Drugmakers would have until 2032 to cut ties with WuXi AppTec and other Chinese life sciences companies, according to an updated draft of the closely watched Biosecure Act circulating ahead of the planned markup Wednesday.
The draft, introduced by Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), would still effectively ban companies from working closely with certain Chinese biotechs, but it now includes a clause allowing existing contracts with “companies of concern” to be grandfathered in until 2032, as Endpoints News previously reported.
A Senate version of the bill would grandfather in all existing contracts with no time constraints.
The House bill — which previously included WuXi AppTec and its subsidiaries — now cites WuXi Biologics for the first time. It also names the genomics companies BGI, Complete Genomics and MGI.
The legislation would require the government to review the list of companies of concern at least once a year and make updates. If new companies are added, contracts with these companies would have to end within five years, the updated draft states.
Industry lobbying group BIO welcomed the updates in a statement, saying Thursday that the grandfather clause provides a “reasonable timeframe” for companies to cut ties with the companies named in the bill.
“It ensures during this transition that important biomedical research will not be slowed and that patients will have unimpeded access to life-saving medicines,” BIO CEO John Crowley said.
Endpoints reviewed a copy of the updated bill, which hasn’t officially been released. Wuxi Biologics did not return a request for comment. A WuXi AppTec spokesperson said the company is “deeply concerned” about the implications of the bill but wouldn’t comment on specific updates in the draft.
“We understand that the official text of the revised House bill has not been released so we cannot speculate on any specific change,” the spokesperson said. “We are monitoring the process and will evaluate the revised bill.”
The House Oversight committee is expected to vote on the bill on Wednesday.
Marne Marotta, managing director at Arnold & Porter, told Endpoints in an interview that the 2032 grandfathering clause was likely tweaked to get the four committees involved with the legislation onboard.
“They are trying to find some kind of grandfathering provision and sunsetting provision that all of the committee leadership would be comfortable with,” she said.
BGI said in an emailed statement that the bill won’t accomplish the goal of protecting Americans’ data, adding that BGI doesn’t have access to the data legislators are concerned about.
“Rather, the bill will limit competition and strengthen the market monopoly in the important field of human genome sequencing by using the legislative process to pick winners and losers,” BGI said.
Complete Genomics said it is “encouraged” that policymakers are trying to learn about how the bill could impact the biotech supply chain, but said the company should be removed from the bill completely.
“Moreover, this legislation will give a single company total control of the US market, resulting inevitably in higher prices and reduced choice,” Complete Genomics said.
An MGI spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the company is encouraged that lawmakers understand the potential impacts of the bill, but said that MGI shouldn’t be included in the bill at all.
“We believe we should be removed from the legislation entirely, because we do not have access to, collect or maintain any personal DNA data,” the spokesperson said.
This story has been updated to include comment from MGI.