Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act

Bill Number: H.R. 1181
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 2
Policy Area: Finance and Financial Sector
Status: Passed House
Latest Action: 2026-07-15: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Last Updated: 2026-07-23T23:06:26Z

AI-Generated Summary

## Purpose The Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act prohibits payment card networks and related entities from using or requiring merchant category codes (MCCs) that single out firearms retailers, aiming to prevent the tracking or distinction of firearm, ammunition, and related purchases through standard payment processing.

## Key Provisions

Prohibitions on MCCs: Payment card networks cannot require firearms retailers or covered entities to use MCCs specific to firearms sales. Covered entities cannot assign such codes to firearms retailers.
Enforcement: The Attorney General must establish a complaint process within 90 days, investigate violations, issue 30-day cure notices, and seek federal court injunctions if needed. No private lawsuits are allowed.
Preemption: Federal law overrides any state or local rules on MCC assignment, use, or disclosure for firearms retailers, but does not block compliance with existing laws on fraud, disputes, or transaction integrity.
Reporting: The Attorney General must submit an annual report to Congress on investigations, outcomes, and the law's effectiveness.
Definitions: The bill defines key terms, including "firearm" (covering rifles, shotguns, handguns, and antiques per 18 U.S.C. § 921), "ammunition," "firearms retailer," "covered entity" (transaction processors), "merchant category code," and "payment card network."

## Significant Changes to Existing Law This legislation introduces new federal restrictions on MCC practices, which were previously unregulated at the national level for firearms retailers. It creates the first explicit nationwide ban on distinguishing firearms sales via payment codes and preempts state and local efforts in this area.

## Potential Impacts

Government agencies: The Department of Justice gains new enforcement duties, including complaint handling, investigations, and litigation.
Citizens: Firearms retailers and customers may see reduced ability to track or categorize purchases separately, potentially affecting privacy concerns around transaction data.
International relations: Minimal direct effects, though payment networks operating globally may need to adjust U.S.-specific processing rules.
Broader effects: Payment processors and networks could face compliance costs or operational changes.

## Main Stakeholders Affected

Firearms retailers and their customers.
Payment card networks (e.g., entities handling credit, debit, and prepaid transactions).
Covered entities involved in transaction processing.
The U.S. Attorney General and Department of Justice.
State and local governments whose MCC regulations are preempted.
Congress (via required annual reporting).

## Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications The preemption clause raises federalism questions by limiting state authority over commercial practices. The bill's focus on firearms sales may intersect with Second Amendment considerations, though it does not directly regulate firearm ownership or sales. Enforcement relies solely on government action, avoiding private litigation.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Moore, Riley [R-WV-2]

Cosponsors (132)

Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6], Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-9], Rep. Bean, Aaron [R-FL-4], Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6], Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10], Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24], Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-KY-2], Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1], Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1], Rep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11], Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3], Rep. Rulli, Michael A. [R-OH-6], Rep. Williams, Roger [R-TX-25], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3], Rep. Bost, Mike [R-IL-12], Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2], Rep. Moore, Tim [R-NC-14], Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4], Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1], Rep. Womack, Steve [R-AR-3], Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6], Rep. Yakym, Rudy [R-IN-2], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5], Rep. Boebert, Lauren [R-CO-4], Rep. Messmer, Mark [R-IN-8], Rep. McDowell, Addison [R-NC-6], Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5], Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48], Rep. Green, Mark E. [R-TN-7], Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1], Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19], Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4], Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. De La Cruz, Monica [R-TX-15], Rep. Wilson, Joe [R-SC-2], Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4], Rep. Clyde, Andrew S. [R-GA-9], Rep. LaLota, Nick [R-NY-1], Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6], Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3], Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5], Rep. Kustoff, David [R-TN-8], Rep. Harshbarger, Diana [R-TN-1], Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23], Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2], Rep. Murphy, Gregory F. [R-NC-3], Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2] and 82 more

Recent Actions

2026-07-15: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
2026-07-14: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
2026-07-14: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 201 (Roll no. 240). (text: CR H4441-4442) (Roll call 240)
2026-07-14: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 201 (Roll no. 240). (Roll call 240)
2026-07-14: On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 208 - 217 (Roll no. 239). (Roll call 239)
2026-07-14: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4451-4452)
2026-07-14: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 1181 the Chair put the question on the motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Frost demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
2026-07-14: The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
2026-07-14: Mr. Frost moved to recommit to the Committee on Financial Services. (CR H4445)
2026-07-14: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
2026-07-14: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 1181.
2026-07-14: Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 139, H.R. 8595, H.R. 9237 and H.R. 1181. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 139, H.R. 9237, and H.R. 1181 under a closed rule, and H.R. 8595 under a structured rule with one hour of debate and one motion to reconsider on each bill.
2026-07-14: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1423. (consideration: CR H4441-4445)
2026-07-14: Rule H. Res. 1423 passed House.
2026-07-13: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1423 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 139, H.R. 8595, H.R. 9237 and H.R. 1181. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 139, H.R. 9237, and H.R. 1181 under a closed rule, and H.R. 8595 under a structured rule with one hour of debate and one motion to reconsider on each bill.

Bill Versions

Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act — issued 2026-07-14 — PDF (8 pages)
Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act — issued 2025-02-11 — PDF (5 pages)
Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act — issued 2026-07-15 — PDF (7 pages)
Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act — issued 2026-02-25 — PDF (10 pages)