Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency ActThis 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. 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.
The bill requires the FCC to publish the listing of entities with foreign ownership within 120 days of its enactment and mandates annual updates to this information. This initiative responds to growing concerns about national security implications tied to foreign ownership of communication infrastructure and services in the U.S. It aims to protect the interests of American consumers and safeguard critical communication networks from potential threats posed by foreign adversaries.
SB259, titled the 'Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act,' mandates the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to create and maintain a list of entities that hold authorizations, licenses, or other grants of authority issued by the Commission and have certain levels of foreign ownership. The bill aims to enhance transparency regarding foreign involvement in U.S. communications by identifying such entities and ensuring that this information is publicly accessible.
While supporters advocate for increased transparency in communications and argue that the bill is essential for safeguarding national security, some critics may view the bill as an overreach that could imply unnecessary restrictions on foreign investments in the telecom sector. The delineation between necessary regulation for national security and the fostering of a competitive market environment might spark substantial debate during the legislative process.
Science, Technology, Communications