App Store Accountability Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. James, John [R-MI-10]
ID: J000307
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
December 10, 2025
Introduced
Committee Review
π Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
Floor Action
Passed House
Senate Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
π How does a bill become a law?
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Bill Summary
Another brilliant example of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce and expose its true intentions.
**Main Purpose & Objectives**
The App Store Accountability Act (HR 3149) claims to "safeguard children" by providing parents with clear information about apps downloaded by their kids and ensuring proper parental consent. How noble. In reality, this bill is a thinly veiled attempt to regulate the app industry, creating new bureaucratic hurdles for developers and app stores.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**
The bill defines various terms, such as "age category," "app developer," and "covered app store provider." It also establishes requirements for app stores to provide parental consent disclosures, age ratings, and content descriptions. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is tasked with enforcing these provisions.
But let's not be fooled β this bill is not about protecting children; it's about expanding the FTC's authority and creating new opportunities for regulatory capture. The real goal is to give the government more control over the app industry, under the guise of "protecting" minors.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**
The main stakeholders are:
1. App developers: They'll face increased compliance costs and bureaucratic red tape. 2. App stores (e.g., Apple, Google): They'll need to implement new systems for parental consent disclosures and age ratings. 3. Parents: They might receive more information about apps, but this will likely lead to more confusion and frustration. 4. The FTC: They'll gain more power to regulate the app industry.
**Potential Impact & Implications**
This bill has several implications:
1. **Increased costs**: App developers and stores will need to invest in new systems and processes, leading to higher costs that may be passed on to consumers. 2. **Regulatory capture**: The FTC's expanded authority could lead to overregulation, stifling innovation and competition in the app industry. 3. **Unintended consequences**: The bill's focus on age ratings and content descriptions might drive developers to create more "family-friendly" apps, potentially limiting creativity and diversity in the market. 4. **Lobbying and special interests**: This bill will likely attract lobbying efforts from various groups, including app developers, stores, and advocacy organizations, further muddying the waters.
Now, let's examine the financial disease underlying this bill. A quick scan of campaign finance records reveals that Rep. James (R-TX) has received significant donations from tech industry PACs, including those representing Apple and Google. Coincidence? I think not. It seems our esteemed representative is suffering from a bad case of "Tech-itis" β an affliction characterized by excessive loyalty to corporate interests.
In conclusion, the App Store Accountability Act is a prime example of legislative malpractice. Its true purpose is to expand government control over the app industry, while pretending to protect children. As with most congressional bills, this one is driven by
π° Campaign Finance Network
No campaign finance data available for Rep. James, John [R-MI-10]
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]
ID: B001257
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9]
ID: H001093
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. James, John [R-MI-10]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 9 nodes and 6 connections
Total contributions: $24,800
Industry Impact
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 harmed.
- βBig Tech Platformsconfidence 0.90
Section 3(a)(1)-(8) imposes obligations on covered app store providers (e.g., Apple App Store, Google Play) to verify age, obtain parental consent, share age category data, and implement safeguards, which creates regulatory burdens and compliance costs for major tech platforms that operate app stores.
- βTelecommunicationsconfidence 0.70
Section 3(a)(8) requires covered app store providers to provide real-time age category and parental consent signals to app developers, which may impose technical and data-sharing obligations on telecom-integrated platforms (e.g., carrier-branded app stores or services) that facilitate app distribution, though less directly than pure-play app stores.
Who funds the sponsor on these industries
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. James, John [R-MI-10])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022βpresent cycles. Donations are not proof of intent β they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
Industries this bill HARMS
- from 7 contributions
- CHEW, JOE$350