PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 0.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 27, 2026
Memory Chip Competitiveness Assessment Act of 2026
This bill requires the Department of Commerce to study and report on the advanced memory technology marketplace. Under the bill, advanced memory technology means semiconductor memory products manufactured using leading-edge process technologies and primarily designed for high-performance, high-bandwidth, or energy-efficient computing applications.
The study must assess the advanced memory technology supply chain, the impact of market trends on the cost of end products, and mechanisms to increase supply (without acquiring products from North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran). Commerce must provide an opportunity for public comment on the report before finalizing it.
People & committees
Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10170 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10170 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10170 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10170 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-08-27 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Memory Chip Competitiveness Assessment Act of 2026 would require the Commerce Secretary to study the market for advanced memory chips used in demanding or energy-efficient computing. The study would examine supply, demand, and how market trends affect product costs for U.S. consumers and small businesses. The Secretary would seek public comments before submitting a report to Congress and publishing it within 270 days after enactment.
This Act may be cited as the Memory Chip Competitiveness Assessment Act of 2026.
(a) Study required The Secretary shall conduct a study on the marketplace for advanced memory technology.
(1) The marketplace for advanced memory technology, including factors relating to the following: (A) Demand for advanced memory technology. (B) Industries and products that use advanced memory technology. (C) Supply constraints associated with advanced memory technology. (2) The impact of trends in such advanced memory technology marketplace on the cost of end products for consumers and small businesses in the United States.
(B) are primarily designed for high-performance, high-bandwidth, or energy-efficient computing applications
(d) Submission; publication Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall— (1) submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the study required by subsection (a); and (2) publish such report on a website of the Department of Commerce. (e) Opportunity for public comment Before the Secretary submits the report as required by subsection (d)(1), the Secretary shall provide an opportunity for public comment with respect to such report.
(4) Secretary The term Secretary means the Secretary of Commerce (acting through the Office of the Secretary of Commerce).
The study would cover semiconductor memory products made with leading-edge manufacturing processes and primarily designed for high performance, rapid data transfer, or energy efficiency. The definition includes specified working-memory technologies, stacked memory, three-dimensional NAND memory with more than 200 layers, and memory supporting artificial intelligence, data centers, vehicle autonomy, and advanced communications.
(1) Advanced memory technology The term advanced memory technology means semiconductor memory products that— (A) are manufactured using leading-edge process technologies; and (B) are primarily designed for high-performance, high-bandwidth, or energy-efficient computing applications, including— (i) dynamic random-access memory at or below industry-leading nodes; (ii) high-bandwidth memory and 3-dimensional-stacked memory architectures; (iii) 3-dimensional NAND that employ high-layer-count architectures that exceed 200 layers; and (iv) memory solutions that enable systems relating to artificial intelligence, data centers, motor vehicle autonomy, and advanced communications, including DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR, and any other commercially significant memory technologies.
The Secretary would assess demand, the industries and products using advanced memory, and constraints on supply. The study would also examine how market trends affect prices of finished products for U.S. consumers and small businesses; the bill does not state what that assessment would find.
(b) Elements In conducting the study required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall assess the following: (1) The marketplace for advanced memory technology, including factors relating to the following: (A) Demand for advanced memory technology. (B) Industries and products that use advanced memory technology. (C) Supply constraints associated with advanced memory technology. (2) The impact of trends in such advanced memory technology marketplace on the cost of end products for consumers and small businesses in the United States.
The study would examine how much investment advanced memory requires, investment timing, and issues involved in moving to newer technologies. It would also analyze the supply chain, including suppliers based outside countries classified as countries of concern.
(3) Capital intensity, investment cycles, and technology transition considerations for advanced memory technology. (4) The supply chain for advanced memory technology, including an analysis of suppliers of advanced memory technology that are not domiciled in a country of concern.
The Secretary would assess legal, regulatory, or policy barriers related to limited supply. The Secretary would also assess regulatory, legislative, or market solutions that could increase supply without obtaining more from a country of concern. These are subjects for assessment, not requirements to adopt those solutions.
(b) Elements In conducting the study required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall assess the following:
(5) Any legal, regulatory, or policy barrier related to limitations in the supply of advanced memory technology. (6) Any regulatory, legislative, or market solution to increase supply in advanced memory technology without obtaining a greater amount of such supply from a country of concern.
The bill would use the definition of “covered nation” in an existing federal statute to determine which countries count as countries of concern. The supplied text does not reproduce that definition.
(3) Country of concern The term country of concern has the same meaning given the term covered nation in section 4872(f) of title 10, United States Code.
The Secretary would have to consult relevant federal agency heads and nongovernmental participants. Required participants would include advanced-memory manufacturers, manufacturers of equipment and materials used to make that memory, and customers including internet service providers and makers of consumer electronics and motor vehicles.
(c) Consultation In conducting the study required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the following: (1) The head of any relevant Federal agency. (2) Non-governmental stakeholders, including the following: (A) Manufacturers of advanced memory technology. (B) Manufacturers of semiconductor manufacturing equipment and materials for advanced memory technology. (C) Customers of advanced memory technology, including internet service providers and manufacturers of consumer electronics and motor vehicles.
The Secretary would have to offer the public an opportunity to comment on the report before submitting it to Congress.
(e) Opportunity for public comment Before the Secretary submits the report as required by subsection (d)(1), the Secretary shall provide an opportunity for public comment with respect to such report.
Within 270 days after enactment, the Secretary would have to submit the study report to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, and publish it on a Commerce Department website. The deadline would run from enactment, not introduction.
(d) Submission; publication Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall— (1) submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the study required by subsection (a); and (2) publish such report on a website of the Department of Commerce.
(2) Appropriate congressional committees The term appropriate congressional committees means— (A) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives; and (B) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
The supplied September 19, 2026 source snapshot records introduction and committee referrals on August 27, subcommittee consideration and forwarding to the full committee by voice vote on September 1, and committee consideration on September 16. It records a 45–0 vote on September 16 to order the bill reported with amendments—a committee action, not passage by the full House or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T08:06:04Z. 2026-09-16: Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 0. 2026-09-16: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held 2026-09-01: Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote. 2026-09-01: Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held 2026-08-27: Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. 2026-08-27: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-08-27: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-08-27. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI