The Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act of 2025 would establish the CCP Initiative within the Department of Justice’s National Security Division. The Initiative is tasked with countering nation-state threats, curbing CCP spying on United States intellectual property and academic institutions, and developing an enforcement strategy for nontraditional collectors—such as researchers in labs, universities, and the defense industrial base—who may transfer technology contrary to U.S. interests.
It also seeks to implement FIRRMA amendments to expand the DOJ’s authorities in coordination with the Treasury and to identify FCPA cases involving Chinese companies that compete with U.S. businesses.
A core thrust is prioritizing enforcement against trade secret theft, hacking, and economic espionage, while safeguarding critical infrastructure from foreign direct investment and supply chain threats and identifying CCP IP theft from small businesses. The bill also directs investigations into investments by Chinese companies on the Entity List and those identified as Chinese military companies, reporting findings to the appropriate agencies.
The Initiative is designed to be independent from other DOJ counter-nation-state efforts, with dedicated resources and an annual progress report to Congress. The act also contemplates a six-year sunset and a severability clause to preserve the remainder if any provision is found unconstitutional.
At a Glance
What It Does
Establishes the CCP Initiative within DOJ’s National Security Division and codifies its core objectives, including countering nation-state threats, curbing CCP IP theft, developing enforcement strategies for nontraditional collectors, and aligning FIRRMA-related authorities with Treasury.
Who It Affects
Directly affects DOJ components, FBI coordination, the Department of Treasury, BIS, and host agencies; also impacts universities, labs, defense contractors, critical infrastructure operators, and entities on the Entity List.
Why It Matters
Creates a dedicated, resourced channel to confront sophisticated foreign threats, closes gaps in enforcement against economic espionage, and formalizes oversight through annual reporting and a sunset to ensure accountability.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The CCP Initiative is a new program housed in the Justice Department’s National Security Division. Its mission is to counter China-linked, state-backed threats to U.S. security, including efforts to steal or inappropriate ly transfer U.S. technology and intellectual property.
A key focus is stopping the spying by the Chinese Communist Party on American IP and universities, and building enforcement approaches for researchers and other nontraditional actors who might move technology in ways that harm U.S. interests.
The bill directs the Initiative to work with the Treasury to adjust regulations under the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (as it relates to Section 721) so that the Department of Justice can better pursue enforcement in this area. It also calls for identifying Chinese companies that compete with U.S. businesses under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, ensuring that violations are pursued when appropriate.
A substantive priority is preventing trade secret theft, hacking, and other economic espionage, while protecting critical infrastructure from foreign investment and supply-chain compromises, and identifying IP theft from small businesses.Additionally, the bill requires regular reporting to Congress on progress, resource use, interagency coordination, and the impact of the CCP’s activities in areas like unmanned aircraft and related technologies. The Initiative is designed to be separate from other DOJ programs, with its own resource allocation, a six-year sunset, and a severability clause to preserve the rest of the act if any provision is found unconstitutional.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The CCP Initiative is created within the DOJ’s National Security Division.
The Initiative prioritizes trade secret theft, hacking, and economic espionage tied to the CCP.
It implements FIRRMA amendments in coordination with the Treasury to regulate foreign investment.
An annual report to Congress assesses progress, coordination, and economic impact.
The act sunsets after six years and resources are dedicated solely to the CCP Initiative.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Establishment and objectives of the CCP Initiative
There is established in the National Security Division of the DOJ a dedicated CCP Initiative. Its objectives include countering nation-state threats, curbing CCP spying on U.S. intellectual property and academic institutions, and developing an enforcement strategy for nontraditional collectors—such as researchers in labs, universities, and the defense industrial base—whose activities could transfer technology contrary to U.S. interests. The Initiative also coordinates with the Treasury to implement FIRRMA amendments for the DOJ and to identify Chinese entities that threaten U.S. economic security.
Consultation and coordination
The Attorney General, acting through the Assistant Attorney General for National Security, must consult with relevant DOJ components and coordinate with the FBI and other federal agencies as necessary. This ensures integrated action across law enforcement, intelligence, and regulatory oversight in pursuing CCP-linked threats.
Program autonomy and resource allocation
The CCP Initiative must operate separately from other DOJ programs devoted to countering nation-state threats. All resources for the Initiative are to be set aside for its purposes and not pooled with other DOJ initiatives, ensuring focused capacity and independence in its mission.
Annual reporting to Congress
The Attorney General shall provide an annual report to the relevant Senate and House committees detailing progress, resource levels, interagency coordination, and the CCP Initiative’s impact on trade secret theft, economic espionage, and related threats. The report also analyzes the CCP’s efforts to use unmanned aircraft and other technologies in ways that affect national security.
Sunset provision
The Act ceases to be in effect six years after enactment, creating a defined window for the Initiative to prove its effectiveness and justify continued authority or a different approach.
Severability
If any provision is held unconstitutional, the remainder of the Act remains in force, and the application of the remaining provisions is not affected.
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
- U.S. manufacturers and small businesses relying on IP and trade secrets gain stronger protection against theft and economic espionage.
- U.S. universities and research institutions benefit from enhanced safeguards against unauthorized transfer of university-owned IP and research results.
- Critical infrastructure operators and defense contractors experience greater scrutiny and protection against foreign influence in supply chains and direct investment.
- DOJ, FBI, and Treasury gain clearer authorities and collaboration pathways to pursue enforcement and regulatory actions.
- Oversight committees gain structured, regular insight into progress and impact through mandated reports.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies (DOJ, FBI, Treasury) must allocate budget and personnel to the Initiative, potentially diverting resources from other programs.
- Universities, research labs, and industry partners may face increased compliance and monitoring requirements.
- Private sector firms may incur costs for enhanced due diligence, reporting, and cybersecurity measures to align with stricter enforcement and screening.
- Entities on the Entity List or designated as Chinese military companies could face heightened scrutiny and potential investment or transaction barriers.
- Some defense contractors may need to adjust supply chain practices and information security controls to meet elevated standards.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing aggressive protection against sophisticated foreign threats with preserving legitimate research collaboration and economic activity. Concentrating authority and resources in a single DOJ program can enhance focus and speed, but may also limit cross-cutting expertise and create compliance burdens for researchers and private-sector partners if not carefully bounded.
The bill’s focus on a dedicated CCP Initiative raises policy and operational questions about scope, burden, and effectiveness. While a centralized program can concentrate expertise and resources, it risks duplicating work done elsewhere in the government or creating bureaucratic silos that impede cross-agency collaboration.
The emphasis on nontraditional collectors—like labs and universities—could intensify oversight of legitimate research collaborations, potentially chilling beneficial academic and industrial partnerships if not carefully calibrated.
The act also leans on FIRRMA authority and the Entity List framework, which are powerful but complex tools. Coordination with the Treasury and BIS is essential, yet it invites questions about how burden will be allocated across industries, how “Chinese military company” designations will be interpreted, and how to keep enforcement proportionate to risk.
The sunset clause creates a finite horizon for evaluation, but it also raises questions about what happens if critical threats persist or evolve after six years. Effective implementation will require clear definitions, robust due process, and dedicated funding to avoid undermining other security and innovation goals.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.