Technical and procedural updates only. The changes between v2 and v3 reflect the bill's progression from being reported in the House to being engrossed and passed by the House of Representatives. There are no substantive policy changes to the text of the bill.
Securing Semiconductor Supply Chains Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 29, 2025
Bottom line
The bill mandates enhanced federal-state coordination through SelectUSA to boost foreign investment in the U.S. semiconductor supply chain without authorizing new funding.
What it actually does
This bill directs the SelectUSA program within the Department of Commerce to actively coordinate with State-level economic development organizations. The primary goal is to identify strategies and overcome barriers to increase foreign direct investment in semiconductor-related manufacturing and production within the United States, specifically focusing on vulnerable segments of the supply chain like fabrication and advanced packaging. It also requires a report to Congress on these efforts.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that strengthening the domestic semiconductor supply chain is crucial for both economic resilience and national security, especially given recent global shortages. They contend that leveraging foreign direct investment through existing programs like SelectUSA, in partnership with states, is a cost-effective way to achieve this goal without new appropriations, ensuring the U.S. remains competitive and secure in a vital industry.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while the goal is laudable, mandating coordination and reporting without additional funding may limit the effectiveness and impact of the initiative, potentially burdening existing SelectUSA resources. Some might also question the extent to which foreign direct investment alone can fully secure the supply chain without more direct federal incentives or investments.
The bill is very short and clear, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core directives and purpose quickly.
Section 4
SelectUSA Engagement with State Economic Development Organizations
Within 180 days of enactment, SelectUSA must solicit comments from State-level economic development organizations. This solicitation aims to review federal support for foreign direct investment (FDI) in semiconductor production, identify barriers to such investment, highlight public opportunities, and pinpoint resource gaps faced by states. Based on this input, SelectUSA is to develop recommendations for increasing FDI independently or through partnerships, and for collaborating with allies to prevent foreign adversaries from benefiting.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is essential for a cohesive national strategy, ensuring federal efforts are informed by on-the-ground state experiences and needs. It leverages existing state expertise and relationships to maximize the impact of foreign direct investment.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision as it focuses on coordination and information gathering, which are generally seen as beneficial. However, some might argue that without dedicated funding, the impact of such coordination might be limited.
Tradeoffs
The primary tension is between the desire for comprehensive federal-state coordination and the lack of additional funding to support these enhanced activities, potentially stretching existing resources.
Section 5
Congressional Report on Foreign Direct Investment Strategies
Not later than two years after enactment, the Executive Director of SelectUSA, in coordination with the Federal Interagency Investment Working Group, must submit a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. This report must include a review of the comments received from State-level economic development organizations, a description of SelectUSA's ongoing activities to increase foreign direct investment in semiconductor-related manufacturing, and an assessment of future strategies to secure the U.S. semiconductor supply chain, including collaboration with other federal agencies and state partners.
This section explicitly states that no additional funds are authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of carrying out this Act.
Section 6
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for bills intended to direct existing agency activities without creating new budgetary outlays. It ensures the bill is perceived as fiscally neutral.
Case for: Supporters argue this demonstrates fiscal responsibility, ensuring the bill leverages existing resources and avoids increasing the national debt. It makes the bill more palatable to those concerned about government spending.
Case against: Critics might argue that without new funding, the mandated coordination and reporting efforts could strain existing agency budgets, potentially diverting resources from other important SelectUSA initiatives or limiting the ambition and effectiveness of the semiconductor supply chain efforts.
Estimated impact: The direct fiscal impact is neutral, as no new spending is authorized. The indirect impact could be a reallocation of existing resources within SelectUSA.
The bill mandates developing recommendations for working with allies to ensure 'foreign adversaries (as defined in section 8(c)(2) of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1607(c)(2))) do not benefit' from efforts to increase investment.
Section 4(2)(B)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative drafting practice to avoid re-defining terms already established in law, ensuring consistency across statutes.
Case for: Supporters argue this ensures a consistent and legally established definition of 'foreign adversary' is applied, preventing ambiguity and aligning with broader national security policies. It streamlines legislative language.
Case against: Critics might argue that relying on external definitions makes the bill less self-contained and harder for a layperson to fully comprehend without additional research.
Estimated impact: Ensures specific nations or entities deemed threats under existing law are excluded from benefiting from U.S. semiconductor investment efforts.