The bill
CCP IP Act
S. 330, 119th Congress — read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
Sponsored by
Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT]
ID: C001114
Follow the money
The bill
S. 330, 119th Congress — read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
25 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 822-824 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Hearings held.
July 22, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another brilliant example of legislative theater, courtesy of our esteemed Congress. The CCP IP Act, or "Combatting China's Pilfering of Intellectual Property Act" - how original.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated purpose is to impose sanctions on individuals and entities from the People's Republic of China who engage in significant theft of intellectual property (IP) belonging to United States persons. How noble. In reality, this bill is a thinly veiled attempt to appease corporate interests and create a new tool for the executive branch to wield against China.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes the President to impose sanctions on individuals and entities that operate in sectors of the Chinese economy where IP theft has occurred. These sanctions include asset blocking, visa revocation, and penalties for violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The bill also creates a waiver process for the President to exempt certain individuals or entities from these sanctions.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include Chinese nationals and entities operating in sectors where IP theft has occurred, as well as United States persons who have had their IP stolen. However, let's be real - this bill is primarily designed to benefit large corporations with significant IP interests in China. The real stakeholders are the lobbyists and special interest groups that pushed for this legislation.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has all the makings of a classic case of "legislative placebo." It creates the illusion of action against Chinese IP theft while doing little to address the root causes of the problem. In reality, it will likely lead to more bureaucratic red tape, increased tensions with China, and potentially even more IP theft as companies find ways to circumvent the sanctions.
The real disease here is not Chinese IP theft, but rather the corrupting influence of corporate interests on our legislative process. This bill is a symptom of that disease - a cynical attempt to create a new tool for the executive branch to wield against China while lining the pockets of special interest groups.
In short, this bill is a joke. A poorly written, cynically motivated joke designed to appease corporate interests and create more bureaucratic busywork. But hey, at least it's a good distraction from the real issues plaguing our country.
Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: S001217
Top Contributors
0
No contribution data available
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 45 nodes and 25 connections (65 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $172,600
Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 5 harmed.
Section 2 imposes sanctions on persons operating in sectors of China's economy that engage in significant theft of US intellectual property, which could impact big tech platforms like Meta/Facebook and Google/Alphabet that operate globally and have intellectual property at risk.
Section 2 imposes sanctions on persons operating in sectors of China's economy that engage in significant theft of US intellectual property, which could impact semiconductor and hardware companies like Nvidia, Intel, and Qualcomm that have valuable IP.
Section 2 imposes sanctions on persons operating in sectors of China's economy that engage in significant theft of US intellectual property, which could impact AI and cloud infrastructure providers like AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud that have global operations and IP at risk.
Section 2 imposes sanctions on persons operating in sectors of China's economy that engage in significant theft of US intellectual property, which could impact private equity firms and hedge funds with investments in affected companies.
Section 2 imposes sanctions on persons operating in sectors of China's economy that engage in significant theft of US intellectual property, which could impact crypto and fintech companies with global operations and IP at risk.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 790 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Systematically reduce and eventually eliminate any U.S. dependence on Communist Chinese supply chains that may be used to threaten national security such as medicines, silicon chips, rare earth minerals, computer motherboards, flatscreen displays, and military components. l Sanction any companies, including American companies like Apple, that facilitate Communist China’s use of its Great Firewall surveillance and censorship capabilities. l Order the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice to contract with U.S.-owned and U.S.-operated artificial intelligence companies that are capable of detecting, identifying, and disrupting both the domestic groups’ and CCP influencers’ social media operations and funding streams using public information as a rapidly available offensive measure. l Reinvigorate and expand the DHS crackdown on the CCP’s use of e-sellers (including third-party sellers) and the shippers and operators of major warehouses such as Amazon, eBay, and Alibaba to flood U.S. markets with counterfeit and pirated goods. l Compel the closure of all Confucius Institutes in the U.S., which serve as propaganda arms of the CCP. l Significantly reduce or eliminate the issuance of visas to Chinese students or researchers to prevent espionage and information harvesting. l Hold the CCP accountable for the COVID-19 virus, which almost certainly originated as a genetically engineered virus from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and do so through the establishment of a presidential commission or select congressional committee that would investigate the origins of the virus; its various costs, both economically and in human life; and the possible means of collecting damages from the CCP, which are likely to rise to the trillions of dollars. If the new U.S. President wishes to defend this country against the serious exis- tential threat posed by Communist China, that President will adopt all of these proposals through the requisite presidential executive orders or memoranda. Effective Trade Policy in the Real World. To conclude this analysis, it is useful to offer brief reflections on a number of key obstacles to implementing the policy initiatives recommended in this chapter. These obstacles include: — 791 — Trade l The dogma of the Ricardian free-trade model, which has been used as propaganda to thwart the adoption of measures that seek to level the global trading field for American manufacturers, farmers, ranchers, and workers; l The politics of trade policy, which has led to a great divide that makes trade policy reforms difficult to implement; l The economics of trade deficits, which are not adequately understood either by the American public or by the policymaking intelligentsia; and l The crucial role of supportive White House and Administration personnel in implementing effective trade policies. The Dogma of Free Trade. Clearly, the fair and balanced trade orientation of this chapter runs starkly against the free trade grain of the globalist Ricardian orthodoxy, which is predicated on the theory that free trade represents the best path by which to achieve both American and global prosperity. This orthodoxy is based on the ivory tower academic conclusion that if countries trade freely among each other, each will pursue its own comparative advantages; production will be most efficient around the world; the economic pie will be bigger both for the globe and for each free trading country; and (so long as workers who lose their jobs are fairly compensated from the gains from trade) everyone will be better off. The most obvious problem with this orthodoxy (there are many more) is that nowhere is Ricardian free trade mirrored in the real world. Instead, America trades in a world where the WTO’s MFN rules are stacked against us, scofflaws like Communist China run roughshod over what meager WTO rules there are, and the United States among all of the world’s developed nations is the biggest victim of the free trade Ricardian orthodoxy. During his first term, President Donald Trump preached that there can be no free trade without fair, reciprocal, and balanced trade. He was right then, and who- ever is the next President in 2025 should heed this critical principle whenever the flag of free trade is waved to prevent the adoption of needed reforms. The Politics of Trade Policy: Who Benefits? Today, there is a great divide among Americans that stands in the way of constructive trade policy reforms. This great divide is certainly not about a partisan desire for low taxes and a reduced regulatory burden. Rather, it is over whether our borders should be open or secure and whether it is prudent to offshore our manufacturing and defense industrial base and associated supply chains. Those who support secure borders and seek to onshore more of American pro- duction and supply chains do so to boost the real wages of American workers and to
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.