Internet Application I.D. Act
- Bill Number
- S. 3614
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Commerce
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-12: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-10T00:10:02Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Internet Application Integrity and Disclosure Act (S. 3614) aims to promote transparency for U.S. users of certain internet websites and mobile applications by requiring clear disclosures about ownership ties to "foreign adversary countries" (countries deemed threats to U.S. national security, such as those listed in federal law) and the storage of user data in those countries. This helps users make informed decisions about potential privacy and security risks.
Key Provisions
- Disclosure Requirements: Starting one year after enactment, any person (individual or company) who owns, controls, or distributes a "covered service" must clearly and conspicuously inform U.S. residents who download or use it about:
- Whether the service is owned (fully or partially) by a foreign adversary country, a government-owned entity from such a country, or a non-state-owned entity located there (e.g., a private company operating under that country's laws or controlled by its government).
- Whether user data collected from the service is stored and maintained in a foreign adversary country.
- Whether a foreign adversary country or its government-owned entity has access to that data.
- Prohibition on False Disclosures: It is illegal to knowingly provide false information in these disclosures.
- Definitions:
- Covered Service: An internet website or mobile app that meets the ownership or data storage criteria above.
- Foreign Adversary Country: Defined by reference to U.S. law (10 U.S.C. § 4872(f)(2)), which currently includes countries like China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela.
- Non-State-Owned Entity: A private entity in a foreign adversary country that is either controlled by its government or organized under its laws.
- Disclosures apply only to natural persons (individuals) residing in the United States.
- Enforcement: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces the law by treating violations as unfair or deceptive business practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act. Penalties include fines, and the FTC's existing powers (e.g., investigations, lawsuits) apply without limiting other authorities.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This bill introduces a new federal mandate for disclosures, which does not exist in current U.S. law. It builds on the FTC's authority to regulate deceptive practices but specifically targets foreign adversary-linked digital services, expanding transparency requirements beyond general consumer protection rules. No outright bans or restrictions on these services are imposed—only required notices to users.
Potential Impacts
- On Citizens: U.S. residents gain clearer information about data privacy risks from apps or websites tied to adversarial nations, potentially encouraging safer online choices and reducing exposure to foreign surveillance or data misuse.
- On Government Agencies: The FTC will handle enforcement, increasing its workload in monitoring digital platforms but leveraging existing tools; no new agencies are created.
- On Businesses: Companies distributing or owning covered services must update apps/websites with disclosures, facing compliance costs and potential FTC penalties for non-compliance, which could deter partnerships with foreign entities.
- On International Relations: May strain ties with foreign adversary countries by highlighting their involvement in U.S. digital markets, signaling U.S. concerns over data security without direct trade sanctions.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Consumers: Primary beneficiaries, as individual users of websites and apps receive mandatory warnings.
- Tech Companies and Distributors: Entities owning, controlling, or selling covered services (e.g., app stores, developers) must comply, including U.S.-based firms dealing with foreign partners.
- Foreign Entities: Companies or governments in adversary countries may see reduced market access or reputational harm due to required labels.
- Federal Trade Commission: Gains enforcement responsibility, impacting its oversight of the tech sector.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Integrates with the FTC Act for enforcement, making violations subject to civil penalties (up to $50,120 per violation as of current FTC rules, adjustable for inflation). The one-year delay allows preparation time, reducing immediate legal challenges.
- Constitutional: Could face scrutiny under the First Amendment (free speech) if disclosures are seen as compelled speech, though courts often uphold such requirements for consumer protection (similar to nutrition labels). No direct privacy rights violations, as it enhances user awareness rather than restricting access.
- Political: Reflects bipartisan national security priorities (introduced by Sens. Cortez Masto, Grassley, and Lujan), amid growing concerns over foreign tech influence (e.g., TikTok debates). It avoids bans but promotes accountability, potentially influencing future tech regulations without escalating to trade wars.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]
Cosponsors (2)
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA], Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM]
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-12: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 2026-01-12: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Internet Application Integrity and Disclosure Act — issued 2026-01-12 — PDF (5 pages)