PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 28, 2020
Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Chain Act
This bill allows a new tax deduction for 10% of the cost of specified domestically-produced materials if such materials are acquired directly from the domestic smelter or processor of the materials. The bill defines specified domestically-produced materials as materials that are smelted or processed in the United States by direct smelting of ore, from a mine product, by a taxpayer in the trade or business of smelting or processing such materials.
The term specified material includes minerals necessary for national defense and security, for U.S. energy infrastructure, for community resiliency, to support domestic manufacturing, agriculture, housing, telecommunications, healthcare, and transportation infrastructure, or for U.S. economic security and balance of trade. The term does not include fuel minerals, water, ice, or snow, or sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, cinders, or clay.
People & committees
Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8] · R–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. 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.6630 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.6630 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.6630 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.6630 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.