H.R. 1869 (119th)Bill Overview

Protecting American Industry and Labor from International Trade Crimes Act of 2025

Crime and Law Enforcement|Crime and Law Enforcement
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
Mar 5, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

Creates a dedicated task force/program within the DOJ Criminal Division to investigate and prosecute "trade-related crimes," defined to include evasion of duties, smuggling, trade-based money laundering, and related offenses under a list of federal criminal statutes. The Attorney General must staff and coordinate the effort, train and partner with DHS components and foreign partners, and submit annual reports to relevant congressional committees.

Why people may split

Progressives stress worker protections and civil-rights safeguards

Watch point

Modest, bipartisan administrative bill with small authorization; likely attractive to many members, but committee and scheduling still required.

Creates a dedicated task force/program within the DOJ Criminal Division to investigate and prosecute "trade-related crimes," defined to include evasion of duties, smuggling, trade-based money laundering, and related offenses under a list of federal criminal statutes.

The Attorney General must staff and coordinate the effort, train and partner with DHS components and foreign partners, and submit annual reports to relevant congressional committees.

The Act authorizes $20 million for FY2026, with at least 80% reserved for the Criminal Division’s prosecutorial effort.

Passage45/100

Modest cost and bipartisan technical focus increase viability, but must secure appropriations and survive Senate procedural hurdles.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention30/100

Progressives stress worker protections and civil-rights safeguards

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agenciesFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesLikely increases federal investigations and prosecutions of import/export-related criminal activity.
  • Potential benefitMay deter underpayment of duties, smuggling, and trade-based money laundering harming U.S. businesses.
  • Federal agenciesCreates new federal prosecutorial and support positions within the Criminal Division.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesAdds federal enforcement activity that could increase compliance costs for importers and brokers.
  • Potential burdenRisks duplication of duties and potential jurisdictional friction with existing enforcement agencies.
  • Potential burdenExpands prosecutorial authority in trade contexts, raising civil liberties and due process concerns for defendants.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives stress worker protections and civil-rights safeguards
Progressive80%

Generally favorable because the bill increases enforcement against illegal trade practices that can harm workers, public health, and domestic industries.

Supports DOJ capacity-building and interagency training but worries about priority-setting, civil liberties, and ensuring enforcement protects, not penalizes, vulnerable workers or communities.

Wants strong oversight and transparency on how funds are used and which cases are prioritized.

Leans supportive
Centrist75%

Likely supportive overall as a pragmatic measure to close enforcement gaps and improve interagency coordination on import/export crime.

Wants clear performance metrics, fiscal oversight, and avoidance of duplicative activity with HSI/CBP.

Views the authorized $20 million as a modest down payment that should be evaluated by the required annual reports.

Leans supportive
Conservative65%

Generally supportive of tougher enforcement against smuggling, tariff evasion, and trade-based crime that harm American industry and jobs.

Concerned about expanding DOJ bureaucracy, new recurring staffing, and federal spending.

Wants limits on growth of prosecutorial power and assurances the program targets criminal enterprises, not lawful trade activity.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood45/100

Modest cost and bipartisan technical focus increase viability, but must secure appropriations and survive Senate procedural hurdles.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether appropriations will be provided after authorization
  • Absent CBO/score in bill text to show fiscal details
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives stress worker protections and civil-rights safeguards

Modest cost and bipartisan technical focus increase viability, but must secure appropriations and survive Senate procedural hurdles.

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Protecting American Industry and Labor from International Trad…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis