Topline
Every U.S. policy tool for securing access to critical minerals involves trade-offs. Knowing which tool fits which problem will allow the government to better design and apply policies going forward.
China controls more than 70 percent of the world’s supply of several critical minerals, and it has shown a willingness to weaponize that dominance through export controls. The resulting price spikes and supply uncertainty threaten the United States—particularly its defense, energy, and manufacturing sectors.
The U.S. government has responded with a set of policy tools, such as tax credits, loans, stockpiles, import tariffs, and permitting reforms. But which tools actually work, and for whom? RAND researchers analyzed each tool using economic theory and historical examples, as well as structured interviews with industry representatives across the critical mineral value chain.
Key Takeaways
Stockpiling is the only fast path to resilience.
Every other policy tool examined takes years to significantly strengthen the U.S. critical mineral supply chain. Stockpiling can deliver results within months, depending on design.
Most policies undercut investment in substitutes.
Policies that boost domestic production tend to lower prices, which reduces the economic incentive to develop alternative materials or technologies that could reduce U.S. dependence in the long term.
Policy design and implementation both matter.
Uncertainty, lack of transparency, and slow timelines make otherwise sound policy tools less effective. Industry representatives cited these process failures as major deterrents to investment.
Needs differ sharply across the value chain.
For example, miners need permitting certainty before capital support, but smelters and refiners need multiple forms of stacked support to overcome structurally thin margins.
Recommendations
For federal interagency bodies coordinating the critical mineral policy effort:
- Make all critical mineral programs competitive and open to qualified applicants, using objective and transparent eligibility criteria.
- Improve the accessibility and transparency of capital support programs.
- Stop making equity investments in critical mineral producers; low-cost debt achieves similar goals without the governance complications and ownership dilution.
- Extend production tax credits indefinitely; their value depends on durability, and industry will not plan around credits that may disappear before projects reach production.
- Streamline permitting pathways and reduce litigation risk.
- Limit import tariffs to materials with at least some existing domestic production capacity to avoid raising costs for downstream manufacturers.
- Include producer countries in plurilateral trade agreements to secure affordable feedstock access for U.S. refiners until domestic mining capacity expands.
- Match policy tools to the specific market segment and commodity.
Methodology
RAND researchers used a two-part approach. First, they evaluated each policy tool against five economic criteria—effects on domestic production capacity, incentives for substitutes and efficiency improvements, effects on downstream industries, the speed of impact, and budget effects—drawing on economic theory and historical U.S. industrial policy experience. Next, they conducted structured interviews with 16 representatives from firms across the critical mineral value chain, including miners, smelters, refiners, financiers, and innovation companies. Interview responses were coded against predefined categories and analyzed by value chain segment, company size, and commodity market size to identify patterns in barriers and policy preferences.
Topics
Citation
RAND Style Manual
LaTourrette, Tom, Omar Aboulezz, Scott Behmer, and Tom Blaubach, Evaluation of U.S. Policies to Increase Domestic Access to Critical Minerals, RAND Corporation, RR-A5195-1, 2026. As of September 29, 2026:
Chicago Manual of Style
LaTourrette, Tom, Omar Aboulezz, Scott Behmer, and Tom Blaubach, Evaluation of U.S. Policies to Increase Domestic Access to Critical Minerals. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2026. .
This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.
