US Congressman Riley Moore: India FCRA Amendment May Impact Bilateral Relations

US Congressman Riley Moore has expressed serious concerns over India's proposed FCRA amendments, claiming they could lead to government control over churches. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, proposes a designated authority to manage assets of organizations with cancelled registrations while reducing maximum penalties for violations.

United States Congressman Riley Moore has formally expressed significant concerns regarding the proposed amendments to India's Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, commonly known as FCRA. Moore, a Republican representative from West Virginia, suggested that these legislative changes could potentially strain the diplomatic and strategic relationship between India and the United States, while the core of his concern lies in the belief that the new provisions might grant the Indian government excessive control over religious institutions, specifically churches and other Christian organizations operating within the country.

Concerns Over Religious Freedom and Institutional Autonomy

Taking to the social media platform X, Riley Moore highlighted the deep-rooted history of Christianity in India to emphasize his point. He noted that the history of the faith in the Indian subcontinent spans nearly two thousand years, tracing back to the arrival of Saint Thomas on the Malabar coast shortly after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. By invoking this historical context, Moore aimed to underscore the significance of the Christian community in India and why he views the proposed FCRA changes as a direct challenge to their institutional independence. He characterized the move as a direct attack on Christians and warned that if the bill proceeds in its current form, it would become a matter of concern for India-US relations.

Key Provisions of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026

The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, introduces several significant changes to how foreign funding is managed in India. ' According to the draft, if an organization's FCRA registration is cancelled by the government, surrendered by the organization itself, or lapses due to a failure to renew it on time, this designated authority will be empowered to take over the management of the foreign contributions received by that entity. Plus, the authority would also manage any assets created using those foreign funds.

However, the proposed legislation includes a specific safeguard regarding religious properties. It explicitly states that if such assets are connected to a place of worship, the religious character of that property won't be altered. The bill mandates that the place of worship must be maintained in its original form, even under the management of the designated authority. Another major change proposed in the bill is the reduction of the maximum punishment for FCRA violations. Currently, the maximum sentence stands at 5 years, but the amendment seeks to reduce this to 1 year. The Modi government is expected to introduce this bill in the Lok Sabha in the coming week.

Statistical Overview of Foreign Funding in India

The scale of foreign funding in India is substantial, as evidenced by data provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs. Between the years 2019 and 2022, a total of 13,520 organizations in India received foreign funding amounting to 55,741 crore rupees. This massive influx of capital highlights the importance of the regulatory framework governing these contributions. As of July 15, 2026, the FCRA portal showed that 14,449 organizations held active registrations, allowing them to legally receive foreign funds.

The data also reveals a significant number of organizations that have lost their ability to receive foreign contributions. According to the official records, 22,498 registrations have been cancelled so far. On top of that, 15,212 registrations are considered to have expired automatically because the organizations failed to complete the renewal process within the stipulated timeframe. The government maintains that these amendments are necessary for the better management and oversight of foreign funds and the assets derived from them, ensuring they're used for their intended purposes.