Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1513227
76 PCB007 MAGAZINE I DECEMBER 2023 How do we make this happen? A version of the CHIPS program for the domestic PCB and substrate industry would be ideal as we pursue different policy rem- edies for the industry. ere's the language in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which says that by 2027, we need a plan to get foreign-restricted microelectronics out of the commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) supply chain. at's more of a prohibition. We all agree that we don't want microelectronics from Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea on our defense platforms. However, COTS tech- nology is one way these components can leak into the supply chain. e Defense Production Act (DPA), which was enacted in 1950 at the start of the Korean War, is a second way to incentivize the industry. If the president says—as he did in March—that printed circuit boards and substrates are criti- cal national technologies and we need to remove federal barriers for purchasing and investment in those technology sets, then we need to fund that hunting license, if you will. ere were some unfortunate cuts to the DPA account at the Pentagon this year. It wasn't a reflection of Congress not believing in the DPA; it was a reflection of the Pentagon not spending that money very quickly. We're now partnering with IPC to get those cuts reversed. We're trying to get money added. at $39.9 million going to Calumet is from the DPA account. There are many companies in the United States that would like to do more work with organic substrates, UHDI, and other kinds of technologies. How is the DoD recognizing that? e Pentagon recognized us as powering the next generation of defense technologies. You already see them doling out their portion of CHIPS Act money to semiconductor compa- nies. In another announcement, this one from Intel, we learned it will use the money to do specific fab work for defense applications. e DoD is moving very quickly because it has an existential reason to want to win these tech- nology races. Perhaps the second push is the use of the DPA. e standalone legislation, the Protect- ing Circuit Boards and Substrates (PCBS) Act, which was introduced in the House, rep- resents $3 billion in funding and a 25% tax credit for the purchase of American-made PCBs. We need a Senate companion bill as well. We are tackling this from differ- ent angles; it's not one bill that will solve every problem. We oen say that it took more than three decades to dig this hole, and it will take more than three weeks, three months, or maybe even three years to dig our way out of it. e market has demon- strated that private money fol- lows public policy. ink about the $450 billion that has come off the sidelines for the semiconductor industry in response to a $52 billion commitment from the federal gov- ernment. We're still in the application pro- cess, so most of that government money hasn't been disbursed; estimates are that it will take a decade to fully disperse the $52 billion. So, private money is getting off the sidelines; they see a demand signal, and sustained support from the biggest buyer of electronics, the fed- eral government. at private money will go into additional private investments, includ- ing greenfield initiatives, capacity, workforce initiatives, and partnerships with institutions such as ASU, Purdue, Ohio State, and others. A great signal was when Michigan stepped up at Calumet, and said, "We'll partner with them so that they can build out more organic substrate production." e Michigan Eco- nomic Development Corporation put up the We are tackling this from different angles; it's not one bill that will solve every problem.