Blake Moore (R-UT)
To expand the sharing of information with respect to suspected violations of intellectual property rights in trade.
A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed both chambers, not yet sent to the President
Both the House and the Senate have passed it, though not necessarily the same text.
If the two chambers passed identical wording, the final copy is being prepared for the President. If they did not, one chamber must accept the other's version or the two negotiate a single one — nothing goes to the President until the text is identical.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- Passed Senate unanimous consent
No one's position on it was recorded: the House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together), and the Senate by unanimous consent (no one objected, so there was no vote).
What this bill would do
This bill updates the Tariff Act of 1930 to change how information is shared regarding suspected violations of intellectual property rights in trade. It expands what kind of information can be shared, including details on packing materials, containers, and labels. The legislation allows U.S. Customs and Border Protection to share certain nonpublic information provided by online marketplaces, freight forwarders, or other entities involved in the importation of merchandise. It also broadens who can receive this information to include any other party with an interest in the merchandise, as determined appropriate by the Commissioner. Ultimately, the bill aims to give officials more tools to crack down on intellectual property violations by improving information sharing.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +6
Does this make patent and copyright rules fairer?
The bill strengthens the ability to identify and act upon suspected intellectual property violations in the trade stream.
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Business owners who hold intellectual property rights benefit from more robust information sharing to combat counterfeits.
- Scored +5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill enhances the enforcement against intellectual property rights violations by allowing broader information sharing regarding suspect goods.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
The bill expands the scope of nonpublic information that can be shared with third parties involved in the interest of merchandise.
- Scored -2
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill allows for the sharing of previously nonpublic information obtained from private entities like online marketplaces.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 1 allows U.S. Customs and Border Protection to share nonpublic information with people regarding merchandise from online marketplaces, freight forwarders, and other platforms. This could help rightsholders better protect their intellectual property because they get more details about suspected violations.
-
Section 1 expands the types of shared details to include packing materials, containers, and labels. This is a positive step because it gives interested parties a clearer picture of suspected intellectual property violations involving imported goods.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any explicit mentions of negative consequences, burdens, or negative impacts for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make patent and copyright rules fairer? — The bill strengthens the ability to identify and act upon suspected intellectual property violations in the trade stream.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The bill expands the scope of nonpublic information that can be shared with third parties involved in the interest of merchandise. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill allows for the sharing of previously nonpublic information obtained from private entities like online marketplaces.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners who hold intellectual property rights benefit from more robust information sharing to combat counterfeits.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill enhances the enforcement against intellectual property rights violations by allowing broader information sharing regarding suspect goods.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill assists in protecting intellectual property rights, which supports more secure and legal international trade environments.
- Enrolled Bill
The final version, on its way to the President
What changed from Referred in Senate: No change to the wording. Only the printed details that record the bill’s progress, such as the heading and dates, are different.
- 11/12/2026
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- 11/10/2026
- Senate Committee on Finance discharged by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5525)
- 4/28/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 4/27/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H3098-3099)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H3098-3099)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4930.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3098-3100)
- Mr. Moore (UT) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 12/30/2025
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 119-415.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 361.
- 12/10/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 40 - 0.
- 12/9/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 11/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/8/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Mike CareyRepublican · Ohio
David KustoffRepublican · Tennessee
Carol MillerRepublican · West Virginia
Adrian SmithRepublican · Nebraska
Bradley SchneiderDemocrat · Illinois
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia