Federal Election Commission Administrative Fine Program
INSIGHTi
Federal Election Commission Administrative
Fine Program
Updated November 28, 2023
Statutory authorization for the Federal Election Commission (FEC) Administrative Fine Program (AFP,
sometimes called the Administrative Fines Program) expires on December 31, 2023. The AFP provides
expedited enforcement for late and nonfiled campaign finance disclosure reports. Congress first
authorized the AFP as a pilot in 2000 and reauthorized it six times between 2001 and 2018. This CRS
Insight provides an overview of the AFP and discusses potential considerations for Congress.
Recent Legislative Activity
Congress most recently extended the AFP’s expiration date in 2018, when P.L. 115-386 amended the
Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) to set the 2023 date. On other occasions, Congress included AFP
extensions in appropriations legislation. Recent Congresses have appropriated FEC funding through
Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) bills. (For appropriations legislation, see the CRS
Appropriations Status Table.)
In the 118th Congress, on September 7, 2023, the Senate passed S. 2747 by voice vote the same day the
bill was introduced. The legislation would extend AFP authority until 2033. The Committee on House
Administration favorably reported a companion bill, H.R. 5734, on November 2, 2023. In addition, the
American Confidence in Elections (ACE) Act (H.R. 4563) would, among other provisions, make the
program permanent. The Committee on House Administration ordered H.R. 4563 reported on July 13,
2023. Other 118th Congress legislation that would extend the AFP or make it permanent includes H.R. 11;
H.R. 4472; S. 1; and S. 2344.
The FEC and the AFP
The FEC is the independent agency responsible for administering civil campaign finance law. Six
commissioners, no more than three of whom may be affiliated with the same political party, head the
agency. FECA requires affirmative votes from at least four commissioners to undertake substantial policy,
rulemaking, or enforcement activity, including issuing administrative fines. The commission has
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12198
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
link to page 2
Congressional Research Service
2
consistently requested that Congress extend the AFP’s expiration dates or make the program permanent.
Making the AFP permanent was the first priority in the FEC’s 2022 legislative recommendations.
AFP Overview
The FEC established the AFP after Congress directed the agency, via a FECA amendment in an FY2000
appropriations law, to develop an expedited enforcement process for reporting violations. FECA requires
political campaigns, parties, political action committees (PACs), and other entities that solicit funds, call
for election or defeat of a candidate, or engage in specified other campaign-related activities to file
regularly scheduled financial disclosure reports with the FEC. The AFP provides an enforcement option
for reports that are filed late or not at all.
Regularly scheduled reports are considered late if they are filed within 30 days after the due date. Special
preelection reports are considered late if they are filed after the due date but no more than four days
before an election. Civil penalties for late-filed reports are based on the amount of financial activity in the
report, the number of days late (or not filed), and whether the respondent was subject to previous AFP
enforcement. Nonfiler penalties are based on estimated financial activity and on whether the respondent
was subject to previous AFP enforcement. Fine amounts are deposited into the general fund of the U.S.
Treasury. They do not affect the FEC’s budget or operations.
Fine Activity
As Figure 1 shows, between 2001 and May 2023, the FEC assessed approximately $9.5 million in
administrative fines (not adjusted for inflation).
Figure 1. Total Administrative Fines Assessed
Source: CRS figure based on Federal Election Commission, “Federal Election Commission (FEC) Enforcement Statistics
for Fiscal Years 1977-2023,” previously available at https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/
enforcementstats1977to2023.pdf.
Notes: The cited source included data through May 31, 2023.
Administrative fines are typically small. For reports due between 2000 and 2022, the most common
(modal) fine assessed was $0. The median was approximately $834; the mean was approximately $2,270.
(The mean is the “average” observation. The median is the middle observation and thus is less sensitive
link to page 3
Congressional Research Service
3
than the mean to statistical outliers.) Excluding an outlier of almost $200,000 for a presidential campaign,
AFP penalties ranged from $0 to approximately $48,000. CRS calculated these and other statistics herein
using AFP enforcement data.
Figure 2 shows average (mean) AFP assessments between 2001 and May 2023 for unique enforcement
matters (i.e., individual cases). Higher average fines generally correlate with election years and have
increased over time. The increase in the average fine amount after 2020 likely is due to increasing
amounts of political committee financial activity. Because financial activity is part of the formula used to
calculate fines, more financial activity would yield larger fines. Statutory adjustments (e.g., for inflation)
to civil penalty amounts across government enforcement programs also can affect the AFP.
Figure 2. Average (Mean) Administrative Fines Assessed Per Unique Enforcement Matter
Source: CRS figure based on Federal Election Commission, “Federal Election Commission (FEC) Enforcement Statistics
for Fiscal Years 1977-2023,” previously available at https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/
enforcementstats1977to2023.pdf.
Notes: The cited source included data through May 31, 2023.
Although most AFP fines are collected, nonpayment has been a recurring challenge. Of the 3,946 AFP
cases closed between 2000 and 2022, 978 (24.8%) were unpaid. (This percentage excludes pending
payments, as of September 2023, so the actual percentage could be higher if pending payments did not
occur.) Unpaid fines totaled approximately $2.9 million.
Some repayment challenges might be explained by the kinds of political committees that appear to be
most likely to miss or exceed filing deadlines. Highly professionalized presidential or congressional
campaigns, from both major parties, are routinely subject to administrative penalties. However, many
committees subject to the AFP appear to be smaller operations with fewer professional compliance
resources, and with fewer funds to pay fines.
Potential Congressional Considerations
The AFP has been subject to little legislative or policy debate historically. The AFP allows the FEC to
process simple reporting-enforcement cases faster and more efficiently than the agency could do
otherwise. Without the AFP, the FEC would have to consider (or dismiss) even minor reporting violations
through the more time-consuming and labor-intensive enforcement processes specified in FECA. FECA
requires that enforcement matters handled through the traditional Matter Under Review (MUR) process
Congressional Research Service
4
involve often time-consuming negotiated settlements. Another potential option, Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR), is faster than MUR enforcement, but also requires time for negotiation and filer
education. By contrast, the AFP facilitates relatively quick resolution to straightforward reporting
violations, while also providing respondents with opportunities to appeal within the FEC or to a U.S.
district court.
Author Information
R. Sam Garrett
Specialist in American National Government
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN12198 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED