WisconsinWisconsin agencies would bar certain businesses from state contracts
Wisconsin agencies would need written certifications before contracting, with an exception only when the Department of Administration approves under strict conditions.
What it does
State agencies could not contract with certain businesses tied to listed foreign adversaries. Contractors would have to certify their status and make every effort to keep covered goods and services out of the contract.
The Department of Administration could approve an otherwise barred contract only when the state cannot reasonably get the goods or services elsewhere and the harm of refusing outweighs the public interest in the ban.
Anyone could file a complaint, and the department would investigate. A person found to have violated the rules could owe a large forfeiture and lose eligibility for state contracts for five years.
Argument forThe restrictions could keep state contracts from going to covered businesses, with large forfeitures and a five-year contracting ban for violations.
Argument againstAgencies could face fewer choices if a needed item comes from a covered business and no approved exception allows the contract.
More detail
State agencies could not contract with a prohibited business entity. Covered businesses include certain entities based in or controlled by listed foreign adversaries, their subsidiaries, and businesses that sell those entities’ final products to a state agency. Before a contract is valid or enforceable, the contractor must certify in writing that it is not prohibited and has made every effort to ensure the goods or services do not come from a prohibited entity. If a contractor later becomes prohibited, it must promptly notify the agency in writing. The agency may end the contract and seek legal remedies.
The Department of Administration could approve an otherwise prohibited contract. The exception applies to a contract with a state agency that would otherwise be prohibited. The state agency must not be able to obtain the goods or services through other reasonable means. The harm to the state from not making the contract must outweigh the public interest served by the prohibition. The Department of Administration must approve the contract.
The Department of Administration would investigate complaints and determine violations; violators would face forfeitures and a five-year state contracting ban. The forfeiture and contracting ban apply to a person the department determines violated the contracting rules. Anyone may file a complaint on a form set by the department, and the department must investigate each complaint. A person found to have violated the rules would owe the greatest of $250,000, twice the value of the contract bid or proposal, or the total financial losses any state suffered because of the violation. The attorney general may bring a court action to enforce the section. The five-year contracting ban would run from the department’s determination that a violation occurred.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- May 13Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82Latest
- May 12Placed on calendar 5-12-2026 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)
- Apr 3Report vetoed by the Governor Tony Evers on 4-3-2026Major
- Apr 2Presented to the Governor on 4-2-2026To Governor
- Mar 23Report correctly enrolled on 3-23-2026Minor
- Mar 18Received from Senate concurred inMinor
- Mar 17Ordered immediately messaged
- Mar 17Read a third time and concurred inPassed Senate
- Mar 17Rules suspended to give bill its third reading
- Mar 17Ordered to a third readingMinor
- Mar 17Read a second timeMinor
- Mar 16Placed on calendar 3-17-2026 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Vote recorded Public hearing requirement waived by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 18 (1m), Ayes 3, Noes 2. Result: pass.Upper
- Mar 16Public hearing requirement waived by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 18 (1m), Ayes 3, Noes 2
- Feb 12Available for scheduling
- Vote recorded Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs, Ayes 3, Noes 2. Result: pass.Upper
- Feb 12Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs, Ayes 3, Noes 2Minor
- Feb 12Executive action taken
- Jan 26Read first time and referred to committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal AffairsMinor
- Jan 22Received from AssemblyMinor
- Vote recorded PASSAGE. Result: pass.Lower
- Jan 22Ordered immediately messaged
- Jan 22Read a third time and passed, Ayes 53, Noes 44Passed Assembly
- Jan 22Rules suspended
- Jan 22Ordered to a third readingMinor
- Jan 22Assembly Amendment 1 adoptedMajor
- Jan 22Read a second timeMinor
- Jan 21Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative DallmanMinor
- Jan 20Placed on calendar 1-22-2026 by Committee on Rules
- Jan 14Referred to committee on RulesMinor
- Vote recorded Report passage recommended by Committee on State Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 3. Result: pass.Lower
- Jan 14Report passage recommended by Committee on State Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 3Minor
- Jan 7Executive action taken
- 2025
- Dec 10Public hearing held
- Dec 5Fiscal estimate receivedMinor
- Dec 1Fiscal estimate receivedMinor
- Nov 19Read first time and referred to Committee on State AffairsMinor
- Nov 19Introduced by Representatives Dallman, Behnke, Callahan, Dittrich, Green, Knodl, Kreibich, Kurtz, Moses, Murphy, Mursau, O'Connor, Piwowarczyk and Wichgers; cosponsored by Senators Testin, Jacque, Marklein, Nass and TomczykIntroduced
Government & Ethics