WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 162

relative to restrictions on acquisition of ownership, controlling, and occupancy interests in real property by certain foreign principals on or around certain military installations, and criminal penalties and civil forfeiture procedures for illegal acquisition.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Kevin Avard and 7 co-sponsors

The bill would restrict foreign principals from acquiring ownership, controlling interests, or long-term occupancy near designated NH military installations, with penalties and for

Inexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 01/07/2026 HJ 1 P. 46
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 162

Summary of Bill SB 162 (New Hampshire, 2026 Session)

Purpose and Intent

SB 162 seeks to restrict the acquisition of ownership, controlling, and occupancy interests in real property by certain foreign principals in proximity to select military installations. The bill also establishes criminal penalties and civil forfeiture procedures for illegal or noncompliant acquisition of real property interests by those foreign principals. The overarching aim is to address national security concerns related to foreign influence or control over property near military facilities.

Key Provisions and Changes

  • Scope of restricted interests: The bill targets acquisition of ownership, controlling interests, and occupancy rights in real property near designated military installations. It defines the types of property transactions and interests subject to the restrictions.

  • Eligibility of a “foreign principal”: The bill specifies criteria to identify foreign principals or entities whose acquisition interests are regulated. This may include foreign governments, organizations, or individuals with substantial foreign ties, depending on the statutory definitions adopted in the bill.

  • Geographic and facility limitations: The restrictions apply in proximity to certain military installations. The bill would outline the exact geographic perimeter or radius around those facilities within which property acquisitions are restricted.

  • Permitted and prohibited acquisitions:

    • Prohibitions on acquiring a substantial ownership or controlling stake by restricted foreign principals.
    • Restrictions on long-term occupancy rights (e.g., leases) by such principals.
    • Provisions for lawful exceptions, such as government-approved leases, or transactions cleared through a national security review process.

  • Criminal penalties:

    • Establishment of criminal penalties for knowingly making prohibited acquisitions or arrangements.
    • Penalties could include fines, imprisonment terms, or both, proportionate to the violation and consistent with existing criminal statutes.

  • Civil forfeiture procedures:

    • Mechanisms to seize or forfeit real property interests acquired in violation of the bill.
    • Procedures for notice, due process, and judicial review.
    • Criteria for restitution or disposition of forfeited property.

  • Enforcement and oversight:

    • Roles for state agencies (e.g., attorney general, secretary of state, or a designated oversight body) to enforce the restrictions.
    • Required reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance measures for real estate transactions near installations.

  • Compliance timelines:

    • Implementation timelines for when the restrictions take effect.
    • Transitional provisions for existing contracts or ongoing transactions, including possible grandfathering or phased compliance.

  • Intergovernmental coordination:

    • Provisions for coordination with federal authorities on national security considerations and due to overlapping concerns with federal foreign ownership laws.

Who Would Be Affected

  • Foreign principals and affiliated entities seeking real estate ownership or long-term occupancy rights near designated military installations in New Hampshire.
  • New Hampshire property owners and developers operating near those installations, including landlords, real estate brokers, and lenders involved in transactions near restricted zones.
  • State government agencies and law enforcers responsible for administering, monitoring, and enforcing the new restrictions, penalties, and forfeiture processes.
  • Potentially affected community members and local governments situated around military facilities due to broader effects on property markets or development plans.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Legislative history highlights:

    • Introduced in 2025, with multiple committee considerations and amendments.
    • Public hearing held in April 2025; subcommittee work sessions followed.
    • The committee reported the bill with amendments and subsequently recommended a favorable passage with amendments in March 2025.
    • In late 2025, the committee voted to retain the bill, but an eventual report stated the bill was “Inexpedient to Legislate” in November 2025 and January 2026, indicating that the committee or chamber did not proceed to enactment during those sessions.

  • Current status (as of the latest action history):

    • The most recent action shows an “Inexpedient to Legislate” determination by the committee and subsequent legislative actions in early 2026, suggesting the bill did not advance to passage in the session.

  • Effective date and transition:

    • If ultimately enacted, the bill would specify when the restrictions take effect and how ongoing transactions are grandfathered or transitioned.

Practical Implications

  • Foreign entities would face new hurdles and potential penalties to acquire or lease property near NH military installations.
  • Real estate market dynamics near protected zones could be affected, including pricing, financing, and development activity.
  • Federal-state coordination could influence how the law is interpreted and enforced, especially in border or defense-related contexts.
  • Property transactions would require enhanced due diligence to determine eligibility under the new restrictions.

If you’d like, I can tailor this summary to focus on a particular installation, define terms as they appear in the bill (once the exact statutory language is available), or compare it to similar state-level foreign ownership restrictions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.