The Mined in America Act: How New Federal Policy Supports Domestic Bitcoin Mining Infrastructure

In the first half of 2026, a new piece of bipartisan legislation began moving through the United States Senate that could fundamentally alter the economics, security posture, and competitive dynamics of domestic Bitcoin mining. The Mined in America Act, introduced by Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), proposes to classify Bitcoin mining operations as critical national security infrastructure and establish a federal certification program for facilities that meet stringent domestic-operations standards.

The bill arrives at a pivotal moment. The United States already commands over 35% of the global Bitcoin hashrate, but that dominance rests on a patchwork of state-level policies, private investment, and market incentives rather than any coordinated federal strategy. Meanwhile, adversarial nations continue expanding their own mining capacity, and the 2024 halving has compressed operator margins to the point where policy advantages can determine which facilities survive and which shut down.

For hosting providers, colocation operators, and data center developers, the Mined in America Act is not an abstract regulatory exercise. It is a direct catalyst for demand, a new compliance framework, and a potential source of competitive advantage for operators who position themselves ahead of the curve.

Legislative Context: Why This Bill, Why Now

The Mined in America Act did not emerge in a vacuum. It is part of a broader shift in Washington's posture toward digital assets and the physical infrastructure that supports them. Several converging trends made this legislation both possible and arguably inevitable.

First, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve codification established the federal government as a custodian and holder of Bitcoin. Once the US government held Bitcoin on its balance sheet, the question of where and how new Bitcoin gets mined became a matter of sovereign interest rather than purely private commerce. The Mined in America Act was designed as a natural companion to the reserve, ensuring that the production side of the Bitcoin supply chain also falls under domestic oversight.

Second, national security concerns about foreign hardware reached a tipping point. A significant portion of the ASIC mining hardware deployed in US facilities is manufactured by companies headquartered in countries that the Department of Commerce has designated as foreign adversaries. The intelligence community raised repeated concerns about firmware-level vulnerabilities, supply chain interdiction risks, and the potential for hardware-based surveillance or disruption of mining operations that process sensitive transaction data.

Third, the energy and grid reliability debate matured. Early political opposition to Bitcoin mining centered on energy consumption. But as more operators co-located with stranded energy and renewable generation, and as waste heat reuse gained traction, the narrative shifted from "mining wastes energy" to "mining can stabilize the grid if properly regulated." The Mined in America Act incorporates this shift by incentivizing facilities that demonstrate grid-positive behavior.

Core Provisions of the Mined in America Act

The legislation is structured around four pillars: classification, certification, hardware compliance, and incentive alignment. Each creates specific obligations and opportunities for mining operators and their hosting partners.

Critical Infrastructure Classification

The act formally classifies domestic Bitcoin mining as critical infrastructure under an expanded definition of the energy sector designation in Presidential Policy Directive 21. This classification carries several practical consequences:

• Federal coordination: The Department of Energy (DOE) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) gain formal jurisdiction over mining facility security standards, incident reporting, and threat intelligence sharing.
• Permitting priority: Certified mining facilities become eligible for expedited federal permitting under the same frameworks that apply to power plants, transmission infrastructure, and other critical energy assets.
• Grid interconnection: Certified operators gain priority in utility interconnection queues, which can reduce the 18- to 36-month timeline that currently delays new facility deployments in many jurisdictions.
• Insurance and financing: Critical infrastructure status opens access to federal risk-sharing programs and may reduce insurance premiums by establishing recognized security baselines.

Federal Certification Program

The certification program is the operational core of the legislation. The Department of Commerce, in coordination with DOE and CISA, administers a voluntary certification that mining facilities can pursue. Certification requires demonstrating compliance across several domains:

Domain	Certification Requirements
Ownership	Majority US ownership or ownership by entities from allied nations. No controlling interest by foreign-adversary entities.
Physical Security	Facility security standards aligned with NERC CIP (Critical Infrastructure Protection) baselines. 24/7 monitoring, access controls, perimeter security.
Cybersecurity	Network segmentation, firmware integrity verification, incident response plans, CISA threat-sharing participation.
Hardware Provenance	Full supply chain documentation for all ASIC hardware. Compliance with approved-manufacturer requirements within transition windows.
Energy Sourcing	Disclosure of energy sources. Preferential scoring for facilities using low-carbon or curtailable power.
Reporting	Quarterly hashrate, energy consumption, and hardware inventory reports to DOE.

Certification is voluntary, but the incentive structure makes it economically rational for any operator at scale. Non-certified operations continue to operate legally but without access to the preferential permitting, tax treatment, and grid interconnection benefits that certified facilities receive.

Foreign-Adversary Hardware Removal

The most operationally disruptive provision of the act is the phased hardware transition mandate. Certified facilities must remove ASIC miners and critical networking equipment manufactured by entities domiciled in designated foreign-adversary countries. The transition timeline follows a stepped schedule:

• Year 1: No new procurement of foreign-adversary hardware. All new deployments must use approved-manufacturer equipment.
• Year 2: At least 50% of deployed hashrate must run on approved hardware.
• Year 3: Full transition. All hardware from foreign-adversary manufacturers must be decommissioned or removed from certified facilities.

The Department of Commerce maintains and periodically updates the approved-manufacturer list. Current approved manufacturers include companies headquartered in the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, the European Union, and other allied nations. The list explicitly excludes entities with majority ownership or effective control by designated foreign-adversary governments.

Incentive Structure

The act pairs its compliance requirements with tangible economic incentives designed to offset transition costs and accelerate domestic infrastructure investment:

• Investment tax credits: Certified facilities qualify for enhanced Section 48-style investment tax credits on new hardware and infrastructure buildouts.
• Accelerated depreciation: ASIC hardware deployed in certified facilities qualifies for accelerated depreciation schedules, improving first-year cash flow for operators upgrading from foreign-adversary equipment.
• Permitting fee waivers: Federal permitting fees for power interconnection and environmental review are waived for certified facilities below 100 MW.
• Grid services compensation: Certified facilities that participate in demand-response programs receive enhanced compensation rates, recognizing their role as flexible grid resources.

The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Connection

Understanding the Mined in America Act in isolation misses the larger strategic picture. The legislation was explicitly drafted as the production-side complement to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve codification, which established the federal government's authority to hold and manage Bitcoin as a reserve asset.

The logic is straightforward. If the United States holds Bitcoin as a strategic reserve, it has a national interest in ensuring that the process of creating new Bitcoin remains anchored to domestic infrastructure. Dependence on foreign mining capacity to produce an asset held in sovereign reserves creates the same category of strategic vulnerability that the petroleum reserve system was designed to mitigate decades ago.

Together, the two pieces of legislation form a coherent two-pronged federal Bitcoin strategy: the reserve secures the asset, and the Mined in America Act secures the means of production. This pairing signals to markets and to international competitors that the United States intends to treat Bitcoin infrastructure with the same seriousness it applies to energy independence and defense-industrial capacity.

Implications for US-Based Hosting Providers and Data Centers

For colocation hosting providers and data center operators, the Mined in America Act creates a new competitive landscape with distinct winners and structural advantages.

Demand Acceleration

The certification program is expected to drive a significant increase in demand for US-based colocation capacity. International mining operators who want access to the US market's incentive structure will need to deploy hardware in certified domestic facilities. This creates incremental demand on top of the organic growth that the US hosting market has already been experiencing.

Analysts project that the act could drive 5 to 8 GW of additional mining facility capacity development within five years of enactment, concentrated in states with favorable power markets, grid capacity, and regulatory environments. Texas, Wyoming, New York (upstate), Georgia, and the Dakotas are expected to capture the majority of this new investment.

Facility Certification as Competitive Moat

Hosting providers that achieve federal certification will enjoy a structural advantage over non-certified competitors. The certification effectively creates a two-tier market: certified facilities that can offer their customers access to tax incentives, expedited permitting, and priority grid interconnection, and non-certified facilities that cannot.

For operators already running facilities that meet high compliance and certification standards, the incremental effort to achieve Mined in America Act certification is manageable. The security, monitoring, and reporting requirements align closely with existing SOC 2, ISO 27001, and NERC CIP frameworks that well-run data centers already implement.

Supply Chain Restructuring

The hardware transition mandate will force a restructuring of ASIC procurement channels. Hosting providers that also offer hardware procurement services must verify that their supply chains deliver approved-manufacturer equipment. Providers with established relationships with manufacturers in allied nations will be better positioned to serve customers navigating the transition.

This supply chain shift also creates opportunities for hosting providers to offer hardware-as-a-service models, where the hosting operator owns and maintains certified hardware on behalf of mining customers who want to avoid the complexity of procurement compliance.

Power Market Positioning

The act's grid-services provisions and energy-sourcing disclosure requirements favor hosting providers with sophisticated power procurement strategies. Facilities that can demonstrate participation in demand-response programs, behind-the-meter renewable generation, or co-location with stranded energy assets will score higher in the certification process and qualify for enhanced compensation.

This reinforces a trend already underway: the most competitive Bitcoin hosting operations are those that treat energy strategy as a core competency rather than a cost center. The Mined in America Act codifies this advantage into federal policy.

How Rax Data and Energy Aligns with the Act's Framework

For infrastructure operators like Rax Data and Energy, the Mined in America Act validates a strategic direction that was already in motion. The act's emphasis on domestic ownership, facility security, energy innovation, and hardware provenance mirrors the operational priorities that define Rax's approach to data center and hosting infrastructure.

Rax operates purpose-built hosting facilities designed to meet enterprise-grade security and compliance requirements. The physical security protocols, network monitoring systems, and operational reporting that the act requires are consistent with the standards Rax already maintains across its facility portfolio.

On the energy side, Rax's investments in power procurement optimization and its integration with Rax Energy's renewable and curtailable power programs position its facilities favorably for the act's energy-sourcing scoring criteria. Hosting customers at Rax-operated facilities can demonstrate grid-positive behavior that certification auditors are specifically looking for.

The hardware provenance requirements are similarly aligned. Rax's procurement relationships emphasize supply chain transparency, and the company has been actively transitioning its recommended hardware offerings toward approved-manufacturer equipment in anticipation of regulatory trends.

Broader Market and Policy Implications

International Competitive Dynamics

The Mined in America Act positions the United States as the first major economy to establish a comprehensive federal framework for Bitcoin mining infrastructure. Other mining-significant nations, including Canada, Kazakhstan, Russia, and several Gulf states, are expected to respond with their own frameworks, potentially creating a global competition for mining capital and hashrate similar to the competition for semiconductor fabrication capacity.

For multinational mining operators, the act creates a clear incentive to shift capacity toward the US or, at minimum, to establish a significant US presence. This could accelerate the ongoing geographic diversification of Bitcoin hashrate away from concentration in any single jurisdiction.

Impact on Bitcoin Network Security

By incentivizing the concentration of hashrate in facilities that meet defined security and ownership standards, the act indirectly strengthens the security of the Bitcoin network itself. Certified facilities operate under oversight that reduces the risk of hashrate manipulation, pool-level collusion, or state-directed mining attacks that could theoretically compromise network consensus.

This is a nuanced point. Bitcoin's security model is inherently decentralized, and any policy that concentrates hashrate in a single jurisdiction carries its own risks. The act's defenders argue that incentivizing domestic hashrate under transparent oversight is preferable to the status quo, where significant hashrate operates in jurisdictions with opaque governance and no security accountability.

Precedent for AI and HPC Infrastructure

The Mined in America Act may also serve as a legislative template for similar treatment of AI training infrastructure and high-performance computing facilities. The national security arguments for domestic control of mining hardware parallel the arguments for domestic control of AI chips and training clusters. If the act proves workable for mining, Congress may extend similar certification frameworks to GPU-powered facilities running large language model training and other compute-intensive national security workloads.

Challenges and Criticisms

The act is not without opposition. Industry participants have raised several legitimate concerns that will shape the legislation's final form as it moves through committee.

Hardware transition costs are the most immediate concern. Operators with large fleets of foreign-manufactured ASIC miners face significant capital expenditure to replace equipment before the end of useful life. The act's tax incentives partially offset these costs, but smaller operators with limited access to capital markets may find the transition financially challenging.

Centralization risk is a philosophical objection raised by Bitcoin maximalists who argue that any federal certification framework inherently conflicts with Bitcoin's decentralized ethos. The act's proponents counter that certification is voluntary and that non-certified mining remains legal, but critics note that the incentive structure could make uncertified operations economically uncompetitive over time.

Approved-manufacturer capacity is a practical bottleneck. The current production capacity of ASIC manufacturers in allied nations may not be sufficient to absorb the demand created by the hardware transition mandate. If the approved-manufacturer list is too narrow, the transition timelines may prove unrealistic without creating equipment shortages and price spikes.

What Operators Should Do Now

Regardless of the act's final legislative timeline, mining operators and hosting providers can take concrete steps to position themselves advantageously:

1. Audit current hardware provenance: Document the manufacturer, origin, and firmware version of all deployed ASIC hardware. Identify which units would need replacement under the act's hardware provisions.
2. Evaluate facility security posture: Compare current physical and cybersecurity controls against NERC CIP baselines and the certification domains outlined in the act. Address gaps proactively.
3. Engage with approved manufacturers: Establish procurement relationships with ASIC manufacturers on the anticipated approved list. Early orders will avoid the supply crunch that compliance deadlines will create.
4. Document energy sourcing: Prepare energy-source disclosures and quantify participation in demand-response or renewable energy programs. These disclosures will be required for certification and advantageous for scoring.
5. Consult legal and tax advisors: Understand the specific tax incentives the act provides and model the financial impact of certification versus non-certification on your operation's economics.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Mined in America Act?

The Mined in America Act is bipartisan legislation introduced by Senators Bill Cassidy and Cynthia Lummis that classifies Bitcoin mining as critical national security infrastructure. It creates a federal certification program for domestic mining facilities, mandates the phased removal of foreign-adversary hardware from certified operations, and pairs with the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve codification to strengthen American leadership in digital asset infrastructure.

How does the Mined in America Act affect Bitcoin mining hosting providers?

Hosting providers and colocation operators that achieve federal certification gain access to preferential permitting pathways and potential tax incentives. The legislation also drives demand for US-based colocation capacity as miners seek certified facilities. Providers must ensure their supply chains exclude hardware from designated foreign adversaries and meet new facility security, reporting, and energy-sourcing standards.

What hardware restrictions does the Mined in America Act impose?

The act mandates a phased removal of ASIC miners and networking equipment manufactured by entities in countries designated as foreign adversaries. Certified facilities must transition to hardware produced by approved manufacturers within defined compliance windows. The Department of Commerce maintains the approved hardware list, and facilities face decertification for non-compliance after the transition period ends.

How does the Mined in America Act relate to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve?

The Mined in America Act was designed as a companion to the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve codification. While the reserve establishes the federal government as a holder and custodian of Bitcoin, the Mined in America Act ensures that the infrastructure producing newly mined Bitcoin operates on US soil under US oversight. Together they represent a two-pronged federal strategy: securing both the asset and the means of producing it domestically.