Technical corrections only. The changes between v2 and v3 reflect the bill's progression from being reported in the Senate to being engrossed after passing the Senate, including updates to the bill's designation from "A BILL" to "AN ACT" and the addition of a Senate passage attestation. There are no substantive policy changes in the text of the bill.
Securing Semiconductor Supply Chains Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 26, 2025
Bottom line
The bill directs SelectUSA to enhance its efforts to attract foreign investment into the U.S. semiconductor industry by collaborating with state economic development groups, without providing new federal funding.
What it actually does
This bill mandates that the SelectUSA program within the Department of Commerce coordinate with State-level economic development organizations to increase foreign direct investment (FDI) in semiconductor-related manufacturing and production. SelectUSA is required to solicit comments from these organizations on current efforts, barriers, opportunities, and resource gaps, and to develop recommendations for increasing FDI. The bill also requires a report to Congress within two years detailing these activities and strategies, while explicitly stating that no additional funds are authorized for its implementation, meaning SelectUSA must use existing resources.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill is a crucial step to strengthen the United States' economic and national security by securing a stable and resilient semiconductor supply chain. They emphasize that semiconductors are foundational to the modern economy and national defense, and that leveraging foreign direct investment, particularly in vulnerable segments like fabrication and advanced packaging, is essential to mitigate future shortages and reduce reliance on foreign adversaries. Supporters believe SelectUSA, through enhanced state coordination, is well-positioned to achieve these goals efficiently.
Opponents contend
Critics might contend that while the bill's intent is laudable, its impact will be limited due to the explicit prohibition on additional funding. They may argue that addressing a challenge as significant as semiconductor supply chain vulnerabilities requires substantial new investment and resources, not just a directive to reallocate existing funds. Some might also suggest that relying primarily on foreign direct investment, even from allies, may not fully address the need for robust domestic manufacturing capabilities and could still leave the U.S. vulnerable to global market fluctuations.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a few minutes.
Section 4
Coordination with State-Level Economic Development Organizations
This section requires the Executive Director of SelectUSA to engage with State-level economic development organizations within 180 days of the Act's enactment. The purpose of this engagement is to gather feedback on how the Federal Government can support increased foreign direct investment in semiconductor production, identify existing barriers, highlight opportunities, and understand resource gaps faced by states. Based on this input, SelectUSA must develop recommendations for increasing such investment, both independently and through partnerships, and ensure that foreign adversaries do not benefit from these efforts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that direct engagement with state-level organizations is critical because they are on the front lines of attracting investment and understand local economic landscapes and specific barriers. This coordination will ensure that federal efforts are aligned with state needs and maximize the effectiveness of initiatives to bring semiconductor manufacturing to the U.S., thereby strengthening the supply chain and creating jobs.
Critics contend
Critics might suggest that while coordination is good, without new resources, this provision might simply add administrative burden to SelectUSA and state organizations without leading to significant new investment. They could argue that states already have robust FDI programs and that federal coordination, without tangible new incentives or funding, may not dramatically alter investment patterns.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the need for federal leadership in national economic security with the recognition of state-level expertise and autonomy in economic development. The tension lies in ensuring effective coordination and impact without imposing unfunded mandates or duplicating existing state efforts.
Section 5
Report on Increasing Foreign Direct Investment
This section requires the Executive Director of SelectUSA, in collaboration with the Federal Interagency Investment Working Group, to submit a comprehensive report to specific Congressional committees within two years of the Act's enactment. The report must include a review of the comments received from State-level economic development organizations, a description of SelectUSA's ongoing activities to boost foreign direct investment in semiconductor-related manufacturing, and an assessment of future strategies to increase such investment and secure the U.S. semiconductor supply chain, including through interagency and state partnerships.
This section explicitly states that no additional funds are authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of carrying out this Act. It mandates that the Executive Director of SelectUSA shall carry out the Act using amounts otherwise available to the Executive Director for such purposes.
Section 6
Why it matters:While standard legislative practice to include funding directives, placing it at the end can minimize its immediate prominence. It could be seen as a way to pass a popular initiative without incurring new spending, which can be politically advantageous.
Case for: Proponents argue that this provision demonstrates fiscal responsibility by ensuring the bill's objectives are met through existing resources, avoiding new appropriations and potential budget increases. It encourages efficiency and prioritization within SelectUSA's current operations.
Case against: Critics contend that by explicitly denying new funds, the bill significantly limits the potential impact of the mandated coordination and reporting. They argue that addressing a critical national security and economic issue like semiconductor supply chain resilience effectively requires dedicated new investment, and relying solely on existing, potentially stretched, resources may render the bill's goals aspirational rather than achievable.
Estimated impact: The bill's direct fiscal impact on the federal budget is neutral, as it authorizes no new spending and requires the use of existing appropriations.