Arizona 2025 Regular Session

Arizona Senate Bill SB1109

Introduced
1/16/25  
Report Pass
2/3/25  
Report Pass
2/10/25  
Engrossed
2/26/25  
Report Pass
3/17/25  
Report Pass
3/24/25  
Enrolled
5/28/25  

Caption

Designated countries; land ownership; prohibition

Impact

The modification of Arizona Revised Statutes by adding Section 33-443 will have a profound impact on foreign investment regulations. By instituting this prohibition, the bill aims to safeguard both military and commercial interests that are deemed vital for the state’s security. It creates a legal framework for the Arizona Attorney General to enforce these prohibitions through court actions, calling into question existing foreign ownership structures, particularly in sensitive sectors.

Summary

Senate Bill 1109 introduces significant restrictions on land ownership in Arizona, specifically targeting the People's Republic of China. The bill prohibits any purchase, ownership, or significant interest in real property by the Chinese government or its state-owned enterprises. This legislative measure is couched within a broader concern for national security, aiming to protect the state from potential threats associated with foreign ownership and influence over critical infrastructure and assets.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB1109 appears to be largely favorable among proponents who believe this legislative action is necessary for maintaining state security and integrity against foreign incursions. However, it also generates concern among critics who argue that such prohibitive measures may deter beneficial foreign investment and complicate real estate transactions involving Chinese enterprises. This divide reflects a tension between national security considerations and the economic benefits that can arise from foreign investments.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the definitions and enforcement mechanisms involved in the bill. Critics may question how the state defines a 'substantial interest' and the implications of limiting property rights based purely on the nationality of the owner. Additionally, while the bill allows for exceptions—such as properties acquired through inheritance or debt collection—there is apprehension about the potential for arbitrary enforcement, which could lead to legal challenges surrounding property ownership rights for individuals or entities from China.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

HI HB1965

Relating To Property Forfeiture.

HI SB149

Relating To Property Forfeiture.

LA SB359

Provides for civil forfeiture reform. (8/1/22)

CA AB2584

Single-family residential real property: corporate entity: ownership.

KS HB2606

Specifying that certain drug offenses do not give rise to forfeiture under the Kansas standard asset seizure and forfeiture act, requiring courts to make a finding that forfeiture is not excessive, restricting actions prior to commencement of forfeiture proceedings, requiring probable cause affidavit filing and review to commence proceedings, increasing the burden of proof required to forfeit property to clear and convincing evidence and authorizing courts to order payment of attorney fees and costs for certain claimants.

HI HB126

Relating To Property Forfeiture.

UT SB0065

Asset Forfeiture Amendments

KS SB458

Specifying that certain drug offenses do not give rise to forfeiture under the Kansas standard asset seizure and forfeiture act, providing limitations on state and local law enforcement agency requests for federal adoption of a seizure under the act, requiring probable cause affidavit filing and review to commence forfeiture proceedings, increasing the burden of proof required to forfeit property to clear and convincing evidence, authorizing courts to order payment of attorney fees and costs for certain claimants and requiring the Kansas bureau of investigation to submit forfeiture fund financial reports to the legislature.