Customs opens IP holders' access to secret marketplace seller data

What it does

This bill amends the Tariff Act of 1930 to expand what information U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) can share with intellectual property rights holders when investigating suspected trademark or patent violations in imported goods. It lowers the evidentiary threshold from "suspects" to "has a reasonable suspicion," broadens the types of physical evidence CBP can disclose (adding packing materials and containers), and crucially, permits CBP to share nonpublic information obtained from online marketplaces, freight forwarders, and other intermediaries involved in the sale or import of goods—information that was previously confidential.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is not a new IP right or penalty, but rather a procedural expansion of CBP's authority to disclose confidential commercial information to private IP rights holders. It is fundamentally a data-access and surveillance-facilitation measure dressed in IP-enforcement language.

What the text implies

• Nonpublic information from online marketplaces (seller identity, transaction patterns, supply chain details) becomes accessible to IP rights holders without explicit consent from the data subjects, creating a de facto commercial surveillance tool for large IP holders against competitors and small sellers.
• The 'reasonable suspicion' standard is significantly lower than 'probable cause' or 'clear evidence,' meaning CBP may disclose data based on preliminary or speculative IP claims, exposing innocent importers and sellers to competitive targeting.
• Freight forwarders, express consignment operators, and online platforms are now obligated to provide CBP with nonpublic data, shifting compliance burden and privacy liability to logistics intermediaries.
• The bill permits disclosure to 'any other party with an interest in the merchandise, as determined appropriate by the Commissioner' (subsection (b)(5)), creating an open-ended category of potential recipients beyond the named IP rights holders, with minimal transparency or oversight.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

While IP protection serves a legitimate public interest, the bill's core mechanism—permitting disclosure of nonpublic commercial data from online marketplaces and freight forwarders to private IP rights holders—creates a privacy and competitive harm to ordinary importers, small sellers, and consumers. The lowered evidentiary threshold and expanded data-sharing regime shift power toward large IP holders and away from the confidentiality protections that shield small businesses and individuals fro

Who stands to gain

• large intellectual property rights holders (trademark and patent owners)
• brand protection firms and IP enforcement agencies
• online marketplace platforms (as data sources, though also subject to disclosure obligations)

Named in the bill

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Secretary of the Treasury, Commissioner of CBP, online marketplaces, freight forwarders, express consignment operators, intellectual property rights holders, Tariff Act of 1930, Section 628A

Where it stands

1 cosponsor: 1 Democrats.

• Aug 1, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Aug 1, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Finance · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance”
• Aug 7, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Senate Committee on Finance discharged by Unanimous Consent”
• Aug 7, 2026 — Passed the Senate · Congress.gov: “Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

8 lobbying clients named this bill on 11 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $5,910,509 in lobbying spend. A filing names 11 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 88% of bills with at least one filing.

Chuck Grassley, the sponsor, reported $49,167 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Entertainment Software Association — $2,810,000 on 2 filings
• National Association of Manufacturers — $2,030,000 on 1 filing
• Ebay Inc. — $580,000 on 1 filing
• American Apparel & Footwear Association — $372,780 on 1 filing
• International Trademark Association — $70,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.