S 71 Vermont Senate · 2025-2026 Regular Session

An act relating to consumer data privacy and online surveillance

Vermont's S.71, the Vermont Data Privacy Act, creates new rules for businesses handling personal data of Vermont residents. It requires businesses to obtain clear, affirmative consent (not dark patterns or broad terms) before collecting personal data, with special protections for sensitive information like reproductive health, gender-affirming care, and precise location data (within 1,750 feet). The law prohibits using geofencing to track individuals near sensitive locations like abortion clinics or mental health facilities. It directly affects all businesses processing personal data of Vermont residents, including tech companies, retailers, and health services, by mandating transparency and restricting how they can use or share consumer information.
Bill status signed all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2025
Committee Review
May 2026
Senate Passage
May 2026
House Passage
May 2026
Signed into Law
May 2026
Introduced Feb 18, 2025 Signed May 29, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 5 comparisons

What changed between versions

As Passed by Both House and Senate (OfficialOpens in a new window) As Passed by Both House and Senate (UnofficialOpens in a new window) · 16 edits
MAJOR
This is a comparison between the official and unofficial versions of Vermont S.71 (2026 session), a comprehensive data privacy and online surveillance protection law. The unofficial version reflects significant substantive changes from the original introduced bill, including revised applicability thresholds, restructured definitions, simplified consent requirements, a narrowed sensitive data category, a redefined targeted advertising provision, and a new 'greatest protection' controlling-law clause. These changes represent a negotiated compromise that both expands and contracts the bill's reach in different areas.
SCOPE

Applicability thresholds changed from 25,000 consumers (or 12,500 with over 25 percent revenue from data sales) to three new tiers: 35,000 consumers for general personal data, 3,000 consumers for sensitive data, or 3,000 consumers whose data is offered for sale. Payment-transaction-only data is now excluded from all thresholds.

A new 'controlling law' provision states that in any conflict between this subchapter and other laws (including the Vermont Age-Appropriate Design Code Act), the law providing the greatest protection for consumer privacy rights controls.

The HIPAA exemption was restructured from a blanket exclusion of 'protected health information under HIPAA' to more specific exclusions: covered entities that are not hybrid entities, health care components of hybrid entities, and business associates. This narrows the exemption's scope.

DEFINITION

The consent definition was substantially simplified, removing detailed requirements about clear and conspicuous disclosure, description of processing purpose, distinguishing between acts, stating data categories, and accessibility to consumers with disabilities. It now only requires a 'clear affirmative act signifying a consumer's freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous agreement.'

The sensitive data category was significantly narrowed. Removed items include income level or indebtedness, union membership, status as victim of a crime, tax return information, keystrokes, driving behavior, and cross-device online activity tracking. Added 'sex life' and 'status as nonbinary or transgender.'

Targeted advertising was completely redefined to focus on cross-site and cross-application tracking (personal data obtained from nonaffiliated websites or applications to predict preferences), replacing the broader prior definition. New exclusions cover own-website activity, current search context, consumer requests, and measurement-only processing.

Precise geolocation data radius was reduced from 1,850 feet to 1,750 feet, and the definition was reworded to focus on 'directly identifies the specific location' rather than 'reveals the past or present physical location.'

The consumer exclusion was expanded to include individuals acting in an 'employment context' and as an 'employee,' broadening who is excluded from consumer protections.

New definitions added for 'collect/collected/collection,' 'derived data,' 'pseudonymous data,' 'nonprofit organization,' and 'person.'

Several definitions were removed entirely: 'contextual advertising,' 'large data holder' (100,000 consumer threshold), 'marketing measurement,' 'unique persistent identifier,' 'victim services organization,' 'independent trust company,' 'investment adviser,' 'qualified service organization,' and 'health care component.'

Neural data was redefined from 'information collected through biosensors that could be processed to infer or predict mental states' to 'any information generated by measuring the activity of an individual's central nervous system,' which is broader in scope.

The processor definition now includes 'collects or processes' (previously only 'processes') and removed federal, state, tribal, or local government entities as a category of entity on whose behalf processing can occur.

The biometric data definition changed from data that 'allow or confirm the unique identification of the consumer' to data 'collected on or used to identify a specific consumer,' shifting the focus from capability to actual use.

The gender-affirming health data definition was simplified, removing detailed sub-categories about precise geolocation for accessing services, research efforts, and data derived from nonhealth information.

The 'sale of personal data' definition changed from exchange 'to a third party' to exchange 'with a third party,' and the consent-based disclosure exclusion was reworded to remove the phrase 'with the consumer's consent.'

REQUIREMENT

The deidentified data provision now requires recipients to 'comply with all provisions of this subchapter' rather than merely satisfying the specific deidentification criteria, imposing a broader obligation on downstream recipients.

Floor votes · Senate Mar 26, 2025 · House May 26, 2026

How they voted

300
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 31
Mar 26, 2025
D Democratic17
16 Yea 1
94% Yea
R Republican14
14 Yea
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
47
Key actions
18
Committee
11
Amendments
8
May 29, 2026
Signed into law
Senate Message: Signed by Governor June 16, 2026
executive
May 29, 2026
Signed into law
Signed by Governor on June 16, 2026
executive
May 29, 2026
Introduced
Senate Message: House proposal of amendment concurred in
lower
May 29, 2026
Upper · Passed
Rules suspended & messaged to House forthwith, on motion of Senator Lyons
upper
May 29, 2026
Upper · Passed
As passed by Senate and House
upper
May 29, 2026
Introduced
House proposal of amendment concurred in
upper
May 29, 2026
Introduced
House proposal of amendment; text
upper
May 29, 2026
Introduced
House proposal of amendment
upper
May 28, 2026
Introduced
House proposal of amendment
upper
May 27, 2026
Upper · Passed
House message: House passed bill in concurrence with proposal(s) of amendment
upper
May 26, 2026
Introduced
Read third time and passed in concurrence with proposal of amendment
lower
May 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Which was agreed to on a Roll Call Passed -- Needed 66 of 132 to Pass -- Yeas = 129, Nays = 3
lower
May 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Report of Committee on Commerce and Economic Development agreed to
lower
May 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Rep. Greer of Bennington, Cole of Hartford, Galfetti of Barre Town, Headrick of Burlington, Lipsky of Stowe, Logan of Burlington, McCann of Montpelier, Sibilia of Dover, and Tomlinson of Winooski moved to amend the report of the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development, which was disagreed to
lower
May 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Rep. Priestley of Bradford reported for the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development
lower
May 26, 2026
Introduced
Notice Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
lower
Apr 1, 2025
Introduced
Read first time and referred to the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development
lower
Mar 26, 2025
Upper · Passed
Recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions agreed to on roll call, requested by Senator Beck, Passed -- Needed 15 of 29 to Pass -- Yeas = 29, Nays = 0
upper
Mar 26, 2025
Upper · Passed
Read 2nd time, reported favorably with recommendation of amendment by Senator Plunkett for Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 26, 2025
Upper · Passed
Favorable report with recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 26, 2025
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (30-0-1)
senate
Mar 25, 2025
Introduced
Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 21, 2025
Upper · Passed
Favorable report with recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 20, 2025
Upper · Passed
Favorable report with recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 19, 2025
Upper · Passed
Favorable report with recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Mar 18, 2025
Upper · Passed
Favorable report with recommendation of amendment by Committee on Institutions
upper
Feb 26, 2025
Upper · Passed
Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs relieved; bill committed to Committee on Institutions on motion of Senator Clarkson
upper
Feb 18, 2025
Introduced
Read 1st time & referred to Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs
upper
6 primary · 0 co-sponsors

Sponsors