Ayotte signs law raising cap on anonymous campaign donations

This election season, political donors will be able to contribute more money to New Hampshire political candidates while staying anonymous, under a new law signed by Gov. Kelly Ayotte.

Senate Bill 405, which Ayotte signed Friday, raises the total contribution cap for an anonymous donor to $200 per election cycle. Under the new law, if an individual, political committee, corporation, or other organization donates $200 or less to one candidate’s political committee, the donor’s name must not be added to the contribution list on the candidate’s campaign finance reports. If the aggregate donation is more than $200, the donor’s name must be included. 

The law, which takes effect Aug. 18, effectively raises the total anonymous contribution limit from its limit in previous elections of $150. 

The Republican-led legislation kicked off a broader debate over transparency and privacy; Democrats who opposed it, said it would hinder accountability. “This bill reduces transparency at the same time it increases the amount of influence that a donor may provide unseen,” wrote Rep. Connie Lane, a Concord Democrat, in a “minority report” opposing the bill. 

Republicans said it represented a modest increase that would alleviate fear of blowback for low-dollar donors. 

“This bill strikes the proper balance between transparency and participation,” argued Rep. Clayton Wood, a Pittsfield Republican, in a report supporting it. 

The change puts New Hampshire in a small group of states that allow anonymous contributions up to $200, including Arkansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Wisconsin, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Montana, Nebraska, and West Virginia allow up to $250 in total contributions.

A majority of states have anonymity limits of $20, $50, or $100, according to the NSCL. 

The law is part of a broader Republican reorganization of campaign finance in New Hampshire. 

More from this section

New Hampshire Ranks Among Worst States for a Budget-Friendly Road Trip in 2026

In previous elections, donors could contribute up to $50 per phase of a campaign — or $150 total — and stay anonymous. That is because state campaign finance law carved up the two-year campaign cycle into three phases: the exploratory phase (the period before the candidate filed in June of the election year), the primary election phase, and the general election phase. 

But in 2024, Gov. Chris Sununu signed a law, House Bill 1091, to eliminate that phased approach and instead treat the entire campaign finance cycle as one two-year period. Individuals and corporations may now contribute up to $15,000 per two-year period directly to a committee, and up to $30,000 to an unaffiliated political action committee.

Sen. James Gray, a Rochester Republican and the chairman of the Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs Committee, noted this year that when lawmakers eliminated the three campaign contribution phases, they did not raise the anonymity threshold accordingly, meaning that the $50 limit applied to the whole two-year period, not just one of the phases. Raising the two-year cap to $200 addresses that, argued Gray, who sponsored SB 405.

The new law also raises another anonymity threshold. Where previously, donors could chip in up to $200 per phase — or $600 per election — before having their occupation and employer disclosed publicly, now they may contribute up to $1,000 per two-year cycle.

Speaking to the Senate election committee, Gray said he got to that number by multiplying $200 by three and rounding “to the nearest ‘000’ number.” 

Republicans argued the anonymity thresholds should be raised to reflect inflation and to reduce administrative work for campaigns.

“It reduces administrative work for campaigns, removes a potential chilling effect on small donors who may be uncomfortable disclosing personal information for modest contributions, and brings reporting thresholds into alignment with the state’s current campaign finance structure,” argued Wood.

Lane disagreed. “The minority disagrees with the assertion that publicly reporting personal information ‘chills’ donations under $1,000,” she wrote in May. “Further, it is not an unfair impingement upon their First Amendment right – money has been deemed to be speech.”