Cash flow to anti-ICE group traced to Chinese government-tied entities

• The Chinese-American Planning Council (CPC) received $1.4M in federal grants since 2022 while allegedly advising illegal immigrants on evading ICE.
• CPC’s donations include $446K from entities linked to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), including state-owned banks and organizations affiliated with CCP influence networks.
• Undercover footage shows CPC staff instructing migrants to “harden physical spaces” and train individuals to resist ICE enforcement.
• The Committee of 100 (C100), linked to CCP’s United Front Work Department (UFWD), has financial and leadership ties to CPC.
• House Republicans launched an investigation, citing national security risks of taxpayer funds supporting groups undermining U.S. sovereignty.

New York’s Chinese-American Planning Council (CPC) has emerged as the focal point of a national security firestorm after revelations that it funneled CCP-linked donations to fund workshops advising illegal immigrants on how to evade federal immigration enforcement. More than $1.4 million in taxpayer-funded grants since 2022 has gone to the nonprofit, which was secretly tied to Chinese state-owned banks and influence networks.

The scandal, unearthed by leaked financial records, raises urgent questions: Can U.S. migration laws and border security withstand foreign interference? Are taxpayer dollars indirectly bankrolling CCP efforts to destabilize the nation’s immigration policies? The answers could redefine how Washington views “foreign entanglements” in domestic law enforcement — and the role of Chinese influence operations in undermining U.S. sovereignty.

The money trail: Chinese state-owned banks and the “community” front

CPC’s financial records reveal a clear pattern of funding from entities aligned with Beijing’s United Front Work Department (UFWD), the CCP’s global influence and intelligence arm.

Since 2018, Chinese state-owned banks — including the Bank of China, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) and Bank of East Asia (whose executives sit on CCP advisory boards) — donated nearly $446,000 to CPC. Meanwhile, the Charles B. Wang Community Health Center, whose namesake maintained ties to the dissolved China Overseas Exchange Association (a CCP?aligned exchange group), contributed over $229,000.

“The CCP has long used proxies to chip away at U.S. institutions,” Colonel John Mills (Ret.), a national security expert, told the DCNF. “CPC is part of a broader strategy to pacify critics of Chinese policies by diverting attention to domestic causes—like blocking immigration enforcement.”

House Republicans cite these flows as evidence of foreign interference.

Workshops, warnings and “hardening” ICE resistance

In March 2022, undercover video captured CPC staff coaching migrants on tactics to avoid detection by U.S. immigration agents. Carlyn Cowen, CPC’s policy chief, advised audiences to:

• Designate “authorized responders” to interact with ICE.
• “Harden physical spaces” (e.g., lock doors, limit access).

These actions may cross legal boundaries. Federal law prohibits obstructing immigration enforcement, yet CPC’s “outreach” mirrors tactics used during sanctuary policy defiance under previous administrations.

“This isn’t community service — it’s warfare against lawful governance,” said Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), leading the House Homeland Security investigation. “Taxpayer money is funding subversion.”

Trump’s DOJ recently indicted a Wisconsin judge for aiding a migrant evading ICE, signaling a zero-tolerance posture toward such obstruction.

The Committee of 100: CCP’s shadow diplomacy in plain sight

CPC’s ties to the Committee of 100 (C100) — a group tasked with fostering U.S.-China relations — deepen concerns. C100 has been labeled a CCP “cover organization,” with members sitting on CCP advisory bodies, including the United Front.

Shared leadership and funding between CPC and C100 point to coordinated goals. Charles P. Wang, a CPC and C100 leader, serves as an advisor to CCP entities, while C100 member Dominic Ng donated directly to CPC.

“C100 isn’t just influencing policy,” said former RNC official Shawn Steel. “They’re enforcing Beijing’s agenda here—even if it means sidestepping U.S. laws.”

The group defended its neutrality in a statement but refused to answer questions about connections to the UFWD or CPC.

A test for sovereignty in the CCP era

The CPC scandal is not merely about immigration—it’s a microcosm of China’s ambition to weaken U.S. domestic policies through proxy groups. With 55% of CPC’s revenue from public funds, the stakes are existential: Will Washington tighten oversight of taxpayer-funded NGOs, or tolerate foreign actors sabotaging border security?

The House investigation illuminates how Beijing exploits legal ambiguities to erode American autonomy. As Rep. Green put it: “The CCP counts on us looking the other way. This ends now.”

The question remains: Can the United States defend its sovereignty in an era where CCP influence is neither loud nor proud—just systemic?

Sources for this article include:

YourNews.com

DailyCallerNewsFoundation.org

WashingtonExaminer.com