Three U.S. Government Lists: Which Minerals Are the Most Critical?

The existence of multiple, inconsistent lists creates unnecessary complexity and uncertainty, undermining efforts to encourage private investment across critical mineral supply chains both domestically and internationally.

1. Critical minerals are defined as resources essential to national security and economic competitiveness. However, the U.S. government lacks a single unified list of these minerals. Instead, the Departments of Defense, Energy, and the Interior each maintain their own distinct lists based on factors such as supply chain vulnerabilities and the minerals’ importance to national security, economic resilience, and manufacturing. Among the 70 materials identified across these lists, only 13 are classified as critical by all three agencies. 
2. These lists play a significant role in determining eligibility for federal funding and incentives, including Defense Production Act Title III grants, Inflation Reduction Act tax credits, and Export-Import Bank financing. Beyond funding implications, these lists send powerful signals to the private sector about which minerals are considered strategic priorities for U.S. investment. 
3. The U.S. government should work toward harmonizing these lists across agencies. With the Department of the Interior’s critical minerals list scheduled for review this year, there is a timely opportunity to streamline and clarify the definition of a critical mineral. The Trump administration has already accelerated permitting processes, shortened development timelines for processing and refining capacity, and forged mineral agreements with resource-rich countries. Establishing a single critical minerals list would support these efforts, provide greater clarity on strategic priorities, and enable faster mobilization of government resources to secure these essential materials.