PolicyBrief
H.R. 4645
119th CongressJul 23rd 2025
NARCO Act of 2025
IN COMMITTEE

The NARCO Act of 2025 restructures the State Department's international narcotics and crime efforts by placing the INL Assistant Secretary under a new reporting structure and significantly expanding their responsibilities to coordinate global crime fighting, manage rewards programs, and vet foreign police units.

Warren Davidson
R

Warren Davidson

Representative

OH-8

LEGISLATION

NARCO Act Overhauls State Dept. Global Crime Fight: Mandates 20% Budget for Rewards and Public Spending Database

The new NARCO Act of 2025 is shaking up how the State Department handles international crime fighting. This bill completely reorganizes the office responsible for global counter-narcotics and law enforcement, putting the Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) under a new boss—the Under Secretary for International Security Affairs—and giving them a massive, updated to-do list focused on transnational threats like drug trafficking, money laundering, and terrorism.

The New Global Crime Coordinator

Think of this Assistant Secretary as the new quarterback for the U.S. government’s international efforts against global criminal networks. Their mandate now explicitly includes overseeing and coordinating all U.S. efforts against international drugs, crime, and law enforcement, making sure that what the State Department is doing aligns with the FBI, DEA, DOD, and intelligence community. This is a clear move to centralize and streamline how the U.S. responds to threats from cartels and foreign terrorist organizations that cross borders and affect U.S. homeland security. For the average person, this means the U.S. is trying to build a much tighter, more coordinated defense against the groups that push illicit drugs and traffic people across continents.

Putting Cash on the Table: The Rewards Mandate

One of the biggest, most concrete changes is the money allocated for catching the bad guys. The bill mandates that at least 20 percent of the Bureau’s total annual budget must be spent specifically on the Narcotics and Transnational Organized Crime Rewards Programs. Furthermore, the Secretary can set aside up to $25 million for tips or actions that lead to the capture or disruption of major international criminal figures. This is a significant prioritization of financial incentives over other programs. If you're wondering where your tax dollars are going, the bill makes it clear: a substantial chunk is earmarked for paying informants and those who help take down high-value targets, especially those linked to foreign terrorist organizations.

The Transparency Trade-Off

The NARCO Act introduces a huge win for transparency: it requires the INL Bureau to create a searchable database detailing all of its programming, including spending down to the line-item level for grants and rewards, along with success metrics. For citizens and watchdog groups, this is gold—a mandate for clear, public accounting of how millions in foreign aid and law enforcement funding are being used. However, there’s a catch in the fine print: the metrics for success cannot rely solely on how many illegal drugs are seized or produced. While this prevents the Bureau from just chasing easy metrics, it also leaves the door open for them to use less tangible measurements, which can sometimes make true accountability harder to pin down.

The System Strengthening Cap

While the bill focuses heavily on enforcement and rewards, it places a clear limit on efforts to fix the underlying problems in foreign countries. The INL Assistant Secretary is tasked with strengthening foreign justice systems—courts, police, prosecutors, and prisons. This sounds great, but the bill explicitly caps the amount of grant money that can be spent on these system-strengthening activities at a maximum of 10 percent of the total grant budget. This means only a fraction of the funding can go toward long-term, foundational reforms that address the root causes of crime and corruption. It suggests a policy preference for immediate enforcement actions and rewards over the slower, more complex work of building stable, fair justice systems abroad. For those who believe stability comes from strong institutions, this 10% cap is a major concern, potentially limiting the bill’s long-term effectiveness.