The Privacy Act Modernization Act of 2025 updates federal privacy definitions, strengthens individual protections against misuse of personal data, and increases penalties for government violations of the 1974 Act.
Ron Wyden
Senator
OR
The Privacy Act Modernization Act of 2025 significantly updates the 1974 Privacy Act by modernizing definitions for records, PII, and processing to reflect current technology. It strengthens individual protections by requiring agencies to cite specific legal authority for data use and imposing stricter rules on data matching. Furthermore, the bill increases consequences for violations, allowing individuals to sue for damages (guaranteed minimum of $1,000) and upgrading criminal penalties for unauthorized access to a felony.
The Privacy Act Modernization Act of 2025 is aiming to drag the government’s data handling rules out of 1974 and into the digital age. This bill significantly updates how federal agencies can collect, use, and share your personal information, offering much tougher penalties and broader protections for everyone living in the U.S.
One of the biggest shifts is who is covered. Previously, the Privacy Act primarily protected citizens and permanent residents. This bill expands protection to every “natural person” physically present in the United States, regardless of immigration status. If you are here, your data is covered. On top of that, the definition of “Personally Identifiable Information” (PII) is finally catching up to 2025. PII now explicitly includes information linked to a device that can be traced back to you. So, that location data or those digital identifiers on your phone? They are now officially protected when a federal agency processes them (which means storing, analyzing, or using the data in almost any way).
If you’ve ever wondered why the government is keeping a record about you, this bill tightens the screws on agency transparency. Agencies now have to cite the specific legal authority—meaning the exact law or executive order—that allows them to collect your data for every purpose they list. No more vague justifications. Furthermore, when agencies share your data with another party, they must adhere to a “minimum necessary” standard, meaning they can only hand over the absolute least amount of information required for the task. This is a huge win for limiting data sprawl and ensuring that your information isn't floating around unnecessarily.
This is where the bill gets teeth. Right now, suing the government over a Privacy Act violation can be tough, and proving damages is often difficult. This bill changes that by allowing you to sue if an agency’s violation causes, or could reasonably cause, you harm. If the court finds the agency acted intentionally or willfully, you are guaranteed to receive at least $1,000 in damages, even if your actual financial loss was less than that. You also get reimbursed for court costs and attorney fees, which lowers the barrier to holding the government accountable. Think of it as a guaranteed minimum payout for the headache and hassle of a serious privacy breach.
For those inside or outside the government who illegally access or disclose your personal records, the penalties are skyrocketing. If someone commits a privacy crime to make money, gain personally, or cause malicious harm, it becomes a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Other existing criminal violations under the Act are also upgraded to felonies, carrying up to a $100,000 fine. This sends a clear signal that misusing sensitive government-held data is a serious crime, not just a slap on the wrist.
While these changes are significant, most of the new rules won’t kick in until two years after the bill becomes law. This gives federal agencies time to update their systems, rewrite their policies, and train staff—a massive undertaking, given the liability increase. However, Section 4 carves out an immediate exception for certain, specific government entities and personnel related to the "United States DOGE Service" and Executive Order 14158. For these groups, the new, stricter rules apply immediately. This creates a bifurcated system where some agencies face the full force of the new law right away, while the rest get a two-year grace period. It’s an interesting move that places immediate, heightened scrutiny on a very specific set of government operations.