Pentagon limits IT purchases to manufacturers and their approved dealers
H.R. 2765 — SAFE Supply Chains Act · Filed by Pat Fallon (R-TX) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Apr 9, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits the Department of Defense from buying or using information technology hardware and components unless they come directly from the original manufacturer or an authorized reseller with a direct contractual relationship to that manufacturer. The bill aims to prevent counterfeit, compromised, or gray-market IT equipment from entering military supply chains, though it includes narrow waivers for research and mission-critical situations approved by the Secretary of Defense with notice to Congress.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a procurement restriction limiting DoD to OEM and authorized-reseller channels for IT hardware. While framed as supply-chain security, it functions as a market-access barrier that may benefit established manufacturers and their authorized networks at the expense of secondary-market resellers and smaller vendors.
What the text implies
- The restriction to OEM and authorized-reseller channels may increase DoD IT procurement costs by eliminating competitive secondary-market and gray-market sourcing, a cost ultimately borne by taxpayers.
- The bill does not define 'authorized reseller' in a way that prevents OEMs from restricting authorization to preferred partners, potentially creating monopolistic pricing leverage.
- The waiver mechanism requires only notice to Congress, not approval, meaning the Secretary of Defense retains broad discretion to bypass the restriction for 'mission-critical' functions—a term left undefined.
- The bill's one-year implementation delay and six-year reporting window suggest the restriction may not be immediately enforceable, creating uncertainty for current procurement contracts.
- Smaller IT vendors and resellers not in OEM-authorized networks face de facto exclusion from DoD contracts, potentially consolidating the market among larger, established players.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill addresses a legitimate national security concern—preventing counterfeit or compromised IT equipment in military systems—which benefits public security. However, the restriction to OEMs and authorized resellers may reduce competition, increase procurement costs borne by taxpayers, and create barriers for smaller vendors and resellers, potentially raising the cost of military IT procurement without clear evidence that the restriction is necessary or proportionate.
Who stands to gain
- Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of IT hardware
- Authorized resellers with direct OEM contractual relationships
- Established IT vendors with existing DoD relationships
Named in the bill
Department of Defense, Secretary of Defense, House Committee on Armed Services, Senate Committee on Armed Services, Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), Authorized resellers, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), 41 USC 4713
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Democrats.
- Apr 9, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Apr 9, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Armed Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
6 lobbying clients named this bill on 7 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $2,050,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 10 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 82% of bills with at least one filing.
Pat Fallon, the sponsor, reported $359,260 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $5,000 of that came from 1 PAC tied to these lobbying clients.
- Cisco Systems Inc — $850,000 on 1 filing
- Information Technology Industry Council — $720,000 on 1 filing
- Business Software Alliance — $320,000 on 1 filing
- Cisco Systems Inc — $100,000 on 2 filings
- Bsa the Software Alliance (formerly Bsa Business Software Alliance Inc) — $30,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (5,140 characters) on Aug 19, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Pentagon limits IT purchases to manufacturers and their approved dealers” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr2765 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.