On Thursday, Senators Ted Budd (R‑N.C.) and Michael Bennet (D‑Colo.) introduced the bipartisan Semiconductor Superiority Act, a bill that would stretch CHIPS‑era tax incentives into low Earth orbit. The proposal would spell out that Section 48D of the CHIPS and Science Act covers space‑based semiconductor fabrication, clearing a path for U.S. firms to develop microgravity chipmaking technology and try to blunt overseas efforts to do the same.
In a press release on his Senate website, Sen. Ted Budd framed the measure as a way to “eliminate uncertainty” for domestic manufacturers and said it “gives domestic manufacturers the green light to develop microgravity semiconductor technology to compete with China,” according to Sen. Ted Budd’s office. The release names Sen. Michael Bennet as a co‑sponsor and pitches the bill squarely as a competitiveness play for U.S. industry.
Across the Capitol, a companion bill in the House, led by Reps. Vern Buchanan, Terri Sewell and Suzan DelBene, would explicitly add “semiconductor manufacturing facilities located in outer space” to the advanced manufacturing investment credit, according to Rep. DelBene’s office. The proposed language, detailed in congressional records and the bill summary on GovInfo, would make orbital fabrication facilities eligible for the Section 48D tax credit created under the CHIPS law.
Why microgravity matters
A growing stack of peer‑reviewed research suggests microgravity is not just a sci‑fi backdrop but a potentially serious manufacturing environment. Studies indicate that microgravity can suppress convection and related defects during crystal growth, producing larger and more uniform semiconductor crystals that may yield higher‑quality substrates, according to a meta‑analysis of space‑grown semiconductor experiments and a recent study in Nature Communications. Those technical findings underpin lawmakers' pitch that manufacturing in orbit could deliver material advantages that are hard to reproduce on Earth.
China and private players racing to orbit
Supporters of the bill are not shy about pointing to the competition. They cite experiments aboard China’s Tiangong space station and published datasets documenting materials and crystal‑growth work in microgravity as signals that Beijing is advancing orbital materials science, with datasets and papers from Chinese experiments archived in scientific repositories such as PMC.
At the same time, commercial outfits are trying to prove that orbital fabs are not just powerpoints. Private companies have begun testing fabrication hardware in space, and the UK’s Space Forge reported generating plasma aboard its ForgeStar‑1 craft, a milestone covered by Space.com. Advocates point to those efforts as evidence the technology is moving beyond lab‑only experiments.
Policy and security questions
Extending tax credits to factories in orbit is not as simple as changing a line in the tax code. Expanding incentives to orbital fabs immediately runs into export‑control and national‑security questions that lawmakers will have to reconcile with the push to boost domestic production, a balancing act federal officials are already watching closely. The White House and trade investigators have repeatedly signaled that semiconductor supply chains are strategic priorities, and analysts say Congress will likely need to pair any new orbital incentives with oversight rules and export‑control provisions to address dual‑use risks, as described in contemporary policy reporting.
What comes next
The legislation has now been formally introduced in both chambers, setting it up for referral to the relevant committees for hearings and markup. The House companion and the Senate text appear in congressional records and bill pages, and Sen. Budd has also promoted the measure on X. Lawmakers say the bill’s prospects will hinge on committee action, budget scoring and whether industry can convincingly argue that orbital fabrication is a practical and scalable way to make better chips, not just a flashy space project.
.jpg){kind=link}