HB1460 would amend Maryland’s State Finance and Procurement law to limit what procurement officers may require from bidders, offerors, and contractors regarding boycotts of foreign countries. Specifically, it prohibits the State from conditioning a bid or proposal on a certification that the bidder is not engaged in such a boycott or will refrain from one during the contract term, except where required by other provisions of Maryland law or by federal law.
The bill also bars procurement officers from inserting similar anti-boycott certification clauses into State procurement contracts or contract renewals. In practical terms, the measure would prevent the State from using procurement terms to compel contractors to disclose or disavow participation in foreign-country boycotts, while preserving any requirements that already exist under state or federal law.
Impact
If enacted, HB1460 would add new sections 13-212.2 and 13-228 to the State Finance and Procurement Article, narrowing the scope of permissible procurement certifications and contract clauses related to foreign-country boycotts. It would affect State procurement officers, bidders, offerors, and contractors by removing a category of political or commercial certification from the procurement process, effective October 1, 2025.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the limited available context, the bill appears to be framed as a procurement-limitation measure rather than a broadly controversial policy change. No committee transcript or vote record is available here, so there is no documented debate or recorded opposition in the provided materials. The sponsors’ inclusion of the bill suggests support for restricting State-imposed boycott certifications in procurement.
Contention
The main point of contention, based on the text, is whether the State should be allowed to require contractors to certify that they are not participating in boycotts of foreign countries or to promise they will not do so during the contract period. Supporters would likely view the bill as protecting contractors from compelled political or commercial certifications, while opponents could argue that such certifications are a legitimate procurement condition or foreign-policy-related safeguard. The bill preserves exceptions for requirements already imposed under Maryland or federal law, which may reduce but not eliminate disputes over how far the prohibition reaches.