Adfin wants to fix bill payments for sole traders and small companies

Image Credits: Adfin

Meet Adfin, a new U.K.-based fintech startup that wants to help companies get their invoices paid — whatever it takes. Founded by two fintech experts, the company is starting with a problem and building a product around it. The problem is that it’s still hard to get paid if you’re set up as a sole trader or even a small company that doesn’t have a person dedicated to administrative tasks.

The process of getting paid for work for small businesses and sole traders like lawyers, accountants, consultants, tradespeople and so on typically entails sending the customer an invoice with your bank information. But you also have to track incoming payments and reconcile them to make sure you’ve received the money. Add to that, the experience isn’t that great for your customers.

For returning customers, you can try and set up a direct debit. But it may be hard for these sorts of businesses to convince their customers to let them withdraw money directly from their bank account. As for card payments, it often leads to high processing fees.

“The average consumer only makes 21 e-commerce purchases a year,” Adfin co-founder and CEO Tom Pope (pictured left) told TechCrunch. He previously worked for Tink, the open banking startup that was acquired by Visa. “All the buzz has been around e-commerce, but for your average legal practice or accountancy firm, their payments are stuck in the ’90s — bank transfers, card payments taken over the phone, paying really high fees.”

Adfin argues sole traders and small businesses don’t necessarily want to think about the most appropriate payment method. Instead, they just want to get paid and move on. At its core, the startup is building an invoice management platform and a payment platform to simplify critical admin and make getting paid less of a headache.

After uploading invoices to Adfin, its customers can use the platform to send payment requests via email, WhatsApp or SMS.

Adfin then automatically decides the payment method to display, depending on various factors, such as whether it’s a returning customer, a small invoice, etc. The company supports pay-by-bank using open banking and card payments, including Apple Pay and Google Pay. If the customer doesn’t pay right away, Adfin automates sending reminders too.

“Our customers are not payments nerds. They don’t have to be payments nerds. And I think the fact that they are not payments nerds has probably led to them being a little bit taken advantage of, if I’m honest,” Pope said.

“With Adfin, we just offer you payments. We get you paid and we will handle the payment mix. And obviously, it’s in our interest to be trying to get your success rate as high as possible and your costs as low as possible,” he added.

As Adfin acts as a central repository for all your invoices, companies can check all pending invoices and see if they’ve been paid or not. Adfin currently charges 1% per payment. It doesn’t matter which payment method was used; it’s always going to be 1%.

“As a merchant, everybody wants to get paid as fast as possible, as cheap as possible and with less efforts from your side,” Adfin co-founder and CTO Ciprian Diaconasu (pictured right) told TechCrunch. He previously spent 12 years working for Mambu, a cloud-based banking platform. “So it’s a bunch of capabilities that we’re building that just maximize the timing when you get paid and minimize the cost of that.”

The startup has already raised $4.9 million in seed funds, co-led by Index Ventures and Visionaries Club. Several business angels also participated in the round, including Thijn Lamers (Adyen founding team); Guillaume Pousaz (Checkout.com founder); Eugene Danilkis (Mambu co-founder); Ferdinand Meyer (Moss co-founder); David de Picciotto (Pledge co-founder); Maximilian Eber and Maik Wehmeyer (Taktile co-founders); and Josef Bovet (Tiller co-founder).

Bill Weber out as CEO of Firefly Aerospace

Firefly Alpha rocket

Image Credits: Firefly (opens in a new window)

Bill Weber is out as chief executive at Firefly Aerospace, following a nearly two-year stint in the role, the maker of launch vehicles, lunar landers and orbital vehicles announced late Wednesday.

While the board initiates a search for a new CEO, board member Peter Schumacher will serve as interim CEO, the company said in a statement published on its website. A Transition Committee will assist in the search. 

Weber joined the company after it was acquired by private equity giant AE Industrial Partners in February 2022. A longtime aerospace executive, Weber previously served as CEO of KeyW Corporation, an intelligence and analytics provider to U.S. defense and intelligence customers, and president of government services company XLA.  

The news of his departure comes just two days after Payload published a story that the company was investigating allegations of an inappropriate relationship between Weber and a female employee. At the time, a Firefly spokesperson reportedly told Payload that “our initial findings do not support any facts behind this speculation.”  

A spokesperson declined to specify whether Weber’s departure was related to this reported investigation, citing company policy. Weber did not immediately respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment. 

Firefly is one of a handful of companies looking to seize a greater share of the launch market from competitors like SpaceX and Rocket Lab with its small Alpha rocket. The company is also developing a lunar lander called Blue Ghost, which is due to launch for the first time later this year, and a suite of orbital transfer vehicles designed to increase in-space mobility for satellites. 

In May, Bloomberg reported that AEI and other backers were considering selling the Texas-based firm in a deal that would value the company at $1.5 billion. 

Controversial internet bill KOSA passed by Senate

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) has passed in the Senate after Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) pushed the internet bill to a vote.

Proposed in 2022, KOSA requires that online platforms take reasonable steps to protect users from harm, and could become the most significant children’s online safety legislation to take effect since COPPA. This “duty of care” would apply to large internet companies, like social media platforms, gaming networks and streaming services.

Under KOSA, platforms can be held legally accountable if they don’t prove they’re doing enough to protect minors from a long list of harms, including sexual exploitation, eating disorders, suicide, substances abuse and advertisements for age-restricted products like tobacco or gambling. These companies would have to disclose when and how they’re using personalized content recommendation algorithms, and give minors the option to opt out of data collection. On minors’ accounts, these companies would have to limit addictive features like autoplay, or ones that gamify engagement.

Despite its noble intentions to protect children, critics have expressed worries that the bill could be misused to enact surveillance and censorship. In order for platforms to determine which users are minors, they would have to use some sort of age verification system.

Among privacy advocates, age verification is frowned upon because it limits the ability to use the internet anonymously, which could endanger whistleblowers, human rights activists and people trying to flee dangerous situations, like victims of domestic abuse. These identity verification platforms could be vulnerable to hackers. Au10tix – a service used by X, TikTok, and Uber – left administrative credentials exposed online for over a year, which could have allowed cybercriminals to access people’s drivers’ licenses and social security numbers.

“Collecting ID online is fundamentally different – and more dangerous – than in-person ID checks in the physical world. Online ID checks are not just a momentary display – they require adults to upload data-rich, government-issued identifying documents to either the website or a third-party verifier, and create a potentially lasting record of their visit to the establishment,” said India McKinney, Director of Federal Affairs at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in a statement.

Since KOSA was introduced in 2022, some human rights groups have been worried about the potential for the bill to be weaponized against LGBTQ+ youth.

In a previous version of KOSA, activists pushed back against a part of the bill that would give individual state attorneys general the ability to decide what online content is appropriate for minors to access. This ability could potentially be weaponized against marginalized kids in a time when LGBTQ+ rights are already being attacked on the state level. As of a February edit to KOSA, the bill now gives the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the right to enforce the legislation. While some LGBTQ+ activist groups like the Trevor Project and GLAAD backed down after these changes, some advocates remain concerned.

“Under a potential Trump administration, the FTC could easily use KOSA to target content related to gender affirming care, abortion, racial justice, climate change, or anything else that Project 2025 infused agency is willing to claim makes kids ‘depressed’ or ‘anxious,’” said Evan Greer, Director of Fight for the Future.

Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who introduced the bill alongside Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), has dismissed these concerns.

Jamie Susskind, Senator Blackburn’s legislative director, said in a statement, “KOSA will not – nor was it designed to – target or censor any individual or community.”

Not all legislators are convinced, though. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) explained in a statement why he does not support KOSA.

“Unfortunately, KOSA’s improvements, while constructive, remain insufficient,” he said. “I fear this bill could be used to sue services that offer privacy-enhancing technologies like encryption or anonymity features that are essential to young people’s ability to communicate securely and privately without being spied on by predators online. I also take seriously concerns voiced by the American Civil Liberties Union, Fight for the Future, and LGBTQ+ teens and advocates that a future MAGA administration could still use this bill to pressure companies to censor gay, trans and reproductive health information.”

Among tech companies, KOSA has picked up steam. Microsoft, X and Snap all came out in support of the bill, even though the requirements may be challenging for the companies to meet.

KOSA would have to pass in both the Senate and the House of Representatives before it heads to President Joe Biden’s desk, who has indicated that he supports the bill and would sign it into law. But the House has its own version of KOSA and may not be friendly to the bill as written by the Senate. (This paragraph originally stated that the bill had passed back and forth with amendments, which is incorrect; it is more accurate to say there are versions competing in parallel.)

“With vocal opposition from the chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, House leadership, and even the youngest member of the House, Maxwell Frost, KOSA currently has no path to becoming law,” Greer said.

But even if the House and Executive act swiftly to turn the bill into law, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has maintained that the Kids Online Safety Act is unconstitutional.

“It’s an unconstitutional censorship bill that would give the Federal Trade Commission, and potentially state Attorneys General, the power to restrict protected online speech they find objectionable,” said McKinney. That means KOSA would likely face legal challenges from day one.

OpenAI's opposition to California's AI bill 'makes no sense,' says state senator

California Senator Scott Wiener's bill SB 1047 tries to prevent an AI disaster.

Image Credits: Bryce Durbin

OpenAI broke its silence on California’s most controversial AI bill on Tuesday, officially expressing opposition in a letter to California state Senator Scott Wiener and Governor Gavin Newsom. The AI giant argued that SB 1047, introduced by Wiener in February, would stifle innovation and push talent out of California — a position Wiener quickly replied “makes no sense.”

“The AI revolution is only just beginning, and California’s unique status as the global leader in AI is fueling the state’s economic dynamism,” said OpenAI’s Chief Strategy Officer Jason Kwon in the letter obtained by TechCrunch. “SB 1047 would threaten that growth, slow the pace of innovation, and lead California’s world-class engineers and entrepreneurs to leave the state in search of greater opportunity elsewhere. Given those risks, we must protect America’s AI edge with a set of federal policies — rather than state ones — that can provide clarity and certainty for AI labs and developers while also preserving public safety.”

The company joins broad local pushback against SB 1047 on Tuesday, adding its take to those of trade groups representing Google and Meta, investment firm Andreessen Horowitz, prominent AI researchers and California Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Zoe Lofgren.

An OpenAI spokesperson says the company has been in discussions with Senator Wiener’s office about the bill for months. However, Senator Wiener says the AI lab’s argument that SB 1047 would push AI companies out of California is “tired.”

Wiener pointed out in a press release on Wednesday that OpenAI doesn’t actually “criticize a single provision of the bill.” He says the company’s claim that companies will leave California because of SB 1047 “makes no sense given that SB 1047 is not limited to companies headquartered in California.” As we’ve previously reported, SB 1047 affects all AI model developers that do business in California and meet certain size thresholds.

In other words, whether an AI company was based in San Jose or San Antonio, if they let Californians use their products, they would be subject to these restrictions. (An example of an effective law with this type of scope is Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act.)

That said, Bloomberg reports that OpenAI has put conversations about expanding its San Francisco offices on hold amid concerns about California’s regulatory landscape. OpenAI has had an office in San Francisco’s Mission district for years, and recently moved into a new office in the city’s Mission Bay region, previously occupied by Uber.

OpenAI declined to comment further on those real estate discussions.

“Instead of criticizing what the bill actually does, OpenAI argues this issue should be left to Congress,” said Wiener in the statement. “As I’ve stated repeatedly, I agree that ideally Congress would handle this. However, Congress has not done so, and we are skeptical Congress will do so.” Tech companies have taken similar stances regarding privacy laws in the past, calling for federal regulation knowing it will be slow to come, and California ended up stepping up there as well.

OpenAI has endorsed several federal bills regulating AI models, one of which authorizes the United States AI Safety Institute as a federal body that sets standards and guidelines for AI models. From a high level, that’s fairly similar to what SB 1047’s Board of Frontier Models is supposed to do.

California lawmakers significantly amended SB 1047 to give Governor Newsom a less controversial AI bill to sign, but they’ve failed to convince Silicon Valley’s most important AI lab the bill is worth passing.

SB 1047 is now headed for a final vote in California’s Assembly and could land on Governor Newsom’s desk by the end of the month. The California governor has not indicated his feelings on SB 1047, but he’d likely face a broad industry backlash if he signs it.

Controversial internet bill KOSA passed by Senate

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) has passed in the Senate after Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) pushed the internet bill to a vote.

Proposed in 2022, KOSA requires that online platforms take reasonable steps to protect users from harm, and could become the most significant children’s online safety legislation to take effect since COPPA. This “duty of care” would apply to large internet companies, like social media platforms, gaming networks and streaming services.

Under KOSA, platforms can be held legally accountable if they don’t prove they’re doing enough to protect minors from a long list of harms, including sexual exploitation, eating disorders, suicide, substances abuse and advertisements for age-restricted products like tobacco or gambling. These companies would have to disclose when and how they’re using personalized content recommendation algorithms, and give minors the option to opt out of data collection. On minors’ accounts, these companies would have to limit addictive features like autoplay, or ones that gamify engagement.

Despite its noble intentions to protect children, critics have expressed worries that the bill could be misused to enact surveillance and censorship. In order for platforms to determine which users are minors, they would have to use some sort of age verification system.

Among privacy advocates, age verification is frowned upon because it limits the ability to use the internet anonymously, which could endanger whistleblowers, human rights activists and people trying to flee dangerous situations, like victims of domestic abuse. These identity verification platforms could be vulnerable to hackers. Au10tix – a service used by X, TikTok, and Uber – left administrative credentials exposed online for over a year, which could have allowed cybercriminals to access people’s drivers’ licenses and social security numbers.

“Collecting ID online is fundamentally different – and more dangerous – than in-person ID checks in the physical world. Online ID checks are not just a momentary display – they require adults to upload data-rich, government-issued identifying documents to either the website or a third-party verifier, and create a potentially lasting record of their visit to the establishment,” said India McKinney, Director of Federal Affairs at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in a statement.

Since KOSA was introduced in 2022, some human rights groups have been worried about the potential for the bill to be weaponized against LGBTQ+ youth.

In a previous version of KOSA, activists pushed back against a part of the bill that would give individual state attorneys general the ability to decide what online content is appropriate for minors to access. This ability could potentially be weaponized against marginalized kids in a time when LGBTQ+ rights are already being attacked on the state level. As of a February edit to KOSA, the bill now gives the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the right to enforce the legislation. While some LGBTQ+ activist groups like the Trevor Project and GLAAD backed down after these changes, some advocates remain concerned.

“Under a potential Trump administration, the FTC could easily use KOSA to target content related to gender affirming care, abortion, racial justice, climate change, or anything else that Project 2025 infused agency is willing to claim makes kids ‘depressed’ or ‘anxious,’” said Evan Greer, Director of Fight for the Future.

Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who introduced the bill alongside Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), has dismissed these concerns.

Jamie Susskind, Senator Blackburn’s legislative director, said in a statement, “KOSA will not – nor was it designed to – target or censor any individual or community.”

Not all legislators are convinced, though. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) explained in a statement why he does not support KOSA.

“Unfortunately, KOSA’s improvements, while constructive, remain insufficient,” he said. “I fear this bill could be used to sue services that offer privacy-enhancing technologies like encryption or anonymity features that are essential to young people’s ability to communicate securely and privately without being spied on by predators online. I also take seriously concerns voiced by the American Civil Liberties Union, Fight for the Future, and LGBTQ+ teens and advocates that a future MAGA administration could still use this bill to pressure companies to censor gay, trans and reproductive health information.”

Among tech companies, KOSA has picked up steam. Microsoft, X and Snap all came out in support of the bill, even though the requirements may be challenging for the companies to meet.

KOSA would have to pass in both the Senate and the House of Representatives before it heads to President Joe Biden’s desk, who has indicated that he supports the bill and would sign it into law. But the bill has bounced between Senate and House with amendments, and now returns to the latter in its current form (to likely opposition, or potentially amendment and another return to the Senate).

“With vocal opposition from the chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, House leadership, and even the youngest member of the House, Maxwell Frost, KOSA currently has no path to becoming law,” Greer said.

But even if the House and Executive act swiftly to turn the bill into law, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has maintained that the Kids Online Safety Act is unconstitutional.

“It’s an unconstitutional censorship bill that would give the Federal Trade Commission, and potentially state Attorneys General, the power to restrict protected online speech they find objectionable,” said McKinney. That means KOSA would likely face legal challenges from day one.

Adfin wants to fix bill payments for sole traders and small companies

Image Credits: Adfin

Meet Adfin, a new U.K.-based fintech startup that wants to help companies get their invoices paid — whatever it takes. Founded by two fintech experts, the company is starting with a problem and building a product around it. The problem is that it’s still hard to get paid if you’re set up as a sole trader or even a small company that doesn’t have a person dedicated to administrative tasks.

The process of getting paid for work for small businesses and sole traders like lawyers, accountants, consultants, tradespeople and so on typically entails sending the customer an invoice with your bank information. But you also have to track incoming payments and reconcile them to make sure you’ve received the money. Add to that, the experience isn’t that great for your customers.

For returning customers, you can try and set up a direct debit. But it may be hard for these sorts of businesses to convince their customers to let them withdraw money directly from their bank account. As for card payments, it often leads to high processing fees.

“The average consumer only makes 21 e-commerce purchases a year,” Adfin co-founder and CEO Tom Pope (pictured left) told TechCrunch. He previously worked for Tink, the open banking startup that was acquired by Visa. “All the buzz has been around e-commerce, but for your average legal practice or accountancy firm, their payments are stuck in the ’90s — bank transfers, card payments taken over the phone, paying really high fees.”

Adfin argues sole traders and small businesses don’t necessarily want to think about the most appropriate payment method. Instead, they just want to get paid and move on. At its core, the startup is building an invoice management platform and a payment platform to simplify critical admin and make getting paid less of a headache.

After uploading invoices to Adfin, its customers can use the platform to send payment requests via email, WhatsApp or SMS.

Adfin then automatically decides the payment method to display, depending on various factors, such as whether it’s a returning customer, a small invoice, etc. The company supports pay-by-bank using open banking and card payments, including Apple Pay and Google Pay. If the customer doesn’t pay right away, Adfin automates sending reminders too.

“Our customers are not payments nerds. They don’t have to be payments nerds. And I think the fact that they are not payments nerds has probably led to them being a little bit taken advantage of, if I’m honest,” Pope said.

“With Adfin, we just offer you payments. We get you paid and we will handle the payment mix. And obviously, it’s in our interest to be trying to get your success rate as high as possible and your costs as low as possible,” he added.

As Adfin acts as a central repository for all your invoices, companies can check all pending invoices and see if they’ve been paid or not. Adfin currently charges 1% per payment. It doesn’t matter which payment method was used; it’s always going to be 1%.

“As a merchant, everybody wants to get paid as fast as possible, as cheap as possible and with less efforts from your side,” Adfin co-founder and CTO Ciprian Diaconasu (pictured right) told TechCrunch. He previously spent 12 years working for Mambu, a cloud-based banking platform. “So it’s a bunch of capabilities that we’re building that just maximize the timing when you get paid and minimize the cost of that.”

The startup has already raised $4.9 million in seed funds, co-led by Index Ventures and Visionaries Club. Several business angels also participated in the round, including Thijn Lamers (Adyen founding team); Guillaume Pousaz (Checkout.com founder); Eugene Danilkis (Mambu co-founder); Ferdinand Meyer (Moss co-founder); David de Picciotto (Pledge co-founder); Maximilian Eber and Maik Wehmeyer (Taktile co-founders); and Josef Bovet (Tiller co-founder).

Bill Weber out as CEO of Firefly Aerospace

Firefly Alpha rocket

Image Credits: Firefly (opens in a new window)

Bill Weber is out as chief executive at Firefly Aerospace, following a nearly two-year stint in the role, the maker of launch vehicles, lunar landers and orbital vehicles announced late Wednesday.

While the board initiates a search for a new CEO, board member Peter Schumacher will serve as interim CEO, the company said in a statement published on its website. A Transition Committee will assist in the search. 

Weber joined the company after it was acquired by private equity giant AE Industrial Partners in February 2022. A longtime aerospace executive, Weber previously served as CEO of KeyW Corporation, an intelligence and analytics provider to U.S. defense and intelligence customers, and president of government services company XLA.  

The news of his departure comes just two days after Payload published a story that the company was investigating allegations of an inappropriate relationship between Weber and a female employee. At the time, a Firefly spokesperson reportedly told Payload that “our initial findings do not support any facts behind this speculation.”  

A spokesperson declined to specify whether Weber’s departure was related to this reported investigation, citing company policy. Weber did not immediately respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment. 

Firefly is one of a handful of companies looking to seize a greater share of the launch market from competitors like SpaceX and Rocket Lab with its small Alpha rocket. The company is also developing a lunar lander called Blue Ghost, which is due to launch for the first time later this year, and a suite of orbital transfer vehicles designed to increase in-space mobility for satellites. 

In May, Bloomberg reported that AEI and other backers were considering selling the Texas-based firm in a deal that would value the company at $1.5 billion. 

Right to repair bill targeting parts pairing passes Oregon House

Samsung Self-repair kit

Image Credits: Samsung

The Oregon House this week passed a right to repair bill by nearly a 3-to-1 margin at 42 votes to 13. If signed into law, the northwestern state wouldn’t be the first in the union to pass a right to repair bill (more like the fourth), but the legislation contains aggressive language that goes beyond those on the books. As a result, manufacturers are split.

Google gave the bill a full-throated endorsement back in January. An executive for the software giant called Oregon’s “a compelling model for other states to follow,” in an open letter.

Apple, which had previously penned an open letter in support of California’s legislation, has been less enthusiastic. It’s a stark contrast, particularly the similarities between the bills. In fact, Oregon based much of their legislation on the one penned by their neighbor to the south. The company insists that — as with the California law — it’s mostly in favor with Oregon’s approach.

“Apple agrees with the vast majority of Senate Bill 1596,” John Perry, Apple senior manager, Secure System Design, said in testimony to state lawmakers last month. “I have met with Senator [Janeen] Sollman several times and appreciate her willingness to engage in an open dialogue. Senate Bill 1596 is a step forward in making sure that the people of Oregon, myself included, can get their devices repaired easily and cost effectively.”

Apple’s big sticking point with the bill comes down to what is known as “parts pairing.” The practice requires the use of proprietary components in order for the repaired device to function as intended. Perry cited biometrics as a particular source of concern, noting:

Under SB 1596’s current parts pairing wording, Apple could be required to allow third-party biometric sensors to work in our devices without any form of authentication, which could lead to unauthorized access to an individual’s personal data. This would be an incredible disservice to consumers not just in Oregon, but worldwide, as we do not have the ability to restrict such provisions regionally.

The practice has, however, long been a cause of concern among repair advocates. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) has petitioned the FTC for a ban of what it calls “one of the most pernicious obstacles to right to repair.”

OPIRG state director Charlie Fisher adds, “I’m proud that we’re moving forward on an innovation even more critical than a new gadget: the right to fix our electronic devices. By eliminating manufacturer restrictions, the Right to Repair will make it easier for Oregonians to keep their personal electronics running. That will conserve precious natural resources and prevent waste. It’s a refreshing alternative to a ‘throwaway’ system that treats everything as disposable.”

In an interview with TechCrunch last month, Senator Sollman expressed frustration over attempts to communicate with Apple during the bill-crafting process.

“People were coming to me with potential changes, and I felt like I was playing the game of operator, like I was being the one that was having to bring forward the changes, and not Apple themselves,” she told TechCrunch. “That’s very frustrating. We entertained many of the changes that Apple brought forward that are in the California bill. There were two remaining items that were concerning to them. We’ve addressed one of them, because that was providing some ambiguity to the bill. And so I think the one part that . . . they will stand on the hill on is the parts pairing.”

The bill has received bipartisan support in both the state Senate and House. It is currently headed to the governor’s desk, where it may be signed into law.

TikTok logo encircled by a "prohibited" symbol

US House passes revised bill to ban TikTok or force sale

TikTok logo encircled by a "prohibited" symbol

Image Credits: TechCrunch

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill this afternoon that would require TikTok owner ByteDance to sell the popular social media app or see it banned in the United States.

Efforts to ban TikTok go back to the Trump administration, but the issue has been revived in recent months. The House already passed a similar bill in March — a bill that the Senate showed little interest in taking up. This new version expands the window for ByteDance to sell TikTok to nine months (compared to six months in the previous bill) and gives the president the ability to grant a single, additional 90-day extension.

It sounds like the change has satisfied some Senate skeptics. Senate Commerce chair Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) told reporters Thursday that she’d suggested the extension, as it “assures that divestiture will more likely happen.”

The new bill was passed 360-58, with strong support from a majority of both Republicans and Democrats. It’s part of a larger package that includes foreign aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, and was likely included as a way for House Speaker Mike Johnson to attract more conservative support.

The Senate could take up the package this coming week, and President Joe Biden has said he supports the bill and will sign it. If that happens, TikTok is expected to challenge the bill in court.

Biden’s administration has been briefing lawmakers on what it says are the national security threats posed by the app — both as a source of data on American users for the Chinese government and as a channel for that same government to push propaganda to Americans. On the other side of the aisle, House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas) described the app today as “a spy balloon in Americans’ phones” used to “surveil and exploit America’s personal information.”

When it became clear a TikTok bill was back on the table earlier this week, the company posted a statement arguing that the House is “using the cover of important foreign and humanitarian assistance to once again jam through a ban bill that would trample the free speech rights of 170 million Americans, devastate 7 million businesses, and shutter a platform.”

Civil liberties groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union and have also opposed previous attempts to ban the app.