HR2683-119

Reported

Remote Access Security Act

119th Congress Introduced Apr 7, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

The Remote Access Security Act expands export-control law from physical export and in-country transfer to remote access. It defines remote access as a foreign person's access to an item subject to U.S. jurisdiction through a network connection, including the internet or a cloud computing service, from somewhere other than the item's physical location, when the Secretary of Commerce determines that use could create serious national security or foreign policy risk. The bill inserts remote access into Export Control Reform Act authorities for licensing, control lists, enforcement, and regulation, while preserving the existing mens rea standard for criminal liability. It also requires the Secretary of Commerce to keep the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee fully and currently informed about anticipated remote-access control regulations, including classified briefings when needed.

Who Benefits and How

National security agencies benefit from a clearer statutory path to restrict foreign remote use of controlled technology. The Bureau of Industry and Security benefits from explicit authority to regulate remote access alongside exports and in-country transfers. Export control compliance consultants benefit from new demand for remote-access reviews, licensing advice, and compliance programs. Defense contractors and semiconductor manufacturers benefit from clearer legal rules for protecting controlled equipment, data, and technology from risky foreign remote access.

Who Bears the Burden and How

Cloud computing providers must assess whether foreign users can remotely access controlled items through their infrastructure. SaaS companies must evaluate remote access to export-controlled technology by foreign users. U.S. research universities must manage remote access by foreign researchers to controlled equipment, data, or research tools. Technology companies with foreign employees and technology companies with foreign contractors face compliance burdens when remote access could become regulated. The Secretary of Commerce and Bureau of Industry and Security must draft regulations, administer licensing and enforcement, and brief Congress on national security risks, regulatory methods, economic effects, affected entities, and burdens.

Key Provisions

  • Adds a remote access definition to the Export Control Reform Act for foreign-person network access to U.S.-jurisdiction items when Commerce identifies serious national security or foreign policy risk.
  • Expands export-control authorities to cover remote access alongside export, reexport, release, and in-country transfer controls.
  • Authorizes Commerce to regulate remote access to covered items and incorporate remote access into licensing, restrictions, and enforcement frameworks.
  • Preserves the existing criminal-liability mens rea standard under section 1760.
  • Requires the Secretary of Commerce to keep the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Senate Banking Committee informed about anticipated remote-access regulations, including classified briefings when necessary.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Amends the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 to define and regulate remote access by foreign persons to items subject to U.S. jurisdiction, including access through internet or cloud connections when the Secretary of Commerce determines the use could pose serious national security or foreign policy risk, and requires Commerce to keep congressional committees informed before promulgating remote-access control regulations.

Key Policy Areas

Trade, Export Controls, Technology, National Security

Primary Purpose

Amends the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 to define and regulate remote access by foreign persons to items subject to U.S. jurisdiction, including access through internet or cloud connections when the Secretary of Commerce determines the use could pose serious national security or foreign policy risk, and requires Commerce to keep congressional committees informed before promulgating remote-access control regulations.

Policy Domains

Trade Export Controls Technology National Security

House resolution provisions

Identified Gains
  • National security agencies
  • Bureau of Industry and Security
  • Export control compliance consultants
  • Defense contractors
  • Semiconductor manufacturers
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: rfs
Defense contractors: , ,
National security agencies: , ,
Semiconductor manufacturers: , ,
Bureau of Industry and Security: , ,
Export control compliance consultants: , ,
Identified Costs
  • Cloud computing providers
  • SaaS companies
  • U.S. research universities
  • Technology companies with foreign employees
  • Technology companies with foreign contractors
  • Secretary of Commerce
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: rfs
SaaS companies: , ,
Secretary of Commerce: , ,
Cloud computing providers: , ,
U.S. research universities: , ,
Technology companies with foreign employees: , ,
Technology companies with foreign contractors: , ,

Legislative Progress

Reported
Introduced Committee Passed
Jan 13, 2026

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, …

Jan 13, 2026

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to …

Jan 12, 2026

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without …

Jan 12, 2026

Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules …

Jan 12, 2026

Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H645-646)

Jan 12, 2026

At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were …

Jan 12, 2026

DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate …

Jan 12, 2026

Mr. Lawler moved to suspend the rules and pass the …

Jan 12, 2026

Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H621-623)

Jan 12, 2026

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without …

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Technology
13 mentions across 4 clauses
-12 negative ?1 uncertain

Foreign technology contractors, Regulated technology exporters, SaaS companies

Education
6 mentions across 3 clauses
-6 negative

Foreign researchers accessing controlled items, Research universities handling controlled items

Trade
4 mentions across 4 clauses
-4 negative

BIS export-control office

Cloud Computing
3 mentions across 3 clauses
-3 negative

Cloud computing providers

Defense
3 mentions across 3 clauses
-3 negative

Defense contractors

Professional Services
3 mentions across 3 clauses
+3 positive

Export control attorneys

National Security
3 mentions across 3 clauses
+3 positive

National security agencies

Congress
2 mentions across 1 clause
+2 positive

House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Senate Committee on Banking

3/3
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Trade Export Controls Technology National Security
Actor Mappings
"bis"
→ Bureau of Industry and Security
"commerce"
→ Secretary of Commerce
"senate_banking"
→ Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
"house_foreign_affairs"
→ House Committee on Foreign Affairs

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology