HB0291 creates a new state framework for identifying and restricting financial institutions that are determined to be “boycotting” energy companies. It directs the secretary of state to prepare and maintain a restricted financial institution list, publish it only after approval by the board of deposits, and update it at least annually. Before a financial institution is added, the secretary of state must provide notice and an opportunity for the institution to show it is not engaged in the prohibited conduct. Institutions can also be removed from the list if they stop the boycott activity.
The bill defines a boycott of energy companies broadly to include discrimination against companies involved in fossil fuel exploration, production, transportation, sale, or manufacturing, including companies that do business with those firms or that do not pledge environmental standards beyond law. It also defines “reasonable business purpose” to include financial stability, risk mitigation, legal compliance, and liability reduction. In addition, the bill amends Wyoming’s existing definition of “discriminate” in the firearms-related financial discrimination statute by adding a new subparagraph and renumbering the existing language.
The practical effect of HB0291 is to bar the state treasurer and state auditor from entering into or renewing banking contracts with any financial institution placed on the restricted list, and to require future banking contracts to include a promise not to engage in a boycott of energy companies. This would affect state banking relationships and could limit which banks or financial institutions are eligible to hold state funds or provide banking services to the state and its political subdivisions. The bill also states that inclusion on the list is not, by itself, a finding that the institution is unsafe or unsound or that consumer deposits are at risk.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the available context does not show formal debate or legislative support/opposition. Based on the bill’s structure and sponsors, the measure appears aimed at protecting the fossil fuel and broader energy sector from financial-sector pressure, suggesting support from lawmakers aligned with energy industry interests. The main point of contention is likely whether the state should use contracting power to penalize banks for environmental, social, or governance-related lending or investment decisions, and whether the bill could conflict with ordinary risk-management or climate-related policies used by financial institutions.
Impact
HB0291 would add a new chapter to Wyoming law governing financial institutions and state banking contracts, creating a restricted financial institution list administered by the secretary of state. It would require state financial officers to avoid contracting with listed institutions and would condition future contracts on a no-boycott pledge. The bill also makes a targeted amendment to the existing statutory definition of “discriminate” in Wyoming’s financial discrimination law, expanding the legal framework used to regulate financial institutions’ treatment of certain industries.
Sentiment
No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee sentiment to summarize. From the bill text and sponsor list, the measure appears to have been introduced in a favorable posture toward the energy industry and with an intent to oppose financial institutions that restrict fossil fuel-related business. The bill’s design suggests support among lawmakers concerned about “debanking” of energy companies and skepticism toward ESG-style financial policies.
Contention
The central controversy is whether the state should identify and penalize financial institutions based on alleged discrimination against energy companies, especially when the bill defines that conduct broadly to include dealings with fossil fuel businesses and their affiliates. Opponents would likely argue that the bill intrudes on private banking decisions, may be difficult to administer, and could discourage banks from serving the state. Supporters would likely argue that it prevents politically motivated exclusion of lawful energy businesses and protects Wyoming’s core industry. The bill also raises questions about the evidentiary standard for listing institutions, the role of public statements versus media reports, and whether the state should rely on a boycott determination that is not tied to safety or soundness concerns.
Limit the imposition of restrictions on the carrying of a concealed pistol and other items of self-defense while on the campus of a public institution of higher education.