Bill would ban deceptive SIM-pooling systems that work or are designed, marketed, or reasonably expected to work

People and businesses could not make, import, market, possess, use, distribute, modify, or assist with a covered SIM box. Coverage would include systems that actually enable, or are designed, marketed, or reasonably expected to enable, automated use of at least two SIM identities. They also must be designed, marketed, or reasonably expected to disguise origins, defeat identity checks or tracing, or evade carrier controls. The ban would apply to activity in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce. Excluded uses would include FCC-approved activity, government work, approved testing, carrier testing, and other purposes the FCC permits. The ban would start 180 days after enactment.

The FCC would have to issue implementation rules, publish guidance, and create review procedures for manufacturers and distributors. The public guidance would give non-exhaustive examples of prohibited systems and permitted devices, services, and uses. The rules would cover functionally equivalent systems, exclude permitted uses, and provide ways to confirm exclusions and accurate advertising. The FCC would coordinate import controls, enforcement, information sharing, and training with federal and state officials. Rules and procedures would be due within 180 days of enactment. Reports to Congress would be due within one year and every year afterward, covering the previous year.

The FCC could issue temporary stop orders, and injured mobile providers could ask a federal court to stop violations, award damages, or both. Each prohibited item, each item illegally modified, and each day of a continuing violation could be counted separately. Items involved in prohibited activity could also be forfeited. The FCC could issue an order only after determining that a violation is occurring. A court could award reasonable attorney’s fees to the winning party in a mobile provider’s case. A temporary stop order could last up to 180 days and could be extended after notice and an opportunity for a hearing.

Mobile providers could assist federal agencies with customer information and generally would be shielded from claims over qualifying good-faith monitoring or government assistance. Protected acts would need a reasonable basis and must seek to find, locate, limit, disrupt, or support enforcement against a SIM box. Protection would not cover unrelated acts, unrelated use or sharing of information unless required by law, intentional wrongdoing, extreme carelessness, or bad faith. Providers would not have a new duty to monitor their systems or give information, facility access, or other assistance.

States and local governments could not maintain or enforce rules that conflict with the federal measure. The restriction would cover state and local laws, rules, requirements, and standards that conflict with or are inconsistent with the measure. States could still impose stricter limits on systems that meet the measure’s SIM-box definition. Other federal agency powers would remain unchanged. If one provision were ruled invalid, the remaining provisions would continue to apply.