HB5287 would require an annual report on the People’s Republic of China’s advanced semiconductor manufacturing capabilities, including both advanced and mature-node technologies. The reporting timeline begins no later than May 1, 2026, and continues for five years, with a classified annex and an unclassified synopsis available to the public.
The report would be produced by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with heads of other federal departments and agencies, and it would include findings, policy recommendations to Congress, assessments of China’s domestic capabilities, analysis of Chinese industrial policies, and year-by-year analyses of China’s progress in semiconductor manufacturing and AI chipmaking, including government plans and international engagement. The form requirement ensures a public-facing summary while preserving sensitive details in a classified annex.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requites an annual, multi-agency report on PRC semiconductor capabilities, due May 1, 2026 and for five subsequent years. The report covers advanced and mature-node semiconductors and includes an annex for sensitive details.
Who It Affects
The report targets Congress and the defense and national security policy community, while guiding interagency work within the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. It informs industry analyses and allied partners about China’s trajectory and policy responses.
Why It Matters
It formalizes a recurring, comprehensive assessment of China’s semiconductor ambitions, consolidating intelligence, policy analysis, and export-control considerations to shape U.S. strategic thinking and allied coordination.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The China Advanced Technology Monitoring Act creates a formal cycle for monitoring China’s progress in advanced semiconductor manufacturing. It instructs the Secretary of Defense, with input from other federal departments and agencies, to prepare an annual report detailing China’s capabilities across both advanced and mature node technologies.
The report will not only catalog China’s current capabilities but also map the policies and government plans driving those capabilities.
The bill lists specific elements the report must address: a candid statement of findings and policy recommendations to Congress on China’s goal to advance semiconductors; an assessment of China’s domestic manufacturing base; an analysis of Chinese industrial policies and their outcomes; and a year-by-year accounting of China’s technological development in semiconductors and AI chipmaking, including government plans, design, IP, R&D, materials, equipment, and packaging. It also examines China’s engagement with other countries on equipment, investments, trade, and research ties, and it analyzes how export controls—used by the United States and its allies—affect China’s progress and where workarounds or partnerships may blunt those controls.The bill requires the report to be submitted in unclassified form with a classified annex, and the unclassified portion or synopsis must be published publicly on a federal website with notice in the Federal Register.
This structure is designed to provide policymakers with a clear, ongoing view of China’s trajectory while safeguarding sensitive data.Overall, the Act seeks to equip Congress and the national security community with structured, timely intelligence and policy guidance to counter China’s semiconductor advances and to evaluate the effectiveness of export-control measures in a rapidly evolving tech landscape.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires an annual report on PRC advanced semiconductor capabilities, due by May 1, 2026, and for five years afterward.
The report must cover both advanced and mature-node semiconductors and include government plans and initiatives from China.
There is a year-by-year assessment of China’s progress in semiconductors and AI chipmaking, including related policies and execution.
The report analyzes the impact of US and allied export controls and potential circumventions by China.
The unclassified portion will be publicly posted with a classified annex available to authorized officials.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Annual report requirement and interagency coordination
The bill requires the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the heads of other federal departments and agencies as appropriate, to submit to the House and Senate committees a report on China’s semiconductor manufacturing capabilities. This report must be produced not later than May 1, 2026, and annually for five years. The process envisions interagency collaboration to assemble a comprehensive assessment that reflects multiple lines of expertise, including defense and technology policy.
Key findings, assessments, and congressional recommendations
The report shall include key findings about the United States’ strategy to counter China in semiconductors and provide concrete policy recommendations to Congress regarding China’s progress and goals in semiconductor manufacturing. This section anchors policy dialogue and allows Congress to calibrate oversight and resource decisions.
Assessment of China’s domestic manufacturing capabilities
This provision requires a rigorous evaluation of China’s own semiconductor production capacity, including mature and advanced nodes. Analysts will map capacity, scale, self-sufficiency, and bottlenecks, alongside trend analysis related to capacity expansion and supply-chain resilience.
Industrial policy analysis and outcomes
The bill calls for an in-depth look at China's industrial policies aimed at semiconductors and an assessment of their outcomes. The analysis should connect policy levers—subsidies, investment regimes, and strategic plans—to measurable shifts in capabilities, production, and international competitiveness.
Year-by-year technology development and AI chipmaking
A detailed, annual accounting of China’s progress in semiconductor-related technology, including AI chipmaking. The analysis should address design, IP, R&D, silicon, minerals, industrial gases, intermediaries such as photomasks, equipment, tooling, software, and advanced packaging techniques, tied to China’s government plans and initiatives.
Foreign engagement and equipment capability
The report analyzes China’s engagement with other countries on semiconductor manufacturing equipment, including coordination with markets to expand influence, foreign investment, trade, and research ties. It captures how international relationships shape China’s access to critical tools and components.
Collaboration and partnerships
An assessment of collaborations, joint ventures, or partnerships between China and other countries related to semiconductor manufacturing. The section examines how these relationships affect China’s capabilities and the global supply chain.
Export controls impact and effectiveness
The analysis covers the impact of United States and allied export controls on items relevant to China’s semiconductor development, focusing on workarounds, circumvention through foreign investments or third-party acquisitions, and risks posed by collaborative agreements. It also assesses whether export controls remain effective and provides recommendations to strengthen them.
Implications for U.S. competitiveness, security, and economy
This section weighs how Chinese semiconductor dominance could affect U.S. global competitiveness, national security, and the U.S. economy. It connects capability development to strategic risk and policy levers available to protect economic and security interests.
Form, dissemination, and public availability
The report must be submitted in unclassified form with a classified annex. The unclassified portion or synopsis must be posted publicly on a federal website, with a concurrent notice in the Federal Register.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Defense across all five countries.
Explore Defense 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
- Congressional defense and foreign affairs committees gain authoritative, multi-agency findings to inform oversight, budgeting, and policy decisions.
- The Department of Defense and other federal agencies receive a structured framework for interagency coordination on a sensitive national-security topic.
- US- and allied-based semiconductor manufacturers and suppliers obtain clearer visibility into policy trajectories and export-control environments.
- Allied governments coordinate on export controls and supply-chain risk assessment using shared intelligence and policy insights.
- Policy researchers and think tanks gain access to public summaries and analytical data to inform ongoing analysis.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies incur administrative costs to coordinate data collection, analysis, and interagency collaboration.
- Industry players may face information requests and data-sharing requirements that impose reporting burdens.
- Deployment of enhanced export-control analysis may require additional regulatory and compliance resources.
- Public-facing reporting logistics (website hosting, updates, and Federal Register notices) require budgeted staff time.
- Ongoing interagency coordination could introduce scheduling and process frictions that affect timely reporting.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is delivering a comprehensive, actionable view of China’s semiconductor development while protecting sensitive information and policy levers that could be compromised by public disclosure. This creates a tension between transparency for oversight and the security needs of ongoing policy tools, export controls, and strategic deterrence.
The bill creates a powerful reporting obligation that aggregates defense, foreign affairs, and trade considerations around China’s semiconductor trajectory. A key tension is balancing the need for a thorough, data-rich assessment with the risk of exposing sensitive intelligence or strategic detail through the unclassified portion.
Effective use of the report requires disciplined redaction and clear boundaries between what goes into the unclassified synopsis versus the classified annex. Implementation will hinge on timely interagency coordination, access to reliable data, and consistent interpretation of policy implications across agencies and allies.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.