[citation needed] North Korea–United States relations developed primarily during the Korean War, but in recent years have been largely defined by North Korea's three tests of nuclear weapons, its development of long-range missiles capable of striking targets thousands of miles away, and its ongoing threats to strike the United States[3] and South Korea with nuclear weapons and conventional forces.

The crisis was marked by extreme escalation of rhetoric by the new North Korean administration under Kim Jong-un and actions suggesting imminent nuclear attacks against South Korea, Japan, and the United States.

[2] The bill would express the sense of Congress that the government of North Korea should be treated as a primary money laundering concern that may be required to undertake special measures with respect to the recordkeeping and reporting of certain financial transactions as well as the identification of customers or retention of information relating to certain beneficial ownership, payable-through, or correspondent accounts.

Prohibits munitions and defense articles from being provided to North Korea under the Arms Export Control Act regardless of whether it is designated as a state sponsor of terrorism.

[2] The bill would set forth exceptions to designations under this Act and authorizes the President to waive designations and sanctions, for a period of up to one year, upon the President's submission to Congress of a determination that the waiver:[2] The bill would direct issuers of financial securities regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to disclose activities relating to North Korea in annual and quarterly reports.

[8] The North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2013 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on April 26, 2013, by Rep. Edward R. Royce (R, CA-39).

[1][9] Rep. Ed Royce, who introduced the bill, said that "by shutting down North Korea's illicit activities, we deprive the Kim regime of the money he needs to pay his generals and to conduct nuclear weapons research.

"[1] Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) also supported the bill, arguing that "the U.S. will not and cannot allow an authoritarian regime to operate with impunity and threaten our national security and that of our allies.

"[11] An editorial in The Boston Globe called for the passage of the bill as a way for the United States to unilaterally "step up the pressure on this irresponsible regime.