House FCC List Bill and Senate Connected-Vehicle Act Advance Together

House Energy and Commerce leaders released the Communications and Technology Transparency Act of 2026, which would route FCC Covered List determinations through the Commerce ICTS process. The same day, senators sought unanimous consent on S.4429, which would write China- and Russia-linked connected-vehicle limits into law.

On 23 September 2026, U.S. lawmakers advanced two bills on market access for Chinese firms. One would change how the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Covered List is filled. The other would put connected-vehicle restrictions into statute and limit exceptions.

Covered List determinations would run through Commerce

House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican chair Brett Guthrie and Democratic ranking member Frank Pallone released the text and a section-by-section of the Communications and Technology Transparency Act of 2026.

Their joint statement said the current system had worked in the past, that technology had outpaced it, that decision-making lacked enough transparency and consistency, and that they wanted a wider set of covered technologies and clearer written bases and procedures for executive decisions.

The Covered List is managed by the FCC. Listing depends on determinations by bodies named in statute. The draft would change the source of those executive determinations.

Current law allows an interagency entity or an appropriate national security agency to make an independent determination. The proposal would remove those two paths and place executive determinations in the Commerce Department information and communications technology and services (ICTS) review process. The Secretary of Commerce would first have to prohibit the relevant transactions under applicable rules. The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information would then notify the FCC in writing. Listing grounds already set in other laws would remain. The bill would also add listing cases required by section 1709 of the fiscal 2025 National Defense Authorization Act.

If the FCC received a written risk notice, it would have to send that notice to Commerce within 60 days. The 60-day limit is a forwarding deadline, not a deadline to finish an investigation or impose a ban. Commerce and the FCC would meet on a regular schedule, and heads of relevant national security agencies could still take part.

The bill would replace many uses of "communications equipment or service" with "information and communications technology or service," using the definition in Commerce rules. The list could then cover more technologies. New listings would have to target technology and services produced or provided by entities controlled by a "foreign adversary." The bill's cited definition names China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

Congressional notice, class-wide rules, and removal

Before a new listing, the FCC would have to file a report with Congress at least seven days in advance, together with the applicable determining agency. The report would state what would be restricted and the national security reasons. The body of the report would be unclassified, with classified material allowed as an attachment. Listing or removing an entire class of technology or service without naming specific vendors would be treated as a "major rule" under the Congressional Review Act.

The Covered List would be updated at least every six months and would need a stated removal process. If the determination that supported a listing were revoked, the agency would have to give reasons and Commerce would notify the FCC. No other valid determination could still support the listing. The FCC would have to take public comment and independently find that the technology or service no longer presents an unacceptable security risk. After those conditions were met, the FCC would have to remove the item within 180 days of receiving Commerce's revocation notice.

Companies that produce or provide listed technology or services, and affiliates that meet the legal definition, would be barred from obtaining, holding, or controlling FCC authorizations and licenses. Equipment authorization under separate specialized rules would sit outside that bar and would remain subject to other applicable rules.

The FCC would not have to review or revoke an authorization solely because the product was listed later. Other FCC authorities would still apply.

Reuters reported on 4 August that U.S. officials had considered first banning imports of all new optical-module models and then exempting many non-Chinese suppliers, a plan that could still be changed or dropped. That method would restrict a whole product class without naming vendors. If the new law were already in force, that method would go through the bill's major-rule process. The draft still allows class-wide listings.

S.4429 would lock in connected-vehicle limits

Also on 23 September, Senator Bernie Moreno planned to seek unanimous consent that week on S.4429, the Connected Vehicle Security Act of 2026, which he sponsors with Senator Elissa Slotkin.

The bill was introduced on 29 April 2026, approved by the Senate Commerce Committee on 22 July, and placed before the full Senate on 22 September. Reuters reported on 23 September that 51 senators supported it and that the House version had more than 100 cosponsors. Unanimous consent fails if one senator objects. Some Republican senators had raised concerns, so that route was not guaranteed.

A 2025 Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) rule already restricts vehicles and technology with specified ties to China and Russia. Whole-vehicle and software limits start with model year 2027. Hardware limits start with model year 2030. Hardware without a model year is covered from 1 January 2029. The rule also covers vehicles those companies manufacture in the United States.

The Senate bill would put those limits in statute, widen some of them, and restrict exception authorizations. After passage, later changes would have to fit the law, not only a rewritten administrative rule.

On 11 September, President Trump said in an interview that Chinese automakers could build U.S. plants if they hired Americans, and that he opposed cars built in Mexico and then sold in the United States. On 18 September, Reuters reported that six groups representing U.S. automakers, suppliers, and dealers had written to Trump asking that Chinese automakers still be blocked from selling, importing, and manufacturing cars in the United States, including at U.S. plants. Twenty-seven House Democrats made a similar request.

The July committee substitute already limited the U.S.-plant path, and the 22 September floor text kept those terms. For a company whose headquarters, place of registration, or principal place of business is in a country of concern, and for its subsidiaries and affiliates, a whole-vehicle exception would require both that the firm already sell passenger cars in the United States when the bill becomes law and that it have manufactured passenger cars in the United States for at least five years before that date.

Control tests would include equity, voting rights, and board seats, with a threshold above 15 percent for vehicle companies and above 25 percent for related software and hardware companies, plus other actual-control tests. Covered technology would include AI components used for autonomous-driving decision and control, and defined battery-management, monitoring, and communications electronic systems.

Restricted whole vehicles would in principle face limits from 1 January 2027. Related software would mainly apply to model year 2027 and later vehicles. Connected hardware would in principle apply from 1 January 2030. Software and hardware that the bill newly covers and that the current rule does not cover would get extra transition time, with those limits starting no earlier than model year 2029 and model year 2032.