America.co emblemAmerica.co
The RECEIPTS Act / An active flag ↗

Our money.
Show the
receipts.

$5.4 trillion in federal receipts in FY2026.
Our money deserves public receipts.

Public money should come with records the public can understand. Clear prices help us ask better questions, recognize good value, and make transparency ordinary—not something we ask for only after a scandal.

Citizen-authored working draft · Not introduced legislation or law.

The common-sense case

If you’re trusted with the money,
you should show your work.

We ask what a purchase costs. We ask what our donations fund. We should be able to ask clear questions about public purchases, too—without needing a scandal or a specialist to get started.

  1. 01

    What did we buy?

    A clear description and a usable quantity.

  2. 02

    What did we pay?

    A price people can actually understand.

  3. 03

    Was it a fair comparison?

    Relevant prices, with the differences explained.

Better value for the things we actually need.

Fair prices can leave more room for the public services people depend on. Clear records can help buyers compare, responsible vendors show their value, and the public ask better questions. Disclosure alone does not guarantee savings or prove fraud.

A standard we can learn from

Transparency isn’t a radical idea.
Organizations already show the way.

Donations and taxes are different. But these organizations offer useful examples of making entrusted money—and the decisions behind it—easier to understand.

GiveDirectly

Make the money understandable.

Explains cash transfers, delivery and shared costs, and fundraising separately, with underlying financial statements available.

See the cost breakdown ↗

GiveWell

Show the reasoning, too.

Publishes grant analyses, key assumptions, uncertainties, and major mistakes so others can examine and challenge its decisions.

Read its transparency approach ↗

Examples of transparency practices—not partners, affiliations, or endorsements of the RECEIPTS Act. These are different disclosure models, not claims that they use this draft’s unit-price rules.

Different sectors. One useful principle:
Show the evidence. Explain the decisions. Earn the trust.

>$25,000Proposed scope: GSA Schedule orders
30 daysProposed publication after disbursement
One draftOpen for scrutiny. Not a finished reform.

One practical starting point

A big principle.
A specific first step.

The goal is understandable public spending. This draft starts with one defined slice of purchasing—not the full $5.4 trillion in federal receipts or every federal dollar spent.

The draft would require identifiers, quantities, unit prices and order identifiers in covered payment files. It proposes publication of those records alongside a preceding-12-month median and a price-to-median ratio.

Its covered purchases are orders exceeding $25,000 against GSA Federal Supply Schedule contracts. This is not a claim that every federal payment, grant or benefit would be covered.

GSA already collects transactional line-item data. This draft asks for a different public-disclosure and completeness standard; it is not inventing government transaction reporting from scratch. See GSA’s current requirements ↗

A comparison needs more than a matching name. Quantities, terms, product differences and market conditions matter. Read the federal price-analysis guidance ↗

01 / Compare carefully

Same units. Real context.

The draft proposes “insufficient comparison data” when fewer than five covered purchases exist. Matching rules still need to be tested.

02 / Protect what matters

Transparency with safeguards.

Classified and emergency exceptions, vendor payment rights and disclosure protections require careful review—not a footnote.

03 / Show what changed

Evidence before victory laps.

A four-year review and five-year sunset are proposed. No demonstrated savings, official sponsor or enacted mandate is claimed.

The source, in full

Read the Act.

The supplied ten-section draft is reproduced below without substantive edits. The legislative header and blank sponsor/bill fields are template language, not a record of introduction or referral.

Source draft supplied by America House · Published here November 6, 2026Download the exact text ↗
WORKING DRAFT — NOT INTRODUCED OR ENACTEDExplanatory copy and the review roadmap are separate from the draft. Neither is represented as expert legal approval.
Full ten-section draft Open / close the text
119TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. ____
To require the publication of the price paid and the government-wide median price for items purchased through Federal Supply Schedules, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr./Ms. ____________ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability
A BILL
To require the publication of the price paid and the government-wide median price for items purchased through Federal Supply Schedules, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Requiring Every Contract’s Expenditures In Published Transparent Summaries Act” or the “RECEIPTS Act”.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Federal procurement fraud, in every form, requires a price that is never compared to the price others pay for the same thing.
(2) The General Services Administration already collects the price paid for items purchased through Federal Supply Schedules under its Transactional Data Reporting requirements.
(3) That data is not published in a form that permits comparison of prices paid across agencies for identical items.
(4) Publication of the price paid alongside the government-wide median price requires no investigation, no adjudication, and no new administrative body.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
(a) COVERED PURCHASE.—The term “covered purchase” means an order exceeding $25,000 placed against a Federal Supply Schedule contract administered by the General Services Administration.
(b) ITEM.—The term “item” means a good or service identified by its manufacturer part number, Special Item Number, or, in the case of services, the labor category designated in the underlying schedule contract.
(c) DELIVERABLE UNIT.—The term “deliverable unit” means the countable good, hour, or measured quantity that an order obligates the vendor to deliver.
(d) MEDIAN PRICE.—The term “median price” means the median price per deliverable unit paid by the Federal Government for the same item across all covered purchases during the preceding 12 months.
SEC. 4. DISBURSEMENT CONDITION.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning with the fiscal year that begins 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, no payment against a covered purchase may be disbursed unless the payment file transmitted to the disbursing agency contains, for each line item—
(1) the item identifier;
(2) the quantity of deliverable units;
(3) the price per deliverable unit; and
(4) the order identifier.
(b) NO NULL VALUES.—The disbursing agency shall reject any payment file in which a field required by subsection (a) is blank, null, or populated with a placeholder value.
(c) NOT A PENALTY.—Rejection under this section is not a penalty, finding, or adverse action against any agency or vendor, and may not be waived by any agency or by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
SEC. 5. COMPARISON AND PUBLICATION.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of General Services shall publish, for each covered purchase, in machine-readable form on a public website not later than 30 days after disbursement—
(1) each field required by section 4(a);
(2) the awarding agency and the vendor name;
(3) the median price for that item; and
(4) the ratio of the price paid to the median price.
(b) BULK ACCESS.—Data published under this section shall be downloadable in bulk and accessible by application programming interface, without registration, fee, or any restriction on reuse, redistribution, or republication.
(c) NOT A FINDING.—A ratio published under subsection (a)(4) is a statement of arithmetic. It is not a finding of waste, fraud, abuse, or improper payment, and shall not be cited as such in the absence of independent evidence.
(d) THIN MARKETS.—Where fewer than five covered purchases of an item occurred during the preceding 12 months, the Administrator shall publish the value “INSUFFICIENT COMPARISON DATA” in place of the values required by paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (a).
SEC. 6. INTEGRITY OF DISCLOSURE.
(a) UNIT AGGREGATION.—Reporting a multi-item or multi-period deliverable as a single unit does not satisfy section 4(a), except where the line item obligates delivery of a single indivisible item or a single measured service period.
(b) ANTI-FRAGMENTATION.—A requirement may not be divided into multiple orders for the purpose of falling below the threshold established in section 3(a).
SEC. 7. EXCEPTIONS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5 shall not apply to a covered purchase the publication of which would reveal properly classified information, or to a purchase made under a declared emergency for a period not exceeding 90 days from the date of the declaration.
(b) CONDITION NOT WAIVED.—Subsection (a) does not waive the disbursement condition established in section 4(a). Disclosure for a purchase exempted under subsection (a) shall be transmitted to the Committees on Appropriations and on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
SEC. 8. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.
(a) NO NEW SYSTEMS.—Nothing in this Act requires an agency to acquire, replace, or modernize a financial management system, or requires a vendor to report data not already reported under the Transactional Data Reporting requirements of the General Services Administration.
(b) VENDORS HELD HARMLESS.—Nothing in this Act authorizes the withholding of payment lawfully owed to a vendor. A vendor may not be delayed more than 30 days on account of an agency’s failure under this Act, and shall be entitled to interest under chapter 39 of title 31, United States Code, for any delay so caused.
(c) NO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.—Nothing in this Act creates a private right of action.
SEC. 9. REPORT AND SUNSET.
(a) REPORT.—Not later than 4 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report on the distribution of price-to-median ratios by agency and item category, the administrative cost of compliance with this Act, and whether the requirements of this Act should be extended to procurement conducted outside the Federal Supply Schedules.
(b) SUNSET.—This Act shall cease to have effect on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, unless reauthorized by Act of Congress.
SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act.
I’ve read it. What needs to happen next? ↓

Keep the distinctions clear

A proposal deserves honest answers.

Is the RECEIPTS Act already law?

No. This page publishes a working draft supplied by America House. No enacted law, official bill number, congressional sponsor, committee referral or government endorsement is claimed.

Does it cover every federal payment?

No. The supplied draft defines covered purchases as orders exceeding $25,000 against GSA Federal Supply Schedule contracts. The broader Public Receipts v0.1 campaign is a separate framework.

Does a high price ratio prove fraud?

No. Section 5(c) says the ratio is arithmetic, not a finding of waste, fraud, abuse or improper payment. A useful comparison also needs compatible items, units, terms and context.

Why is the flag marked active?

America House has linked movement channels to this mission. Active means there is a public place to follow the work; it does not mean the proposal is enacted, the review is complete, or savings have been demonstrated.

Primary sources for the review

Build on the record.

These are reference points for qualified review, not endorsements or proof that this draft complies with every applicable rule. Sources checked November 6, 2026.

The full next-step readout

A draft is a start.
Here is the work.

These are proposed workstreams, not completed milestones or commitments from named experts. The next public update should name actual owners, dates and evidence.

Draft publishedReview neededPrototype neededNo official sponsor claimed
  1. 01

    Review the draft against the real rules.

    Who can help: Procurement counsel and experienced contracting officers.

    Produce a section-by-section crosswalk to current Schedule reporting and payment rules. Clarify which orders, modifications, identifiers and units are covered. Scrutinize the draft’s broad finding about fraud; a price comparison cannot detect every type of procurement fraud.

    What progress looks likeA versioned legal review with proposed edits, citations and unresolved questions.

  2. 02

    Prove that the prices are comparable.

    Who can help: Data engineers, researchers and purchasing specialists.

    Build a small prototype using lawful public, synthetic or voluntarily supplied records. Define matching rules for units, quantities, bundles, freight, warranties, service levels and dates. Show rejected matches and insufficient-data cases—not just a compelling ratio.

    What progress looks likeA reproducible schema, test dataset and methodology. Synthetic records must be clearly labelled.

  3. 03

    Protect people, vendors and sensitive records.

    Who can help: Privacy, FOIA, security and payment specialists; small vendors.

    Specify redaction, correction, appeal and oversight procedures. Reconcile the completeness gate with lawful vendor payment and interest obligations. The proposed five-comparison threshold is not an established privacy safe harbor.

    What progress looks likeA disclosure policy and tested payment scenarios, including agency errors and emergency exceptions.

  4. 04

    Make implementation credible.

    Who can help: Agency operators, accessibility reviewers and budget analysts.

    Estimate staffing, system changes, vendor burden and ongoing costs. Resolve the 18-month/fiscal-year timing. Define how completeness, timeliness, comparability, payment delay and burden would be measured. “No additional funds authorized” does not establish zero cost.

    What progress looks likeA costed implementation plan and evaluation design—not an unsupported savings promise.

  5. 05

    Prepare the legislative review package.

    Who can help: Policy editors, procurement reviewers and people with relevant introductions.

    Bring together the reviewed draft, a plain-language brief, prototype results, costs and open questions. Invite relevant congressional staff to review it. A Member of Congress would need to introduce a federal bill; an online support count does not do that.

    What progress looks likeA review-ready package. Publish any sponsor, bill number or committee action only when official records support it.

  6. 06

    Keep the work public and checkable.

    Who can help: Creators, community organizers and evidence-minded contributors.

    Publish dated updates, material revisions, review notes and practical results. Explain what changed and why. If legislation advances, track the official text, committee decisions, votes and implementation rather than presenting interest as passage.

    What progress looks likeA public revision log and a next-action list with actual owners and evidence.

Find your part

You don’t have to do all of it.
Bring one useful contribution.

Read & question

Read one section. Send a specific ambiguity, counterexample or correction with a source.

Build & test

Help define a schema, clean an allowed dataset or reproduce a comparison.

Review & protect

Bring procurement, legal, privacy, security or vendor-payment experience.

Explain & distribute

Create a clear explainer that says “draft proposal,” names its limits and links to the actual text.

Connect the right people

Offer a relevant introduction to reviewers, operators, small vendors or legislative staff.

Keep the receipts

Help maintain the revision log, sources and next steps. No invented progress or savings.

In your message, name “Receipts Act,” the section or workstream, what you can contribute, and one realistic next step. No payment or social account is required to offer help.

Follow the work in public

One flag. A wider movement.

These are America House’s shared movement channels—not separate Receipts Act accounts. Linked channels make the flag active; they are not proof of legislative progress.