PolicyBrief
S. 321
119th CongressJan 29th 2025
Decoupling America's Artificial Intelligence Capabilities from China Act of 2025
IN COMMITTEE

This bill aims to decouple America's AI capabilities from China by prohibiting the import/export of AI technology and intellectual property, restricting U.S. persons from engaging in AI research with Chinese entities of concern, and preventing U.S. investment in Chinese AI firms involved in military or human rights abuses.

Joshua "Josh" Hawley
R

Joshua "Josh" Hawley

Senator

MO

LEGISLATION

AI Tech Freeze: New Bill Bans Trade with China, Starting in 6 Months

The "Decoupling America's Artificial Intelligence Capabilities from China Act of 2025" aims to completely separate the US and Chinese AI sectors. It's a sweeping move with big implications for anyone involved in AI, from researchers to tech companies. The core purpose is to prevent China from using American technology for military advancements or surveillance, essentially building a wall around US AI development.

Zero-Sum Game

This bill, effective 180 days after enactment, introduces a total ban on the import and export of AI technology and intellectual property between the US and China (SEC. 3). This isn't just about finished products; it includes "technology or intellectual property that could be used to contribute to artificial intelligence" (SEC. 2). For example, a US-based chip designer couldn't sell advanced circuit board designs to a Chinese company, even if that company claims it's for civilian use. A researcher at a US university couldn't collaborate with colleagues in China on AI-related projects, even if the research is publicly available. The bill specifies criminal and civil penalties for violations, mirroring those in the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (SEC. 3).

Research Lockdown

Beyond the trade ban, the bill severely restricts AI research collaborations (SEC. 4). U.S. persons are prohibited from working with any "entity of concern" connected to China on AI research and development. This includes everything from joint projects to simply sharing research data. Penalties are steep: up to $100,000,000 in fines for entities and $1,000,000 for individuals, plus loss of federal funding and potential immigration consequences (SEC. 4). Imagine a US professor who has been collaborating with a Chinese university on a groundbreaking AI medical diagnostic tool. Under this bill, that collaboration would become illegal, and the professor could face massive fines and career-ending penalties.

Follow the Money

One year after enactment, it will be illegal for any US person or entity to invest in or finance Chinese AI companies that are involved in military-civil fusion, surveillance, or human rights abuses (SEC. 5). This means US venture capital firms couldn't invest in promising Chinese AI startups, and US banks couldn't provide loans to these companies. The President can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enforce this, with significant penalties for violations (SEC. 5). For example, a US investment fund with holdings in a Chinese AI company that later develops surveillance technology would be forced to divest, potentially at a significant loss. The broad definition of "military-civil fusion strategy" (SEC. 2) could create uncertainty and chill even legitimate investments.

Real-World Ripple Effects

While the bill aims to protect national security, the broad scope and severe penalties raise some serious questions. The restrictions on research collaboration could slow down AI innovation in the US, as many breakthroughs come from international partnerships. The ban on technology transfer could disrupt supply chains and hurt US companies that rely on components or software from China. The definition of a "Chinese entity of concern" is broad, and the "military-civil fusion" clause could be interpreted widely, potentially impacting individuals and small businesses unfairly. The hefty penalties, including the potential for triple damages in civil suits (SEC. 4), create a chilling effect. It will be important to see how the Secretary of Commerce and Attorney General define the regulations needed to implement sections 3 and 4 within 90 days of the Act's enactment.