Chip Security Act Clears Committee
A bipartisan 'Chip Security Act' passed a House committee 42-0, moving export and tracking mandates for semiconductor supply chains closer to law and shifting compliance toward active oversight. That legislative momentum means Apple and suppliers will likely face stricter tracking and documentation requirements for advanced components going forward. (chinaselectcommittee.house.gov)
H.R. 3447 directs the Secretary of Commerce to issue binding standards for “chip security mechanisms” that would apply to covered integrated‑circuit products exported from the United States. (congress.gov). (congress.gov) The bill’s text explicitly defines a “chip security mechanism” to include software‑, firmware‑, or hardware‑enabled security mechanisms as well as physical security mechanisms. (congress.gov). (congress.gov) The legislative text and committee materials require that, within 180 days of enactment, covered export‑controlled advanced chips be equipped with location‑verification capabilities that operate before export, re‑export, or in‑country transfer. (docs.house.gov). (docs.house.gov) Sponsors directed the Commerce Department to require diversion reporting to the Bureau of Industry and Security and to coordinate with the Department of Defense to study additional chip security mechanisms and produce annual assessments for three years. (cotton.senate.gov). (cotton.senate.gov) House committee materials tie the bill to findings from the Select Committee on China’s Deepseek investigation and to a recent indictment alleging diversion of Nvidia processors, both of which lawmakers cited when advancing the measure on March 26, 2026. (chinaselectcommittee.house.gov). (chinaselectcommittee.house.gov) A Senate companion, S.1705, was introduced by Sen. Tom Cotton on May 8, 2025 and later attracted Sen. Elizabeth Warren as a cosponsor, creating parallel legislative tracks in the Senate Banking Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee. (congress.gov). (congress.gov) Policy analysts and industry observers have warned that the 180‑day requirement for hardware‑level location checks is technically ambitious, could raise unit costs, and may have performance or supply‑chain timing impacts if manufacturers must retrofit or redesign products on short timelines. (technologyandsecurity.org). (technologyandsecurity.org)
