PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · May 16, 2023
Deterring America’s Technological Adversaries Act or DATA Act
This bill requires federal actions to protect the sensitive personal data of U.S. persons, with a particular focus on prohibiting the transfer of such data to foreign persons influenced by China.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) authorizes the President to regulate various commercial transactions and to block foreign-owned property and assets subject to U.S. jurisdiction. An exemption to IEEPA (i.e., the Berman Amendment) blocks the President from regulating information and informational materials. This bill specifies that sensitive personal data is not information or informational materials exempt from regulation under IEEPA.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill requires the Department of the Treasury to issue a directive prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in any transaction with any person who knowingly provides or may transfer sensitive personal data subject to U.S. jurisdiction to any foreign person subject to Chinese influence.
The bill also establishes new sanctions on certain transactions related to connected software applications. For example, the President must impose a sanction on any foreign person that knowingly operates, directs, or deals in a connected software application that is subject to the jurisdiction of China and is reasonably believed to have been or may be used to facilitate or contribute to China's military, intelligence, censorship, surveillance, cyber, or information campaigns.
The President must determine whether reasonable grounds exist for concluding that specified entities (e.g., TikTok) meet the criteria under the bill for purposes of applying a directive by Treasury or for imposing sanctions.
People & committees
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 43.
Reported by the Committee on Foreign Affairs. H. Rept. 118-63.
Reported by the Committee on Foreign Affairs. H. Rept. 118-63.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 16.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: May 27, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1153 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1153 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1153 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1153 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.