US States Seek To Ban Chinese Citizens From Buying Land, Property
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Some U.S. states are attempting to ban Chinese citizens from buying land and property, amid souring diplomatic relations between the countries.
By 2024, more than two thirds of states had enacted or considered laws limiting or barring foreign land ownership including states that specifically mention China by name, according to POLITICO.
According to the non-profit membership organization the Committee of 100, in total 27 states have considered this kind of legislation. However, the group has not shared a list of those states.
Newsweek has rounded up a non-exhaustive list of states that have been involved in this kind of legislation, based on publicly available information. Some states do not name China explicitly, but name foreign nations that would likely include China.
A number of US stakes have advanced legislation to ban some land sales by foreign nationals and so-called "foreign adversaries."
A number of US stakes have advanced legislation to ban some land sales by foreign nationals and so-called "foreign adversaries."
Flourish
Why It Matters
There has been a wave of concern over Chinese land purchases in the United States, some of which have taken place close to military bases. This comes amid soaring tensions between the U.S. and China including trade clashes between the two giants and national security concerns.
However, as of USDA data accurate to 2023, Chinese investors own land in the U.S. equivalent to roughly twice the size of the footprint of New York City.
What To Know
A number of states have considered legislation on the issue. In May, the Texas legislature passed a bill to ban people tied to the governments of China, North Korea, Russia and Iran from purchasing land in the state.
In January, Republican senators in Arkansas introduced the Not One More Inch or Acre Act which would prohibit any Chinese citizen, entity or foreign person acting on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from purchasing public or private real estate in the U.S.
On Tuesday, Arizona's Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill to prevent the People's Republic of China from buying a 30 percent stake or more in land near military bases and other strategic assets.
Meanwhile, Florida passed a bill to prohibit citizens from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria from owning agricultural land or property near military sites in 2023. Similar legislation has been passed in South Dakota, North Dakota, Indiana, Nebraska, Virginia, Utah, Iowa, West Virginia and Montana.
Other states are considering legislation or bills regarding foreign nations' ability to purchase land including Ohio, Michigan and Georgia.
What People Are Saying
Speaking to Newsweek, Michael McFaul, who served as the U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, said: "Not every Chinese citizen is an agent of the Communist Party of China. Many of China's most successful entrepreneurs, engineers, and academics—especially those living and working in the United States—loathe the Chinese Communist Party. U.S. government officials must develop more sophisticated policies for decreasing the influence of the Chinese Communist Party in the United States that do not treat all Chinese citizens as enemies of America."
Cole Hefner, a Texas Republican state representative, said of Texas' bill: "Senate Bill 17 will counter this threat and make Texas a leader in state security. We cannot, we will not, allow oppressive regimes who actively seek to do harm to cease control and dictate their terms over our economy, our supply chains, our daily lives, our critical infrastructure for our food supply."
Advocacy group Asian Texans for Justice opposed the Texas bill, saying it revives "a shameful chapter in American history—when Asian immigrants were banned from owning land."
What Happens Next
Texas' bill will now go to the state's governor, who has indicated he will support it. The success of other bills as well as whether other states will advance legislation pertaining to the issue remains to be seen.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
21 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Oil flip-flops and shares are mixed after the US strikes Iranian nuclear sites
BANGKOK — Global markets appeared to take the U.S. strike against nuclear targets in Iran in stride as investors watched Monday to see how Iran will react. The price of oil initially jumped more than 2%, fell and then regained about half that much. U.S. stock futures edged lower and share benchmarks in Europe and Asia also were mostly lower. The attacks on three Iranian sites raised the stakes in the war between Israel and Iran and left questions about what remains of Tehran's nuclear program. It also increased the possibility that Iran might retaliate, potentially disrupting shipping through the narrow Strait of Hormuz, a waterway through which much of the world's crude oil passes. The big unknown is what Iran will do, analysts said. The price of Brent crude oil, the international standard, was up 1.2% at $77.91 per barrel. U.S. benchmark crude climbed 1.3% to $74.79. The future for the S&P 500 was little changed, while that for the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down 0.1%. Treasury yields were steady. In Europe, Germany's DAX lost 0.5% to 23,230.54 and the CAC 40 in Paris fell 0.6% to 7,541.25. Britain's FTSE 100 shed 0.2% to 8,761.53. Overall, there was no sign of panic. 'I believe what we are thinking is or the thinking is that it is going to be a short conflict. The one big hit by the Americans will be effective and then we'll get back to sort of business as usual, in which case there is no need for an immediate, panicky type of reaction,' said Neil Newman, managing director of Atris Advisory Japan. The conflict began with an Israeli attack against Iran on June 13 that sent oil prices yo-yoing and rattled other markets. Closing off the Strait of Hormuz would be technically difficult but it could severely disrupt transit through it, sending insurance rates spiking and making shippers nervous to move without U.S. Navy escorts. As a major oil producer, Iran may be reluctant to close down the waterway, which is used to transport its own crude, mostly to China. Oil is a major revenue source for the regime. 'The situation remains highly fluid, and much hinges on whether Tehran opts for a restrained reaction or a more aggressive course of action,' Kristian Kerr, head of macro strategy at LPL Financial in Charlotte, North Carolina, said in a commentary. Speaking to Fox News on Sunday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said disrupting traffic through the strait would be 'economic suicide' and would elicit a U.S. response. 'I would encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that because they heavily depend on the Strait of Hormuz for their oil,' Rubio said. When asked about that at a routine briefing in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told reporters in Beijing that 'China is willing to strengthen communication with Iran and relevant parties to continue playing a constructive role in promoting de-escalation' of the conflict. 'The Persian Gulf and its adjacent waters are important international channels for cargo and energy trade. Maintaining security and stability in this region serves the common interests of the international community,' he said. Tom Kloza, chief market analyst at Turner Mason & Co said he expects Iranian leaders to refrain from drastic measures and oil futures to ease back after the initial fears blow over. Disrupting shipping would be ' a scorched earth possibility, a Sherman-burning-Atlanta move,' Kloza said. Writing in a report, Ed Yardeni, a long-time analyst, agreed that Tehran leaders would likely hold back. 'They aren't crazy,' he wrote in a note to investors Sunday. 'The price of oil should fall and stock markets around the world should climb higher.' Other experts weren't so sure. Countries are not always rational actors and Tehran could lash out for political or emotional reasons, said Andy Lipow, a Houston analyst who has covered oil markets for 45 years. 'If the Strait of Hormuz was completely shut down, oil prices would rise to $120 to $130 a barrel,' Lipow said. That would translate to about $4.50 a gallon at the pump and hurt consumers in other ways, he said. Much of East Asia depends on oil imported through the strait. Taiwan's Taiex fell 1.4% while the Kospi in South Korea slipped 0.2%. In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 edged 0.1% lower, with gains for defense contractors, oil companies and miners helping to make up for broad losses. 'The U.S. strike on Iran certainly is very good for defense equipment,' Newman of Atris Advisory said, noting that both Japan and South Korea have sizable military manufacturing hubs. Australia's S&P/ASX fell 0.4%. Hong Kong's Hang Seng regained lost ground, climbing 0.7%, while the Shanghai Composite index picked up 0.7%. In currency dealings, the U.S. dollar rose to 147.82 Japanese yen from 146.66 yen. The euro fell to $1.1464 from $1.1473.
UPI
31 minutes ago
- UPI
Britain, U.S. warn Iran against Strait of Hormuz blockade
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (R) and Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy (L) at a meeting at NATO Headquarters in Brussels in April. File Photo by NATO/UPI | License Photo June 23 (UPI) -- Britain cautioned Iran Monday that attempts to block the Strait of Hormuz or to strike at American military facilities in the Middle East could lead to escalation, even as Israel continued its strikes on Iran. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said Monday that such actions would be a "catastrophic mistake." "It would be a huge, catastrophic mistake to fire at U.S. bases in the region at this time. We have forces in the region at this time," said Lammy in an interview with BBC Breakfast. The Iranian parliament moved Sunday to approve a measure to close the Strait in response to the American strikes on Iran over the weekend. The strait serves as a critical route for oil being shipped from Persian Gulf countries, but ultimately it will come down to whether Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei decides to move forward with such a plan. Close to 30% of the world's seaborne oil shipments are moved through the strait. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also commented Sunday against Iranian interference with movement through the strait. He spoke with Fox News and called on China to prevent Iran from closing the Strait of Hormuz. "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil," said Rubio, as China is a key oil customer of Iran. "The Persian Gulf and nearby waters are important route for international trade in goods and energy. Keeping the region safe and stable serves the common interests of the international community," Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Guo Jiakun said in a press conference Monday. "China calls on the international community to step up effort to promote de-escalation of the conflict and prevent the regional turmoil from having a greater impact on global economic growth." Meanwhile, Israel Defense Forces announced Monday on social media that it "struck routes in order to obstruct access" to the Fordow nuclear enrichment site in Iran's Qom province. The IDF also proclaimed it attacked six Iranian airports "across western, central, and eastern Iran, destroying runways, underground hangars, refueling aircraft, F-14, F-5 and AH-1 aircraft." It further alleged the strikes "impaired takeoff capabilities from these airports, as well as the Iranian military's ability to operate its air force from them."
35 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
