Georgia House Bill HB113

Georgia 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/25
• Report Pass: 2/13/25
• Engrossed: 2/27/25
• Refer: 2/28/25
• Report Pass: 3/20/25
• Enrolled: 4/8/25
• Chaptered: 5/9/25
• Passed: 5/9/25

Caption

State government; prohibit the state or its agencies from purchasing goods from certain foreign countries or related entities

Summary

HB 113 revises Georgia’s state procurement rules to bar state agencies from buying goods or services from certain foreign countries or related entities deemed security risks. The bill defines terms such as “foreign country of concern,” “foreign company of concern,” and “scrutinized company,” and it directs the Georgia Technology Authority to maintain an up-to-date list of “concerned goods” associated with those entities. State agencies would be required to certify that bidders are not scrutinized companies, and the state would be prohibited from purchasing concerned goods from foreign companies of concern, foreign countries of concern, or third-party vendors/resellers. The bill also creates enforcement mechanisms. If a company is found to have made a false certification or to have sold prohibited goods to the state, it may face contract termination, a civil penalty equal to the greater of $250,000 or twice the purchase value, and a period of ineligibility for future state contracts set by the Georgia Technology Authority. In addition, the bill repeals an existing provision related specifically to contracting with companies owned by China and expands the Georgia Technology Authority’s authority to evaluate security risks tied to technology-related purchases.

Impact

HB 113 amends Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated to tighten state procurement restrictions involving foreign adversaries and related businesses. It shifts Georgia’s contracting framework from country-specific restrictions focused on Russia, Belarus, and China to a broader security-based regime covering foreign countries of concern and foreign companies of concern, while also expanding the Georgia Technology Authority’s role in identifying risky technology goods and services. The bill affects state agencies, vendors, resellers, and companies seeking state contracts by imposing certification, exclusion, penalty, and debarment consequences.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad legislative support based on its vote margins: it passed the House 148-17, the Senate substitute passed 51-0, and the House agreed to the Senate substitute 146-18. That voting pattern suggests strong bipartisan or near-unanimous agreement on the general policy of restricting state purchases from foreign adversary-linked entities. The available record does not include committee testimony, so the overall sentiment can only be inferred from the overwhelmingly favorable floor votes.

Contention

The main policy tension in HB 113 is between state procurement security and the practical effects of restricting vendors based on foreign ownership, control, or place of business. Supporters likely view the bill as a safeguard against supply-chain and cybersecurity risks, especially for technology-related purchases, while critics may be concerned about the breadth of the definitions, the administrative burden of maintaining the prohibited-goods list, and the impact on competition and contract costs. The bill’s repeal of the China-specific contracting provision and replacement with a broader foreign-adversary framework suggests an effort to standardize the policy, but it may also raise questions about how the state will determine which goods are covered and how third-party vendors and resellers will be monitored.