USA Batteries Act

Bill Number

H.R. 1264

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Taxation

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Last Updated

2026-06-09T15:02:58Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The USA Batteries Act (H.R. 1264) aims to support the domestic lead battery industry by removing certain taxes on key chemicals used in production, making U.S. manufacturing more competitive against imported batteries. It addresses concerns that existing taxes disadvantage American producers without similarly taxing foreign imports.

Key Provisions

• Short Title: The bill is named the "USA Batteries Act."
• Findings: Congress outlines the economic importance of the lead battery sector, including its $23.6 billion annual impact, over 25,000 jobs in 38 states, 99% recycling rate, and role in critical areas like defense, transportation, and energy. It highlights how Superfund taxes (fees funding environmental cleanup efforts) on domestic chemicals increase costs for U.S. producers compared to imports.
• Tax Elimination: Amends Section 4661(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by removing lead oxide, antimony, and sulfuric acid from the list of taxable chemicals under Superfund excise taxes. These chemicals are essential raw materials for lead-acid battery manufacturing.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Under current law, the Superfund excise taxes (established to fund hazardous waste cleanup via the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA) impose fees on manufacturers and importers of listed chemicals, including lead oxide, antimony, and sulfuric acid.
• This bill eliminates these taxes specifically for the three chemicals, reducing the tax burden on domestic producers who use them. No other changes to the Superfund tax structure are proposed.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) would collect less revenue from these taxes, potentially reducing funding for Superfund cleanups (estimated annual revenue loss not specified in the bill). This could strain the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) resources for hazardous site remediation.
• On Citizens: Could lead to job preservation or growth in the battery manufacturing sector (benefiting workers in 38 states) and lower production costs, possibly stabilizing prices for batteries used in vehicles, telecom, and energy storage. However, it might indirectly affect environmental cleanup efforts if Superfund funding decreases.
• On International Relations: Enhances U.S. competitiveness in global battery markets by addressing trade imbalances, potentially reducing reliance on imported batteries from countries without similar taxes. No direct impact on foreign policy or trade agreements is outlined.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Domestic Lead Battery Manufacturers: Primary beneficiaries, as they face reduced raw material costs and improved market position against imports.
• Workers and Communities: Over 25,000 direct jobs in battery production could be supported, particularly in manufacturing-heavy states.
• Importers and Foreign Competitors: May face increased competition from cheaper U.S.-made batteries.
• U.S. Government (IRS and EPA): Loss of tax revenue could impact federal budgeting for environmental programs.
• End-Users in Key Sectors: Industries like defense, transportation, and telecommunications may benefit from more affordable, sustainable battery options.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: The change is a targeted amendment to tax code, likely facing minimal legal challenges as it falls under Congress's authority to regulate taxes (Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution). It does not alter broader Superfund liability or environmental standards.
• Constitutional: No apparent issues; it promotes economic policy without infringing on due process or equal protection, though it favors domestic industry over imports, which is permissible under tax law.
• Political: Reflects priorities in supporting U.S. manufacturing and sustainability (e.g., high recycling rates), potentially appealing to pro-industry lawmakers. It could spark debate on balancing environmental funding with economic competitiveness, especially amid growing demand for clean energy technologies. The bill was introduced by bipartisan sponsors and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee for review.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]

Cosponsors (5)

Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1], Rep. Malliotakis, Nicole [R-NY-11], Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10]

Recent Actions

• 2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
• 2025-02-12: Introduced in House
• 2025-02-12: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• USA Batteries Act — issued 2025-02-12 — PDF (2 pages)