owning or trading individual stocks. The unresolved question: should digital assets count?
The Restore Trust in Congress Act, introduced in September 2025 with more than 80 co-sponsors, would bar members, their spouses, and their dependents from holding or trading company shares. According to Politico and the Harvard Journal on Legislation, the biggest sticking point is whether Bitcoin and Ethereum should be treated the same as stocks.
Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) said they should. Lawmakers can influence crypto prices through legislation, she argued, so the same conflict-of-interest rules should apply. Congressman Chip Roy (R-Texas) pushed back, calling digital currencies “a little different” and saying legislators should still be allowed to hold them as an inflation hedge.
Crypto political contributions totaled $119 million in the 2024 election cycle, according to the Campaign Legal Center. Politico’s estimate put the figure above $160 million. Ten sitting members of Congress hold between $750,000 and $2 million in crypto assets, the same group estimated.
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) has taken a hard line. Members should not buy or sell crypto while writing legislation that affects it, he said. Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), a prominent crypto advocate, said she voluntarily placed her own digital-asset holdings in a blind trust but opposes making that mandatory for all lawmakers. A blanket requirement, she argued, would disproportionately burden members with fewer financial resources.
The existing regulatory framework has done little to quiet the critics. The STOCK Act of 2012 prohibits insider trading by members of Congress and requires trades to be disclosed within 45 days. The maximum penalty for a late filing is $200. No member has ever been prosecuted for insider trading under the law, the Campaign Legal Center notes. Legal experts cited by the Harvard Journal on Legislation pointed to the constitutional Speech or Debate Clause as an additional barrier.
A study published in the International Review of Economics & Finance in 2024 analyzed more than 181,000 trades by lawmakers from 2004 to 2022. Stock buying declined after the STOCK Act took effect, the study found. Trading remained elevated during congressional sessions and periods of geopolitical turmoil.
Newer research complicates the argument that lawmakers consistently beat the market. A 2026 working paper by Haotian Chen and Bruce Sacerdote for the National Bureau of Economic Research examined portfolios from 2012 through 2023. Congressional investment returns were similar to – or slightly worse than – broad market benchmarks over that period, the paper found.
That finding shifts the debate. The question is no longer whether lawmakers can front-run their own policy moves. It is whether they should own assets that their votes can move at all. Supporters of including crypto in the trading ban say public confidence in the integrity of legislation matters more than whether profits can be proven illicit.
The Harvard Journal on Legislation also reported that more than 50 lawmakers made over 2,000 financial transactions in companies affected by Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariff announcement within 55 days of the February 2025 policy change. That disclosure has added urgency to the reform push, though the crypto carve-out remains the biggest obstacle.
The bill has cleared procedural hurdles. No floor vote has been scheduled.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.