The U.S House of Representatives as the lower chamber has the powers to initiate an impeachment inquiry into a sitting president whilst the senate will vote on the actual impeachment.
The House is currently under a Republican majority and the Senate is under a Democrat majority.
The Republican-led House of representatives voted 221-212 to authorise a resolution accusing the president of bribery, corruption and influence-peddling off his âbrandâ.
Despite months of investigation, there has still not been any concrete evidence of misconduct by Biden,
Republican party leaders in both the House and the Senate have rallied support for the inquiry by arguing that the administration is âstonewallingâ and that investigators need more authority to gather evidence.
The White House has called the investigation a political stunt and an attempt to damage Bidenâs re-election bid,
Its important to recognise that voting to authorise an inquiry is not the same as voting for impeachment, but it advances the likelihood the House will seek to impeach Mr Biden early next year.
The last three out of four times the House did this they opted to impeach not long after. However, it should be understood that as the Democrats have the majority in the Senate this is unlikely to end up with Biden being impeached although evidence called upon may damage his reputation.
What are their claims ?
Providing people access to Biden due to his position as VP
There is no substantive evidence of any specific payments made to the then-vice-president or that he benefited directly from the payments.
But committee chairman James Comer has argued Hunter and other relatives âsoldâ Mr Biden - who at the time served as Barack Obamaâs vice-president - as a âbrandâ to reap millions from corrupt business schemes.
He has also said that âit appears no real services were provided other than access to the Biden network, including Joe Biden himselfâ.
Lieing about business dealings
Joe Biden has said his son âhas not made moneyâ in China or elsewhere. He has also repeatedly said he never spoke to his son about his business dealings.
But Republicans say the evidence theyâve uncovered refutes both those claims.
Oversight Committee Chair James Comer has been accused by the White House of repeatedly mischaracterising evidence during the impeachment hearings
Mr Comer has alleged that the president âspoke, dined, and developed relationships withâ his sonâs foreign business targets nearly two dozen times.
It is unclear, however, whether the existence or substance
Alleged bribery scheme
A key element of the inquiry has been claims Republicans have recently resurfaced after they first emerged in 2019 during former President Donald Trumpâs first impeachment.
An unverified tip to the FBI claimed Joe Biden pressured Ukraineâs government to fire its top prosecutor to halt an investigation into the local Burisma energy firm, where Hunter Biden was on the board.
An FBI document detailing the claim - in which an ex-Burisma CEO says he paid $5m to both Joe and Hunter Biden - was obtained and released by Republican Senator Chuck Grassley this July.
The justice department had investigated the claim for eight months during the Trump administration, but ultimately abandoned its probe due to âinsufficient evidenceâ.
Preferential treatment of Hunter Biden
House Republicans have alleged that the justice department âimpeded, delayed, and obstructedâ an ongoing multi-year criminal investigation into Hunter Biden.
The department has denied these claims. Other witnesses called by Republicans in July testified that neither President Biden nor Attorney General Merrick Garland interfered in the investigation.
But Republicans, who have claimed a broad âweaponisationâ of the justice system under President Biden, have sought to contrast ongoing efforts to prosecute former President Trump with what they said was leniency toward the presidentâs son.
