PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 31, 2025
Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act
This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to annually publish a list of entities that hold a license or other authorization granted by the FCC and have ties to specified foreign countries.
With respect to entities holding cable landing licenses (for the placement and operation of submarine communications cables) or other licenses granted via competitive auction, the FCC must publish a list of all such entities (1) in which a covered entity holds a specified voting or equity interest, or (2) that have been determined by a national security agency to be subject to the control of a covered entity.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
With respect to entities holding all other categories of FCC licenses or other authorizations, the FCC must first issue rules facilitating the collection of information on such licensees’ ownership structure. After that information is obtained, the FCC must add to the published list any such entity in which a covered entity holds a specified voting or equity interest.
Under the bill, a covered entity is defined as an entity organized in China, Iran, North Korea, or Russia; a subsidiary of such an entity; or the government of China, Iran, North Korea, or Russia.
People & committees
Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1665)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1665)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 906.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1665-1666)
Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 50.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-73.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-73.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.906 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.906 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.906 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.906 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.