Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Ad Tech Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear bills to curb ad‑tech brokers, require business model notice for apps
Summary
The Vermont House Commerce & Economic Development Committee reviewed two short‑form bills on April 3 proposing limits on ad‑tech broker practices and requiring clearer business‑model disclosures for apps and online services, citing concerns about fraud, consumer harm and K‑12 student data flows.
A committee staff member introduced two short‑form bills at the Vermont House Committee on Commerce & Economic Development on April 3 that would regulate ad‑tech brokers and require companies to disclose how they monetize user data.
The staff member said the measures — identified in the hearing as H.390 and H.391 — aim to rein in “an unregulated $700,000,000,000 industry” and restore transparency for small businesses, publishers and consumers. "For every $1 spent on ads, 36¢ actually reaches the consumer," the presenter said, citing industry research during the committee discussion.
The bills, described by the presenter as the “Building Better Online Businesses Act” and a companion Business Model Transparency measure, would use four policy mechanisms: limits on common ownership in the ad marketplace, a duty of care for ad‑tech brokers, know‑your‑customer rules, and mandated transparency. The presenter said the transparency measure would require a concise “business model notice” presented when a consumer engages with a product, listing the company’s legal name and revenue streams and disclosing whether and how personal data are monetized.
Committee members heard several examples the presenter said underline the bills’ goals. The presenter described research from digital advertising watchdogs (including Check My Ads and WebX‑ray) that traces how ad spend flows through complex real‑time bidding systems and how pixel trackers and identity resolution platforms can distribute data to multiple brokers. The presenter said ad fraud could exceed $84,000,000,000 globally by 2025 and noted research showing ad brokers sometimes place ads on sites that host illicit content.
The presenter also cited work by AppMicroscope (appmicroscope.org), which publishes scorecards for mobile apps and web tracking. The presenter said AppMicroscope’s U.S. K‑12 benchmark found that 243 tested apps (15.8%) sent data to registered data brokers and that those apps communicated with an average of 6.7 brokers. Using data flagged by AppMicroscope, the presenter reported that 85% of sampled Vermont schools used at least one app that transmitted data to data brokers and that the state sample included 15 app instances and six unique apps with broker traffic.
Committee members asked how the proposals would interact with existing federal and state laws. The presenter referenced the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and federal health privacy rules including HIPAA, and said Vermont currently has a state student data privacy law that applies to some school software contracts but does not comprehensively restrict data broker activity. The presenter described conversations with a Vermont software vendor who said several schools did not request required privacy disclosures despite the state rule.
Members suggested outreach and education — for schools and small businesses — alongside rulemaking. One committee member said many constituents’ “eyes glaze over” on data privacy and urged making resources and scorecards more accessible.
The committee did not take formal action on the short forms during the meeting; the bills were presented for initial consideration and possible referral to committees for further drafting and testimony.
The discussion included named tools and organizations referenced by the presenter: Check My Ads, WebX‑ray, AppMicroscope (appmicroscope.org) and a U.S.‑based FBI verification step referenced in connection with scams affecting locksmith listings. The presenter recommended follow‑up briefings, including tech‑sector and school‑system witnesses, and offered to bring experts who track ad‑tech supply chains to a future session.
The committee will decide whether to move the short forms forward for public testimony and drafting. If advanced, the bills would require further legal drafting to translate the presenter’s policy outlines into statutory text and to align provisions with federal privacy rules and existing Vermont student privacy requirements.
