HR8030119th CongressWALLET

DPA Transparency Act of 2026

Sponsored By: Representative Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]

Introduced

Summary

Bars Title III assistance for companies tied to high-level officials and close relatives. The bill would amend the Defense Production Act to deny Title III help when a "covered individual" such as the President, the Vice President, or a member of the Defense Production Act Committee, or certain family members, directly or indirectly holds a "significant interest" in an entity.

Show full summary
  • Businesses seeking Title III aid: Entities would be ineligible if a "covered individual" or related person owns, controls, or holds at least 20 percent of any class of equity. Holdings owned or controlled by related individuals are aggregated to prevent circumvention.
  • Covered officials and families: A "covered individual" includes the President, the Vice President, or a Defense Production Act Committee member, plus their spouse, child, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law. Those family ties would block affiliated firms from receiving Title III assistance.
  • Program oversight and penalties: The bill would raise monetary penalties and require a fraud risk management framework for Title III programs. It also corrects a mis-citation that affects the law's short title.

Your PRIA Score

Score Hidden

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to start

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

3 provisions identified: 1 benefits, 2 costs, 0 mixed.

Ban on DPA help for relatives

If enacted, an entity would be ineligible for Title III assistance when a covered individual or their related covered people hold a significant interest. "Covered individuals" would include the President, Vice President, or a member of the Defense Production Act Committee and that person's spouse, child, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law. A "significant interest" would be 20 percent or more by vote or value and interests held by related covered people would be added together. The rule would take effect on enactment.

Higher civil penalties under DPA

If enacted, businesses and people fined under parts of the Defense Production Act would face larger maximum fines. The bill would replace each "$10,000" penalty with "$100,000" in section 103, in every place "$10,000" appears in section 705, and in section 710(f). The change would raise the per-violation cap and take effect on enactment.

Stronger fraud rules for DPA

If enacted, the Defense Production Act Committee would have to report steps taken to reduce fraud and include a fraud risk assessment. Within one year the Committee would adopt GAO-15-593SP procedures, train personnel, and name a fraud point of contact. The change would aim to reduce fraud in DPA transactions and improve oversight.

Free Policy Watch

You just read the policy. Now see what it costs you.

Pick a topic. PRIA runs your household against live legislation and sends you a free personalized readout.

Pick a topic to get started

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]

CA • D

Cosponsors

There are no cosponsors for this bill.

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov

Live Policy Activity

Live

Surfaced from PRIA's policy knowledge graph — ranked by signal strength, connected by evidence.

Cached · 6 days ago1,439Wiki0 signals surfaced
Back to Legislation

Take It Personal

Get Your Personalized Policy View

Take the PRIA Score to see how policy affects your household, then upgrade to PRIA Full Coverage for year-round monitoring.

Already have an account? Sign in