Billionaire investor Mark Cuban has forcefully criticized a proposed Commerce Department plan to levy a percentage fee on the value of patents, labeling it “one of the dumbest ideas in the history of business.” His sharp rebuke adds a high-profile voice to a growing chorus of opposition from various sectors concerned about the potential ramifications for innovation and intellectual property.
The controversial proposal, reportedly under discussion within the Trump administration, seeks to charge patent holders between 1% and 5% of their patent’s overall assessed value. This radical shift from current practices has immediately raised alarms, with critics arguing it would fundamentally alter the landscape of invention and intellectual property protection in the United States.
Cuban’s commentary, shared on X following a Wall Street Journal report, highlighted a crucial concern: “The crazy part is that fewer patents will be filed as inventors try to protect their creations from LLMs.” This underscores fears that such a valuation-based levy could inadvertently stifle innovation, discouraging creators from seeking formal protection for their groundbreaking work due to prohibitive and unpredictable costs.
The Journal indicated that this innovative fee structure is part of a broader revenue-raising initiative by the Commerce Secretary. If implemented, this new system could either replace or supplement the existing fee schedule, which has historically relied on standardized filing, examination, and maintenance fees rather than a recurring tax on intellectual property assets.
Leading legal and industry groups have already signaled strong opposition to the prospective changes. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center, through its senior vice president, characterized the proposal as a “recurring tax,” emphasizing that it would upend a 235-year-old established practice of fixed fees.
Patent scholars at Patently-O have further warned that a value-based tax ranging from 1% to 5% would “dramatically increase costs” for inventors and businesses. They argue that such a system would render the U.S. an international anomaly, potentially making it less attractive for global innovators to file patents within the country’s jurisdiction, thereby impacting the US economy.
Concerns also echoed by Bloomberg Law highlight the significant risk that the proposed plan could undermine the nation’s robust innovation ecosystem. This sentiment aligns with broader industry anxieties that unpredictable and substantial patent fees would create an environment of uncertainty, hindering research and development in critical fields like technology and life sciences.
Mark Cuban’s public stance amplifies resistance that is rapidly spreading across the technology, life sciences, and manufacturing sectors. His previous public disagreements with prominent figures further underscore the escalating debate in Washington about how best to fund government initiatives without inadvertently chilling private-sector invention and intellectual property development, which are vital for economic growth.
The debate surrounding these potential patent fee changes represents a critical juncture for U.S. innovation policy, with high-profile figures like Cuban advocating for policies that continue to foster creativity and technological advancement, rather than impose potentially burdensome financial barriers on inventors and businesses striving to bring new ideas to market.
