Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill amends Section 628A of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1628a) to expand the kinds of nonpublic information Customs and Border Protection (CBP) may share about suspected intellectual property (IP) violations in trade. It explicitly allows CBP to provide nonpublic information that was generated by or obtained from online marketplaces, express consignment operators, freight forwarders, and other entities involved in sale or importation of merchandise.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties, due process, and protections for small sellers; conservatives emphasize stronger IP enforcement and property rights.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that clearly and specifically expands the categories of data that may be shared and enlarges the set of potential recipients under 19 U.S.C. 1628a.
The bill amends Section 628A of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1628a) to expand the kinds of nonpublic information Customs and Border Protection (CBP) may share about suspected intellectual property (IP) violations in trade.
It explicitly allows CBP to provide nonpublic information that was generated by or obtained from online marketplaces, express consignment operators, freight forwarders, and other entities involved in sale or importation of merchandise.
The bill also broadens recipients of shared information to include “any other party with an interest in the merchandise,” as determined appropriate by the CBP Commissioner.
On content grounds the measure is a modest, technical expansion of existing CBP disclosure authority that imposes little fiscal burden and could be framed as strengthening IP enforcement—factors that favor enactment. However, ambiguous language (e.g., 'any other party...as determined appropriate by the Commissioner') and absence of explicit privacy or commercial-confidentiality safeguards create potential stakeholder pushback that could slow or alter the measure before final enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that clearly and specifically expands the categories of data that may be shared and enlarges the set of potential recipients under 19 U.S.C. 1628a. It sets a clear administrative authorization but omits procedural safeguards, definitions, fiscal acknowledgment, and accountability mechanisms that would normally accompany an operational enlargement of data-sharing authority.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties, due process, and protections for small sellers; conservatives emphasize stronger IP enforcement and property rights.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties, due process, and protections for small sellers; conservatives emphasize stronger IP enforcement and property rights.
A mainstream progressive would see the bill as improving IP enforcement capacity but would be cautious about expanded government access to and dissemination of nonpublic commercial data.
They would welcome measures that protect workers and legitimate businesses from counterfeiting, but worry about civil liberties, privacy, and due-process protections for small sellers who might be wrongly flagged.
They would want stronger safeguards, transparency, and remedies for affected parties before giving clear support.
A pragmatic moderate would view the bill as a reasonable, targeted adjustment to help CBP and rights holders combat widespread counterfeiting and other IP violations using information sources that already exist.
They would support stronger enforcement so long as it includes practical safeguards to protect trade facilitation, business confidentiality, and due process.
Their support would depend on implementation details, oversight, and minimal disruptions to legitimate commerce.
A mainstream conservative would generally support stronger enforcement of intellectual property rights as protection of property and markets, and would view expanded information-sharing with CBP as a tool to stop counterfeits and protect American businesses.
At the same time, they would be attentive to any expansion of federal discretion and potential regulatory burdens on platforms, carriers, and importers.
They would favor the bill if it does not create undue new obligations or litigation exposure for private firms and if it preserves efficient enforcement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
On content grounds the measure is a modest, technical expansion of existing CBP disclosure authority that imposes little fiscal burden and could be framed as strengthening IP enforcement—factors that favor enactment. However, ambiguous language (e.g., 'any other party...as determined appropriate by the Commissioner') and absence of explicit privacy or commercial-confidentiality safeguards create potential stakeholder pushback that could slow or alter the measure before final enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties, due process, and protections for small sellers; conservatives emphasize stronger IP enforcement and…
On content grounds the measure is a modest, technical expansion of existing CBP disclosure authority that imposes little fiscal burden and…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that clearly and specifically expands the categories of data that may be shared and enlarges the set of potential recipients under 19…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.