Sponsors (8)
The bill strengthens tools to deter and punish foreign-directed trade-secret theft and gives prosecutors clearer authority, but it also expands criminal exposure, imposes large corporate penalties, and leaves definitional and statutory ambiguities that could chill legitimate research, politicize enforcement, and increase legal and administrative costs.
Companies that operate critical infrastructure and financial institutions gain stronger legal deterrents and monetary remedies—higher fines and criminal penalties—to discourage and compensate for foreign-directed theft of trade secrets and sensitive operational information.
The Department of Justice and federal prosecutors are given clearer authority and direction to prioritize and pursue economic espionage tied to foreign adversaries, potentially improving government capacity to address state-directed theft.
Tech workers, researchers, and others who share technical information risk criminal exposure because the bill's 'critical infrastructure'–linked definitions are broad and could sweep in legitimate research, defensive sharing, or compliance-related disclosures, chilling innovation and collaboration.
Businesses—including small companies, utilities, and financial firms—face substantial financial uncertainty and exposure from very large corporate fines (e.g., multiples of the value of a stolen secret), which could threaten solvency, deter investment, or generate costly valuation disputes.
The legislation creates legal vagueness and potential politicization—by cross-referencing foreign-adversary designations and amending statutes without substantive rules—producing uncertainty for federal employees, employers, and prosecutors and likely increasing litigation and administrative costs for enforcement agencies.
Based on analysis of 3 sections of legislative text.
Introduced June 23, 2025 by Pat Harrigan · Last progress June 23, 2025
Creates tougher criminal penalties for economic espionage when the theft of trade secrets is done to advance the interests of a "covered nation," including higher fines for organizations and longer minimum prison terms (with harsher ranges when the theft causes "severe harm" to critical infrastructure). It also defines "severe harm" to mean transmission of nonpublic information about the security, design, operation, or vulnerability of critical infrastructure that could lead to incapacitation or destruction if acted upon. Also attempts to amend the statute dealing with national defense information (18 U.S.C. § 793) but provides no actual language for that change, leaving that amendment non‑operative as written.