New Hampshire House Bill HB1606

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/10/25
• Refer: 12/10/25
• Report DNP: 2/11/26

Caption

Regulating real property ownership by Chinese nationals and providing for civil, criminal, and administrative penalties.

Impact

If enacted, HB1606 would bring significant changes to state laws regarding property ownership, particularly concerning foreign adversaries. The bill will explicitly prohibit PRC nationals from acquiring or maintaining any controlling interest in real property. The legislation empowers the Department of Justice to oversee the enforcement of these provisions, which includes civil and criminal penalties for violations, as well as mechanisms for property forfeiture. Notably, the legislation establishes a new enforcement framework, which may include increased state expenditures for law enforcement positions to facilitate oversight of compliance.

Summary

House Bill 1606, also known as the New Hampshire Real Property Security Act, seeks to regulate and restrict real property ownership and control by nationals of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in New Hampshire. The legislation aims to mitigate perceived threats posed by PRC nationals, including risks related to espionage, cybersecurity, and asymmetric warfare. This is framed as a measure to protect both national and local interests, emphasizing local public safety, economic security, and infrastructure protection.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB1606 is markedly polarized. Proponents argue that the bill is essential for safeguarding national security, indicating a strong need to protect local interests against adversarial threats. In contrast, opponents will likely raise concerns regarding discrimination against individuals based on their nationality and the broader implications of restricting property rights. The discussions suggest that many view this legislation as a proactive measure, while others interpret it as an overreach that could foster xenophobia and challenge property rights.

Contention

Key points of contention center on the bill's implications for civil liberties and the due process rights of individuals, particularly PRC nationals. Critics question the constitutionality of the preemption of property rights solely based on nationality without evidence of individual wrongdoing. Moreover, the imposition of civil and criminal penalties raises debates about whether such measures are proportional to the actual risks involved and whether they would effectively deter hostile actions. The mandatory forfeiture of properties acquired in violation of the act within a 90-day divestment window introduces additional legal complexities and concerns about fairness and legal recourse.