Codify — Article

SBIR/STTR Foreign Interference Safeguard Act

Prohibits awards to firms majority-owned by designated foreign entities and expands due diligence to protect national security and program integrity.

The Brief

The bill bars small business concerns that are majority-owned or controlled by foreign entities designated as covered foreign entities from receiving SBIR or STTR awards. It also extends the Small Business Act’s due diligence program to assess national-security risks through September 30, 2030, reinforcing screening and risk-management around SBIR/STTR funding.

Finally, it codifies safeguards for entities majority-owned by venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms by establishing participation limits and new ownership tests to determine eligibility.

At a Glance

What It Does

The Administrator must determine SBIR award eligibility by considering whether a firm is directly or indirectly owned or controlled by covered foreign entities. It adds a new Participation Limits rule and requires size standards to be established for these purposes. The extension of the due-diligence program widens the window for security risk assessment through 2030.

Who It Affects

SBIR/STTR applicants, program administrators, and fund managers at venture-capital-backed firms. It affects small business concerns seeking federal research funding and the entities that review and approve those awards.

Why It Matters

Creates a national-security-aware gatekeeping mechanism for SBIR/STTR funds, aiming to curb foreign influence while defining ownership relationships and setting clear thresholds for eligibility and program administration.

More articles like this one.

A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.

Unsubscribe anytime.

What This Bill Actually Does

The SBIR/STTR Foreign Interference Safeguard Act adds several guardrails to how SBIR and STTR awards are awarded. It introduces a new test for ownership, stating that small business concerns that are majority-owned by venture capital operators, hedge funds, or private equity firms will be ineligible for SBIR awards if the administrator determines they are owned or controlled by a covered foreign entity.

To support this, the bill expands the due-diligence program under the Small Business Act to include security risk assessments through September 30, 2030.

The bill also broadens the definition of a “covered foreign entity” and sets up criteria to decide when a firm is effectively controlled by such an entity. It requires the administrator to consider both direct and indirect ownership, including relationships through agents and entities under common control.

It also authorizes the establishment of size standards for firms participating in SBIR programs under this new framework.Finally, the amendments apply only to SBIR awards made after enactment. This means that any new rules will affect only future awards, not those already made, and enforcement will hinge on the updated ownership determinations and the extended due-diligence checks.

The Five Things You Need to Know

1

The act extends the due-diligence program to assess security risks to Sept. 30, 2030.

2

A new Participation Limits provision makes certain majority-owned firms ineligible if controlled by covered foreign entities.

3

‘Covered foreign entity’ includes foreign entities of concern, designated individuals, and entities controlled by foreign governments.

4

The Administrator will establish size standards for SBIR participants under the new safeguards.

5

The amendments apply only to SBIR awards made after enactment.

Section-by-Section Breakdown

Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections. Expand all ↓

Section 1

Short Title

Cites the act as the SBIR/STTR Foreign Interference Safeguard Act, signaling its purpose to shield SBIR/STTR funding from foreign interference and strengthen screening and eligibility rules for program participation.

Section 2

Extension of due diligence program to assess security risks

Extends the Small Business Act’s due-diligence program to assess national-security risks, pushing the applicable end date to September 30, 2030. This extension broadens the scope of review for SBIR-related awards to ensure potential risks are evaluated before funds are released.

Section 3

Safeguards for small business concerns majority-owned by venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms

Adds a new Participation Limits provision: a small business concern that is majority-owned by multiple venture-capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms is ineligible for SBIR awards if the Administrator determines that the firm is or is owned and controlled in major part by a covered foreign entity. It requires the Administrator to consider whether such a concern is a direct or indirect subsidiary of a foreign-owned firm, and to establish size standards for SBIR participation under this section. It also defines covered foreign entities and foreign-entity-of-concern criteria to determine eligibility.

At scale

This bill is one of many.

Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.

Explore Government in Codify Search →

Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost

Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.

Who Benefits

  • Small business concerns that are not majority-owned or controlled by covered foreign entities, preserving eligibility for SBIR/STTR awards and continued access to funding.
  • SBIR program administrators (the SBA and relevant agencies) responsible for applying the new eligibility rules and conducting enhanced due-diligence reviews.
  • Domestic, non-foreign-controlled startup ecosystems supported by US-based venture funds, which may benefit from clearer eligibility rules and reduced risk of foreign-controlled awards.
  • Compliance professionals within SBIR-focused firms who will lead ownership assessments and due-diligence processes.
  • Policy analysts and national-security stakeholders who track the integrity of SBIR allocations and enforcement of safeguards.

Who Bears the Cost

  • Firms that become ineligible due to covered foreign-entity ownership, potentially losing SBIR/STTR funding opportunities.
  • Foreign-owned or foreign-tied venture capital funds and private equity firms that invest in SBIR-eligible firms and rely on those investments for funding strategies.
  • SBIR program administrators and grant managers who must implement, verify, and monitor the new ownership determinations and compliance requirements.
  • Independently owned small firms that may need to restructure or redeploy ownership to maintain eligibility, incurring transaction and governance costs.
  • Investors and funds facing increased due diligence costs and potential restrictions on cross-border investment in SBIR-backed ventures.

Key Issues

The Core Tension

How to prevent foreign interference without unduly restricting legitimate investment in U.S. small businesses receiving SBIR/STTR funds, given broad ownership definitions and the practical challenges of verifying indirect control across complex corporate structures.

The bill’s approach hinges on the breadth of the defined ‘covered foreign entity,’ which includes government or political party affiliations, non-U.S. residents, and entities associated with foreign governments or control by entities listed on sanctions and intelligence lists. This breadth raises questions about how ownership is demonstrated, how indirect relationships are traced, and how consistently agencies can apply these standards across diverse SBIR-award contexts.

Enforcement relies on post-enactment eligibility determinations for future awards, but it also depends on accurate and timely data on ownership structures and control relationships, which can be costly to obtain and verify.

The central policy tension is the balance between national-security protections and maintaining robust access to federal research funding for domestic innovation. While the safeguards aim to curb foreign influence, they may inadvertently chill investment in frontier sectors where foreign capital plays a role in scaling domestic high-tech firms.

The mechanism’s complexity also poses implementation risks for small firms with layered corporate structures and for agencies tasked with constant monitoring and updating of “covered entity” lists and ownership tests.

Try it yourself.

Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.