HB8223, the Recovering Expended Costs from Operationally Unwarranted Policing Act of 2026 or “RECOUP Act of 2026,” would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to reimburse state and local first responder agencies when they respond to requests for assistance tied to immigration enforcement activities initiated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The bill covers responses connected to enforcing the immigration laws and applies to first responder agencies that provide assistance at the request of federal immigration authorities.
The bill sets out two reimbursement pathways. If DHS collects identifying information from responding personnel through the requesting ICE or CBP officer, DHS must seek additional billing information from the agency and then reimburse it within 30 days. If DHS does not collect that information, the local or state agency may submit a reimbursement request with the date, location, and a detailed cost estimate, and DHS must pay within 30 days unless it determines no response occurred. The bill also bars release of personally identifiable information except by court order and directs DHS to use unobligated funds already appropriated to ICE or CBP under Public Law 119-21 through January 20, 2029.
Impact
HB8223 would create a federal reimbursement obligation for DHS, shifting the cost of certain state and local emergency or first-responder deployments associated with federal immigration enforcement from local governments to the federal government. It would not change the underlying immigration enforcement statutes, but it would add a new administrative and fiscal requirement for ICE and CBP-related operations, including recordkeeping, claims processing, and payment timelines. The bill could affect state and local police, fire, EMS, and other first responder agencies that are called to assist federal immigration enforcement actions.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a cost-recovery and fairness proposal for state and local agencies rather than a direct immigration policy change. There are no recorded votes or committee transcripts in the provided material, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to assess. The bill’s referral to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement suggests it is being considered within a border and immigration enforcement policy context.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether federal taxpayers should reimburse local agencies for responses tied to ICE and CBP operations, and whether such reimbursements could indirectly encourage or legitimize local participation in federal immigration enforcement. Supporters would likely emphasize cost recovery, while critics may argue the bill creates new federal spending, administrative burdens, or blurs the line between local public safety functions and immigration enforcement. Privacy is another possible issue, though the bill attempts to address it by restricting release of personally identifiable information except by court order.
Reforms the organizational structure for the Department of Transportation and Development including its duties, powers, and responsibilities of officers and employees (EN INCREASE SD EX See Note)
A bill for an act providing for certain business entities acting under the jurisdiction of the secretary of state by providing for the removal of information from a filing based on a sworn affidavit and administrative dissolution based on the response to interrogatories.(See HF 2678.)