RESTRICT Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6879
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Foreign Trade and International Finance
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-18: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-30T08:06:32Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The RESTRICT Act aims to strengthen U.S. national security by restricting the export of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips—specifically advanced integrated circuits—to countries considered potential threats, while allowing controlled transfers to approved U.S. entities operating abroad. It seeks to prevent these technologies from reaching adversaries without hindering legitimate U.S. business activities.
Key Provisions
- Definitions:
- Advanced integrated circuit or product: Refers to high-performance chips, computers, or related products classified under specific export control codes (e.g., 3A090 or 4A090) as of January 1, 2025, or those functionally similar and designed for data centers. The definition can be updated after 24 months by the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, following consultation with Congress and ensuring no harm to U.S. security.
- Country of concern: Includes countries in Export Control Group D:5 (e.g., those with advanced military threats like China, Russia), plus Macau and Hong Kong.
- Covered country: Broader category including all Group D countries (those with national security concerns).
- Approved United States person: A U.S. entity or individual meeting strict criteria for designation, ensuring secure handling of the technology.
- Export Controls:
- Requires a license from the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security for exporting, re-exporting, or transferring advanced integrated circuits to any covered country.
- Mandates denial of such licenses if the recipient entity is primarily located in, headquartered in, or controlled by a parent company in a country of concern.
- Exemptions for Approved U.S. Persons:
- No license needed if the product is headed to a non-country-of-concern destination and remains under the ownership and control of an approved U.S. person.
- Within 90 days of enactment, the Under Secretary must issue regulations for approval, including:
- Limiting ownership by entities from countries of concern to no more than 10%.
- Requiring physical security, cybersecurity, and access controls to prevent misuse or diversion.
- Implementing "know your customer" standards (due diligence on buyers) and annual audits or certifications.
- Duration: The new controls sunset (expire) five years after enactment.
- Amendments: Adds a new section (1758A) to the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 and updates congressional tables of contents for reference.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Inserts a targeted new section into the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, which previously focused on broader export rules but lacked specific prohibitions on advanced AI chips.
- Introduces mandatory license denials for countries of concern, shifting from case-by-case reviews to a presumption of denial.
- Creates a novel "approved U.S. person" exemption process, allowing secure intra-company transfers abroad without licenses, which was not explicitly detailed in prior law.
- Permits periodic updates to technology definitions to adapt to innovations, with congressional oversight—a flexibility not emphasized in earlier statutes.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security will face increased workload for licensing, approvals, and regulations, potentially requiring more resources for enforcement and audits.
- Citizens and Businesses: U.S. tech companies may benefit from streamlined transfers for their overseas operations but could face compliance costs (e.g., audits, security upgrades). Delays or denials in exports might disrupt supply chains.
- International Relations: Could strain trade with countries like China by limiting access to cutting-edge U.S. technology, escalating tech rivalries. Allies in non-covered countries may see easier access via approved U.S. entities, fostering secure collaborations.
- Broader effects include bolstering U.S. technological edge in AI while risking retaliatory export bans from affected nations, potentially slowing global AI development in adversarial regions.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Technology Companies and Exporters: Semiconductor firms (e.g., those producing AI chips) must navigate new licensing and approval processes, with exemptions aiding multinational operations.
- Foreign Entities in Covered Countries: Governments, companies, and researchers in countries of concern (e.g., Chinese tech firms) will face barriers to acquiring advanced U.S. chips, limiting their AI capabilities.
- U.S. Government: Departments of Commerce and related agencies enforce rules; Congress gains oversight on definition updates.
- Approved U.S. Persons Abroad: U.S.-owned subsidiaries or affiliates in non-concern countries benefit from exemptions, enabling efficient global operations.
- Global Supply Chain Partners: Allies and neutral countries may indirectly gain from redirected trade, while end-users in data centers worldwide could see varied access based on origin.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Enhances export control authority under existing statutes without new penalties, but relies on administrative rulemaking (e.g., Federal Register notices), which could invite legal challenges over definition updates or approval denials if deemed arbitrary. The 90-day regulation deadline pressures timely implementation.
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's foreign commerce powers (Article I, Section 8), focusing on national security without directly infringing on free speech or privacy, though cybersecurity mandates might raise data protection concerns for businesses.
- Political: Bipartisan sponsorship signals consensus on countering tech threats from adversaries, but the five-year sunset allows future reevaluation amid evolving geopolitics. It may fuel debates on balancing security with economic innovation, potentially influencing broader U.S. trade policies like those on semiconductors.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]
Cosponsors (16)
Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37], Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4], Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-21], Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, Sheila [D-FL-20], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5], Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-32], Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2], Rep. Johnson, Julie [D-TX-32], Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2]
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-18: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- 2025-12-18: Introduced in House
- 2025-12-18: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Restoring Export and Security Trade Restrictions for Integrated Circuit Technologies Act — issued 2025-12-18 — PDF (7 pages)