Sponsors (5)
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Creates a Commerce-led program to map, assess, and strengthen resilience of critical supply chains and related emerging technologies for U.S. national security. It stands up a Supply Chain Resilience Working Group, directs analyses and public reporting (including a National Strategy), encourages shifting production to U.S. and allied manufacturers, and establishes protections for voluntarily submitted supply-chain information while explicitly allowing voluntary participation. The law requires Commerce to inventory its relevant offices, coordinate across agencies and with state/local governments and industry, produce multiple reports on risks and capacity, and identify critical industries and goods; it prohibits new appropriations to carry out these tasks and sunsets all requirements after ten years.
The bill aims to strengthen U.S. manufacturing and supply‑chain resilience through definitions, planning, and confidentiality protections — but does so at the cost of higher near‑term economic costs, reduced public transparency, uneven benefits for small/rural suppliers, and uncertainty from funding limits and a 10‑year sunset.
Manufacturers, small businesses, and workers: receive clearer eligibility, targeted support, and federal attention to boost domestic production of critical and emerging technologies, potentially creating jobs and strengthening U.S. industrial competitiveness.
Consumers, businesses, and taxpayers: benefit from stronger federal supply‑chain planning (assessments, annual reports, working groups, and an implementation roadmap) that aims to reduce shortages and market disruptions.
Federal, state, and allied partners: gain improved coordination and prioritization of allies and critical technologies (AI, quantum, additive manufacturing), supporting strategic supply diversification and national-security resilience.
Middle‑class families, consumers, and small businesses: may face higher prices and input costs as incentives and sourcing restrictions encourage reshoring and reduced purchasing from lower‑cost foreign suppliers.
Taxpayers: could bear higher federal costs because ongoing assessments, reports, interagency coordination, and any new programs or incentives require sustained staffing and funding.
Taxpayers, state and local governments, and the public: will have reduced transparency and oversight because broad FOIA exemptions and nondisclosure rules shield submitted supply‑chain information from disclosure.
Introduced March 27, 2025 by John James · Last progress April 29, 2025