Commission on the Scaling of Fusion Energy OCTOBER 2025 Fusion Forward Powering America’s Future Letter from the Commission Co-Chairs As co-chairs of the Commission on Scaling of Fusion Energy, we are grateful for all the work the Commission members, countless experts, and stakeholders have contributed towards crafting this groundbreaking report. Since the publication of the Commission’s preliminary report in February 2025, awareness of the potential and promise of fusion energy has continued to grow. We share this enthusiasm and believe that the opportunities a fusion-powered future could deliver for the United States warrants continued government focus aimed at spurring the private sector to develop and rapidly deploy fusion energy generation facilities. As this report finds, the global race for fusion energy has reached a critical inflection point, and the nation that is able to win this competition could enjoy robust, dependable, and virtually limitless supplies of electricity and process heat. Such energy abundance would not only provide for prosperity but also security, positioning the United States as a global leader in this transformational industry. China has made massive investments in fusion research and development and only continues to accelerate its efforts. The United States must maintain its competitive edge, set the standards, and prepare to capture the massive global market for this transformative technology. We again extend our gratitude to the Commissioners for proposing strategies to help ensure America leads the scaling and commercialization of fusion energy. Sincerely, James Risch U.S. Senator (R-ID) Maria Cantwell U.S. Senator (D-WA) Ylli Bajraktari President, Special Competitive Studies Project Letter from the Chairman Fusion energy—what promises to be a baseload, dispatchable, carbon-free source of energy—is on the cusp of transforming how humanity fuels its future. Once thought to be decades away, recent scientific milestones and rapid progress in enabling technologies have brought fusion within reach of demonstration in the coming decade. Achieving fusion energy at scale would ensure energy security, drive economic prosperity, and provide a sustainable power source for generations to come. Given the strategic and transformative potential of fusion, it is imperative that the United States lead in its scientific discovery, demonstration, and commercialization. Leadership in this field will not only secure our nation’s energy future, but will also reinforce our position as a global powerhouse of innovation. As with other breakthrough technologies, maintaining U.S. leadership in fusion will require accelerating research, development, and demonstration efforts; streamlining regulations; and cultivating robust markets. The recommendations outlined in this report provide a roadmap to achieve these goals, combining ambitious public investment with strategic public–private partnerships and forward-looking policies. This effort is the result of a collaborative effort among leading experts from academia, the private sector, and government, all dedicated to ensuring that the United States leads in the global race to commercialize fusion energy. The urgency to act has never been greater. While the United States has long been at the forefront of fusion research, the international competition is intensifying. China, in particular, is rapidly advancing its fusion energy capabilities through massive state investments and aggressive technological development, narrowing the window for American leadership. Without decisive action, the United States risks falling behind in an industry poised to reshape the global energy landscape far sooner than many anticipated. U.S. leadership in fusion is not just a matter of scientific progress—it is a geopolitical necessity to maintain technological supremacy and ensure national security. This Commission concludes its work at a crucial moment in our nation’s history. The coming years will determine whether the United States sets the pace of fusion innovation or follows in the wake of others. By leveraging our unparalleled scientific base, fostering innovation, and enacting bold policy, we have the opportunity to usher in a new era of clean, abundant, and secure energy. With continued commitment and investment, fusion energy can move from promise to reality—transforming our economy, strengthening our security, and ensuring a sustainable and prosperous future for all. Sincerely, Eric Schmidt Chairman, SCSP About the Commission Mission The Commission on the Scaling of Fusion Energy, convened by the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP), is dedicated to ensuring that the United States, alongside key allies and partners, leads in the global race to commercialize fusion energy. With a bold vision for achieving large-scale domestic power generation from fusion within a decade, the Commission aims to position the United States as the global leader in this transformative technology. Commission Leadership Senator Jim Risch (R-ID), Co-Chair Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Co-Chair Ylli Bajraktari, President of SCSP, Co-Chair Commissioners Manu Asthana, President and CEO of PJM Interconnection Dr. Kimberly Budil, Director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Dr. Steven Cowley, Director of Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory The Honorable Paul Dabbar*, Deputy Secretary of Commerce Dr. David Kirtley, CEO of Helion Energy Michael Kuiken, Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution The Honorable Mark Menezes, President and CEO of the United States Energy Association Dr. Bob Mumgaard, CEO of Commonwealth Fusion Systems Luke Murry, Head of Government Affairs at Marvell Technology Dr. Rachel Slaybaugh, Partner at DCVC *Commissioner Emeritus Scope of Work and Progress Since February 2025 Following the release of its preliminary report, Fusion Power: Enabling 21st Century American Dominance, in February 2025, the Commission intensified its activities, focusing on developing actionable implementation guidance to facilitate the three-pillar strategy for U.S. fusion leadership. Through the Commission’s three working groups—R&D Acceleration, Authorities, and Resources—and plenary sessions, Commissioners received 48 briefings from fusion stakeholders, including from 14 private companies, 12 current and former Department of Energy (DOE) representatives, and 16 other experts from government, non-governmental organizations, research, legal, and private capital communities. These engagements resulted in several key deliverables that form the foundation of this Fall Report: ● An updated assessment of the U.S.–China competition landscape in fusion; ● An updated analysis of the emerging fusion supply chain and recommendations for addressing critical vulnerabilities and opportunities; ● Recommendations for implementing the National Fusion Goal, including a fusion Executive Order; and ● A Roadmap for Authorities to Deploy Fusion Energy and Progress Report detailing the next steps in fusion regulation. This report includes recommendations derived from the Commission’s working group meetings and reflects the collective views and expertise of the commissioners, with input from advisors, expert briefers, commission staff, and additional contributors listed in Appendix 2. In developing this report, all commissioners had the opportunity to review and provide feedback. The majority of commissioners offered substantive input, which has been incorporated into this final version, and concurred with its release to the public. Commission Co-Chairs Senator Risch and Senator Cantwell provided their guidance for the development of this report, but were not involved in the formulation of the report's specific policy recommendations. As co-chairs, the Senators provided strategic direction and supported the commission’s broader mission to advance U.S. leadership in fusion energy and technology competitiveness. Table of Contents Letter from the Commission Co-Chairs 2 Letter from the Chairman 3 About the Commission 4 Table of Contents 6 Executive Summary 7 Introduction: The Urgency Accelerates 9 The Shifting Fusion Landscape: U.S.–China Comparative Analysis 11 Research & Development: Moving from Ignition to Deployment 12 Cash, Scale, and Speed: Mobilizing Private vs. Government Capital 15 Supply Chains: Controlling the Metals, Minerals, and Manufacturing 21 The Global Landscape: Other Key Players 23 Policy Recommendations: Winning the Fusion Race 25 1. Declare Fusion a National Security Priority 25 2. Expand Fusion Leadership and Inject $10B to Drive Commercialization 26 3. Strategic Actions to Win the Fusion Race 27 Conclusion: The Path to Fusion Dominance 30 Appendix 1: Roadmap for Authorities to Deploy Fusion Energy 31 Appendix 2: Contributors and Expert Briefers 38 Executive Summary This report underscores the urgent need for the United States to prioritize the rapid commercialization of fusion energy to secure U.S. national security and restore American energy dominance. Fusion, the process that powers the stars, offers the potential for an abundant, clean, and geographically unconstrained energy source, poised to revolutionize the global energy landscape and boost economic growth. The Stakes Have Increased. The nation that leads in fusion will secure significant economic advantages, ensure its energy independence, and maintain its technological edge in critical areas, including AI and national security. In our preliminary report, Fusion Power: Enabling 21st Century Dominance, we set forth a bold National Fusion Goal: to begin construction on the world’s first commercial fusion power plant within this decade, anchored in a clear, three-part strategy for success. The global fusion race continues to evolve rapidly. The United States leads in scientific breakthroughs and predictive understanding, a lead that must be preserved. It also leads in private investment. However, China is executing an infrastructure-first strategy, outpacing the United States in building critical R&D facilities, taking major steps in commercialization, and positioning itself to dominate the future fusion supply chain. Failing to act decisively now will result in the United States ceding this critical industry to China. This report consequently raises the level of ambition. There is no time to waste. This administration has the opportunity to unleash a thriving American fusion industry. In our revised National Fusion Goal, we call for America to initiate construction on more than one industry-led demonstration fusion power plant in the United States by the end of 2028 that leads to commercialization. Achieving this goal requires immediate and concerted action in the following areas: 1. Declare Fusion Energy a National Security Priority. The Federal Government must officially recognize fusion energy as critical to national security. a. We recommend that the President immediately issue an Executive Order on advancing fusion energy as a national security priority. This EO would establish the National Fusion Goal, drive continued U.S. scientific leadership, and direct support across the interagency for the U.S. fusion industry. 2. Expand Fusion Leadership and Inject $10 Billion to Drive Commercialization. To bring fusion to the grid, the Department of Energy must take organized, sustained action across fusion research, development, and demonstration (RD&D). A $10 billion investment is needed to achieve the National Fusion Goal. a. Organize for a Commercialization-Oriented Mission: We recommend that the Secretary of Energy designate a National Fusion Lead, create a temporary project office to achieve the National Fusion Goal, and align the mission and budget of DOE fusion programs around its execution while preserving U.S. leadership in predictive fusion science. b. Invest in Strategic RD&D: A $10 billion funding injection would enable the nation to execute this goal on a competition-relevant timeline. Funds should go towards (1) supporting the necessary R&D infrastructure to close remaining technical gaps; (2) fully funding and expanding existing programs and partnerships focused on fusion commercialization; and (3) adding a demonstration tier to the existing Milestone-Based Fusion Development Program to de-risk the construction of industry-led demonstration fusion power plants. 3. Strategic Actions to Win the Fusion Race. Winning the fusion race will also require bringing together multiple departments and agencies, as well as the private sector. a. Scale Regulatory Progress: Execute the roadmap detailed in the Roadmap for Authorities to Deploy Fusion Energy (Appendix 1). This includes ensuring that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which has already laid a great foundation for fusion, finalizes an efficient licensing framework under 10 CFR Part 30 and that state regulators are resourced to execute. We also need to look beyond the NRC to fast-tracking environmental reviews; directing FERC to expedite grid interconnection for clean, firm power, including with co-located loads like data centers; and ensuring global regulatory bodies align with U.S. positions to enable U.S. exports. b. Secure Key Resources: Mitigate critical vulnerabilities and build an America-friendly fusion supply chain. This requires prioritizing investments in domestic manufacturing for key components through incentives like the Section 45X tax credit and government funding, and incentivizing commercial sources of fusion fuel inputs. c. Lead in modern digital design: U.S. leadership in predictive fusion science and in applying AI to fusion control and design should be strengthened to fully seize the opportunities of digital fusion optimization. Enhanced digital tools can significantly accelerate progress in the U.S. private fusion sector by helping to distinguish the true potential of many new concepts being proposed. d. Build the Fusion Workforce: Ensure that a capable stream of experts are ready to design, build, and operate the power plants of tomorrow. Support graduate researchers and partnerships with universities, community colleges, and trade schools. The time for bold action is now. We must seize this moment to ensure that fusion energy powers America’s future. Introduction: The Urgency Accelerates Fusion energy, the process that powers the stars, offers humanity its best chance to harness an abundant, clean, dispatchable source of power. Achieving fusion at scale would secure U.S. energy independence, unleash economic prosperity, and affirm America’s role as the world’s innovation leader. In February 2025, this Commission issued its preliminary report, highlighting the importance of fusion energy to U.S. national security and energy dominance, and offering a strategy to secure U.S. leadership. We set forth a bold National Fusion Goal: to begin construction on the world’s first commercial fusion power plant within this decade, anchored in a clear three-part strategy for success. The urgency of this mission has only accelerated. American scientists continue to deliver historic breakthroughs—most recently, the National Ignition Facility’s (NIF) achievement of energy gain greater than four in 2025, building on its 2022 ignition milestone. U.S. predictive fusion models lead the world and steer many of the private sector’s efforts. U.S. fusion companies are making progress on delivering net energy gain at facility scale; building demonstration power plants; and entering ambitious partnerships with utilities, industry, and government. At the same time, global competition is intensifying. China is executing an aggressive, state-led, infrastructure-first strategy—having mobilized at least $6.5 billion since the NIF first achieved ignition—to dominate fusion’s commercial ecosystem. The race is no longer theoretical; it is unfolding now, and the consequences of losing would reverberate across energy security, economic leadership, and national power. We have thus decided to raise the level of ambition in this report. There is no time to waste. This administration has the opportunity to unleash a thriving American fusion industry. In our revised National Fusion Goal, we call for America to initiate construction on more than one industry-led demonstration fusion power plant in the United States by the end of 2028 that leads to commercialization. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright has framed the moment with urgency and ambition. “Fusion has hit that tipping point where things are going to happen fast,” he observed earlier this year, while noting that fusion technology has “huge room to run.” He has also recognized the rapid speed of progress, saying, “I believe we will know the commercial pathway to fusion during the Trump administration.... Commercial electricity from fusion energy could be as fast as eight years, and I’d be very surprised if it’s more than fifteen.” In addition, a White House memorandum published in late September listed fusion as one of its R&D budgetary priorities for Fiscal Year 2027. Specifically, it directed agencies to prioritize investments in “affordable, reliable, and secure energy technologies,” including fusion, and “support the technological development and demonstration” of fusion energy. This is a step in the right direction. Action needs to be taken immediately to ensure that the United States does not fall behind in the fusion race. Without decisive steps, the United States risks ceding leadership in an industry that will redefine the global energy and national security landscape. This report offers an updated net assessment of the global fusion competitions and a detailed strategy for the United States to win the fusion race, with a dedicated National Fusion Goal and the steps needed to achieve it. The Shifting Fusion Landscape: A U.S.–China Comparative Analysis The global race for fusion energy has reached a critical inflection point. The policy decisions and investments Washington makes in the next few years could shape the geopolitical energy landscape for decades to come. For generations, the United States has led the world in fusion science, most famously resulting in the historic achievement of ignition at the NIF in 2022—a feat yet to be replicated at any other fusion machine in the world. This legacy of scientific leadership has helped foster the world’s largest and most dynamic private fusion industry. However, the race is rapidly shifting from a contest of scientific discovery to a competition for commercial dominance. China, recognizing fusion’s strategic importance, is mobilizing massive state resources not only to pursue scientific breakthroughs but also to build the infrastructure, supply chains, and industrial capacity required for deployment at scale—a proven strategy Beijing has already used to lead sectors like solar panels and advanced batteries. We conservatively estimate that, since 2023, China has mobilized at least $6.5 billion for fusion infrastructure supporting a variety of approaches, though this figure could be as much as $13 billion. The central dynamic of the fusion race is clear: the United States laid the scientific groundwork; China is positioning to win the industry. An assessment of the global landscape reveals critical divergences in investments, infrastructure development, R&D, and supply chains that threaten America's ability to capitalize on its own innovations. Below, we assess the evolving U.S.–China competition for fusion energy commercialization across the scientific and commercial value chain. We start by comparing the state of fusion R&D in the United States and China based on scientific breakthroughs, talent, and publications. Next, we look at each country’s respective fusion commercialization efforts, examining the buildout of commercialization-relevant infrastructure, key companies, and levels of public and private investment. We then examine the emerging fusion supply chain by evaluating U.S. and Chinese access to the specialized components and materials that will be required for commercial fusion systems. Finally, we zoom out to look at other key players in the global landscape of fusion competition and examine the state of international fusion cooperation. Research & Development: Moving from Ignition to Deployment The United States maintains a lead in scientific achievement, but China is swiftly expanding its capacity for innovation and workforce development. Scientific Breakthroughs The United States leads the world in demonstrated fusion performance. The NIF is the only facility in the world to have achieved fusion ignition and Q > 1. U.S. scientists have continued to improve this record, recently achieving a target gain of over four (Q > 4). The United States also leads in the application of AI and advanced simulation to fusion, driving breakthroughs in plasma stability and optimized machine designs. China has not yet achieved ignition and trails the U.S. in laser fusion and plasma physics. However, China is making significant bets on magnetic confinement concepts. In 2025, the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) set a record—since broken by the Tungsten Environment in Steady-state Tokamak (WEST) in France—for the longest plasma sustainment. This follows 2021 plasma temperature records of 120 million Celsius for 101 seconds and 160 million Celsius for 20 seconds. Additionally, in its recent AI+ Energy plan, China named an explicit goal of using AI in plasma control, building on existing research programs. Talent and Publications The United States has long been the foremost destination for the world’s top scientific talent, but that advantage is rapidly slipping. In science, talent follows infrastructure and funding: when the United States led in both, it also dominated the global flow of researchers. Today, with little commercialization-focused public investment and limited new facilities at home, that gravitational pull is weakening. Although the United States has roughly doubled its number of publications in Nuclear Fusion (one of the field’s premier research journals) since the early 2000s, researchers affiliated with Chinese institutions have massively increased the scale of their output in the past 15 years. While publications are only one measure of scientific progress, the past decade has seen China surpass the United States in its share of publications in the journal. China, on the other hand, is producing ten times more fusion Ph.D. graduates than the United States, a direct function of government funding. On the intellectual property front, China also filed more fusion patents than the United States in 2023. China will also be hosting the 30th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, the preeminent international fusion conference, in Chengdu this October, providing an opportunity to showcase its burgeoning fusion ecosystem to global scientific talent. Although China is still behind the U.S. in fusion simulation or the application of AI to fusion, a previous DOE-sponsored collaboration with MIT helped to close that gap. Despite U.S. leadership in major scientific milestones and advanced computation, China’s massive investment in human capital is building the workforce necessary for long-term industrial dominance. Cash, Scale, and Speed: Mobilizing Private vs. Government Capital Since 2023, China has mobilized over $6.5 billion across its fusion enterprise, almost three times the funding appropriated to the Department of Energy’s Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) Program in roughly the same period of time. These investments, largely public but partly private, span the infrastructure for multiple approaches, the basic research and development to make those infrastructure projects work, and the companies to commercialize the technology. Annualized, this investment is almost double the 2023 estimate ($1.5 billion per year) of China’s fusion spending. This is a conservative estimate, which does not factor in the multibillion-dollar Mianyang laser fusion facility, the operational costs of EAST, or funding for university programs, and a reasonable party could have counted it as $10 billion or higher. It also fails to account for the fact that dollars spent in China go further than they would in the United States, owing to softer regulations and cheaper resources and labor. This batch of spending includes investing $2.1 billion in a new state-owned consortium, China Fusion Energy Company (CFEC), a single investment almost triple the size of FES’s budget request for FY 2026. China’s largest fusion companies and infrastructure projects all feature significant backing from the national and/or provincial governments. While this is unsurprising in China’s state-dominated energy sector, it underscores Beijing’s readiness to absorb the risks of capital-intensive, infrastructure-heavy technologies, even at the pre-commercial stage. Infrastructure The United States has no significant public fusion infrastructure projects underway, and its last one, the NIF, opened over fifteen years ago. The United States’ scientific community identified the important infrastructure in the 2020 Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee’s Long-Range Plan, but DOE has not executed this plan due to a lack of funding, ability, willpower, and policy prioritization. Despite existing plans, the absence of infrastructure capable of closing key gaps in fusion science and technology creates a disconnect between public research and private commercialization efforts, hindering the development of new technologies. China, on the other hand, is backing its fusion goals with massive infrastructure projects. The message is clear: Beijing is not just competing, it is aiming for global leadership in the deployment and commercialization of this potentially game-changing energy source. Its money is being spent on a comprehensive and realistic plan for the entirety of a fusion ecosystem, as seen through the facilities below. ● On Hefei Science Island in Anhui, construction is underway on China’s next major fusion machine, the Burning plasma Experimental Superconducting Tokamak (BEST). It is a compact, high-field tokamak expected to go online in 2027 and designed to reach Q = 1–5. BEST is located roughly a mile north of the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST), a separate fusion research facility that has been in operation since 2006. ● On the same science campus as BEST and EAST in Hefei, construction of the 14 research facilities that constitute the $570 million Comprehensive Research Facilities for Fusion Technology (CRAFT) campus is nearing completion. The research facility broke ground in 2019 and is expected to be fully functional by the end of 2025. The same campus will also be the planned home of the China Fusion Engineering Test Reactor (CFETR), which aims to produce a gigawatt of fusion power and go online in the 2030s, but has not yet begun construction. Through the CRAFT campus, China will be able to design the materials and parts that will bring fusion plants into the commercial market. ● Xinghuo, a 100 megawatt hybrid fission–fusion reactor is to be built on Yaohu Science Island in China’s southeastern provincial capital city of Nanchang, which plans to have a gain of over 30 and be operational by 2030. Construction of the supporting buildings on its science island began in 2024, and environmental reviews for Xinghuo should be completed this year, although the full total of the $2.76 billion in required funding is still being raised. ● China is also building an NIF-style fusion research facility in Mianyang, in southwestern China. The NIF-style device would entail significantly more laser power and would likely be capable of achieving ignition with a wider variety of experiments. Not only would this be a potential gain to China’s inertial fusion energy research, but it could also provide data to inform the simulation and design of nuclear weapons. The implications of this gap are severe. While the United States has stalled on building critical R&D infrastructure identified years ago, China is rapidly constructing a comprehensive suite of facilities designed to close critical technological gaps and accelerate commercial deployment. Funding The United States leads the world in private investment. As of 2025, total global equity investment in private fusion companies has reached at least $13.9 billion, with $7.57 billion invested in U.S. firms; 29 of the world’s 53 active fusion companies are based in the United States. However, U.S. public funding has stagnated. While Congress allocated $790 million to DOE’s Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program in FY 2025, much of this supported legacy projects focused on science: for example, $240 million of that was directed towards the multilateral ITER project. Commercialization-focused programs like the Milestone-Based Fusion Development Program have also received less funding than had been Congressionally authorized. By one estimate, only 1.2% of U.S. Government funding for FES goes towards fusion commercialization. China’s funding of fusion companies and projects, at least $6.5 billion since 2023, features a mix of backing from regional governments, the central government, venture capital, and individual private investors. The majority of this funding is provided by the central government (52%), with another sizable amount (26%) provided by regional governments. Private capital only accounts for 21% of China’s company fusion funding. It is clear that China maintains a heavy lead in government investment in fusion projects, even if American entrepreneurs are ahead in accumulating private capital. Given the apparent state-backed efforts to bolster its fusion ecosystem, China is quickly catching up to the level of private investment in U.S. fusion companies. Key Chinese companies and initiatives include: ● China Fusion Energy Company (CFEC): $2.1 billion state-owned company mostly owned by China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC). ● Neo Fusion: Commercialization arm of BEST, backed by provincial and central government and private backing from NIO and Anhui Wenergy Company. ● Xinghuo: 50-50 collaboration between China Nuclear Industry 23 Construction Company and Lianovation Superconductor. ● ENN Energy Research Institute: Raised $550 million, pursuing spherical tokamaks and proton-boron fuel. ● Startorus Fusion: $139 million spherical tokamak company backed by VC. ● Energy Singularity: $113 million compact tokamak company backed by NIO and private investors. ● NovaFusionX: $70 million dual field reversed configuration (FRC) company. ● Other companies: Star Energy Xuanlight and Hanhai Ju Neng (both FRC approaches). Supply Chains: Controlling the Metals, Minerals, and Manufacturing As fusion moves from the lab to the grid, control over specialized components and materials could be decisive in determining how quickly the technology can be deployed, adopted, and commercialized. The United States will need to be proactive to win the competition to build out the future fusion supply chain, and it is already behind in many components. Even though fusion machines will depend less on raw materials than conventional energy industries, the existing suppliers of certain specialty components—some sourced from China—still pose risks. The United States has relative control over some components in the fusion supply chain, including the mining of beryllium and the construction of magnets using high-temperature superconducting tape. Other components, like fusion-capable laser diodes and cryogenic systems, are largely manufactured by the United States and its allies, namely those in Japan and Europe. Yet China, by way of its command over the current global electronics supply chain, is well-positioned to control critical links in the fusion supply chain. It is difficult or impossible for fusion companies that need access to the following inputs or components to build a China-proof supply chain today: ● Power Electronics: High-power switches and high-voltage capacitors comprise major costs to many pulsed approaches to fusion, and are also used in steady-state fusion approaches. China has held a general lead in this industry. As well, computing chips that drive these electronics and fusion systems generally will be necessary for the design, simulation, and operation of fusion power plants, but the threat posed is shared among a wide variety of industries. ● Tungsten and Vanadium: Leading candidates for plasma-facing components; China produces 80% of the world's supply of tungsten and has over half of the world’s known tungsten reserves. China produces 67% of the world’s vanadium. ● Lithium-6 Enrichment: Used for breeding tritium fuel. Currently, there exists no commercially available supply for enriched lithium in the United States, and it is only produced in China and Russia. ● Laser Diodes: China dominates the raw materials (gallium, indium, and germanium) needed for laser diodes critical to inertial fusion, recently implementing export controls on both. ● High-Temperature Superconductors (HTS): Common formulations of HTS tape require small amounts of rare-earth elements (REEs) like yttrium. China supplies 94% of the U.S. supply of yttrium, and has recently implemented restrictions on the export of REEs and related processing technologies, but this may not be a problem with appropriate production from MP Materials. Production of the HTS tape/wire itself generally takes place in Japan, but China is growing its own capabilities. The United States government has not prioritized developing or securing the fusion supply chain, leaving the nascent industry vulnerable as China aggressively captures control over the critical materials and specialized components essential for fusion deployment. The Global Landscape: Other Key Players Beyond the United States and China, several advanced economies are pursuing distinctive fusion strategies that reflect their national strengths and policy priorities. From the UK’s focused push on spherical tokamaks and regulatory innovation, to the EU’s investment in large-scale demonstration projects, to Japan and South Korea’s technology leadership and Canada’s tritium supply chain, these countries are carving out niches that could shape the global fusion ecosystem. The United Kingdom is executing a focused strategy exemplified by the Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production (STEP) program, backed by a recent $3.4 billion investment. Critically, the United Kingdom is moving to create the world's first fusion-specific siting and permitting regulations, has designated fusion as an Industrial Strategy priority, and has a strong private fusion industry. The United States and United Kingdom are pursuing a number of commercialization-focused fusion partnerships, including in the U.S.–UK Technology Prosperity Deal, which lists fusion as a key area for collaboration. The European Union prioritizes large-scale research and demonstration projects, including the France-based ITER project. The European Commission’s recent planned Euratom budget features allocating $6.3 billion towards fusion energy research. France is also home to the Tungsten Environment in Steady-state Tokamak (WEST), which recently beat EAST’s record for plasma sustainment, albeit at a lower temperature. Germany is a prominent leader in a magnetic fusion concept known as the stellarator; this year, the Max Planck Institute’s Wendelstein 7-X stellarator achieved a record-setting performance. German-based companies are also advancing additional stellarator designs and laser-driven designs. Germany has set a goal of building the “world’s first fusion power plant” domestically, and recently announced it would invest more than $2.3 billion by 2029 to support fusion research and pilot plant development. Japan concentrates on advanced technology development with projects like JT-60SA and the Fusion by Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (FAST) project. This year, JT-60SA progressed through scheduled upgrades in preparation for its first experimental campaign in 2026, and the Japanese government released an updated national fusion strategy outlining a 10-year roadmap to commercialize fusion and position Japan as a global leader in the industry. Japan’s private fusion industry excels in the depth of its suppliers. South Korea leads in high-temperature plasma research, showcased by KSTAR. In June 2025, South Korea launched a joint WEST–KSTAR experimental program to collaborate on long, tungsten-environment plasma operations, a key step toward ensuring power plant–relevant performance. Canada plays a key role as a major tritium supplier, thanks to its CANada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors and the Darlington Tritium Removal Facility—the world's largest civilian tritium producer. Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) supports tritium R&D at its Chalk River site and is developing UNITY-2, a deuterium–tritium fuel cycle testbed, with Kyoto Fusioneering. In 2024, CNL released a national fusion strategy. Canada’s limited private industry focuses on magnetized target fusion. Russia emphasizes fusion–fission hybrid technologies and experimental plasma research with the T-15MD tokamak, though with limited global collaboration. Rosatom, the Russian state-backed nuclear energy corporation, plans to have built the central part of a $1.42–1.64 billion tokamak by 2030 that could be a feature of future Russian–Chinese cooperation. Policy Recommendations: Winning the Fusion Race The United States—long the world’s leader in scientific innovation—must not allow China or other competitors to convert American breakthroughs into its own technological and economic dominance. For a technology as potentially consequential as fusion energy, the Commission recommends the U.S. Government reiterate the three pillars set forth by its preliminary report, and furthermore urges the adoption of the policy recommendations below. The policy recommendations—which are further detailed below—include: (1) Declare fusion a national security priority and set an explicit National Fusion Goal of breaking ground on more than one industry-led demonstration fusion power plant in the United States by the end of 2028 that leads to commercialization; (2) Expand fusion leadership and drive commercialization by empowering a fusion lead to execute the National Fusion Goal and transition the DOE program structure to better support fusion commercialization; (3) Take strategic action to win the fusion race, including shaping a favorable regulatory landscape to execute fast, predictable licensing, siting, and interconnection at scale; building out a domestic supply chain; and training a reliable fusion workforce. 1. Declare Fusion a National Security Priority To win the race for fusion energy, we recommend that the President issue an Executive Order that formally recognizes fusion as critical to U.S. national security and energy dominance, sets an ambitious goal for U.S. leadership in fusion commercialization, and lays the policy groundwork for achieving that goal. The Executive Order should include the following key components: 1.1 Launching a National Fusion Goal. The Department of Energy should lead the execution of a National Fusion Goal to initiate construction on more than one industry-led demonstration fusion power plant in the United States by the end of 2028 that accelerates commercialization. This would empower DOE to lead a coordinated push in partnership with U.S. industry, the National Labs, U.S. universities, and strategic international partners, and receive interagency support when needed. 1.2 Ensure U.S. Leadership in Fusion Science. Private industry alone cannot close the remaining scientific and technological gaps for fusion on the time scale needed to win against China. To cultivate a robust fusion industry, the United States should provide appropriate levels of funding and staffing to the world-leading National Labs, DOE public user facilities, and university programs that support priorities identified in the FESAC Long Range Plan and Facilities Construction Projects Subcommittee report. 1.3 Identify Threats and Defend American Industry. Within 90 days, the Director of National Intelligence, working with experts inside and outside the U.S. Government, should produce an annual intelligence assessment of adversaries’ fusion programs, and the Department of Energy, Department of Justice, and Department of Homeland Security should publish a voluntary cybersecurity program to protect U.S. fusion firms from intellectual property (IP) theft. 1.4 Win the Global Market. Within two years, the Departments of Energy, Commerce, Defense, State, and the Treasury should propose for input and then establish expedited export procedures for U.S. fusion technology designed for speed and commercial dominance. Likewise, Commerce, State, EXIM, and the Development Finance Corporation should leverage their funding and authorities to support global markets for American-made fusion technologies. 1.5 Dominate the Supply Chain & Unleash American Industry. Within 30 days, Commerce should lead a multi-agency effort to map the global fusion supply chain and identify potential vulnerabilities and mitigations. The Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with other agencies, should leverage existing funds, programs, and authorities to mitigate vulnerabilities identified in this study. 2. Expand Fusion Leadership and Inject $10 Billion to Drive Commercialization The United States has a narrow window to establish leadership in the commercialization of fusion energy. DOE must take immediate, organized, and sustained action across fusion research, development, and demonstration (RD&D). Additionally, a one-time investment of $10 billion would provide the fuel required to achieve the National Fusion Goal. 2.1 Organize the Department of Energy’s Fusion Efforts for Commercialization. The Secretary of Energy should appoint a singular “Fusion Lead” with decision-making and budget authority, streamlined and independent contracting mechanisms, and responsibility for coordinating and implementing DOE’s fusion strategy. Furthermore, the Secretary of Energy should consider creating a temporary National Fusion Project Office to execute the National Fusion Goal and serve as a bridge between the current organizational structure (in which most civilian fusion energy efforts are housed in the Office of Science, with the exception of ARPA-E) and the eventual need for an applied office. 2.2 Make a One-Time Investment of $10 Billion to Enable and Accelerate U.S. Fusion Commercialization. The DOE fusion program’s mission and budget should evolve into one that accelerates fusion R&D and industry-led demonstration activities. Building on existing FES funding levels, $10 billion in new funding should go towards a multi-pronged approach of: 2.2.1 Building commercialization-relevant R&D facilities to close scientific and technological gaps in key fusion components and systems needed to enable the National Fusion Goal and then build reliable power plants thereafter. 2.2.2 Fully funding and expanding existing commercialization-focused programs and partnerships, in particular public–private partnerships aimed at de-risking the private sector’s preliminary engineering designs for demonstration fusion power plants. 2.2.3 Adding a demonstration tier to the Milestone Program to de-risk the construction of more than one industry-led demonstration fusion power plant and capping federal contributions at 50 percent. 3. Strategic Actions to Win the Fusion Race A number of further actions will require interagency collaboration or the interventions of agencies outside of the Department of Energy. In particular, the best path forward for fusion to reach the grid will require action from the NRC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Department of Commerce (DOC), and Congress. 3.1 Shape the Regulatory Authorities Landscape: 3.1.1 Scale Licensing & Permitting Progress: NRC should explore mass-manufacture licensing pathways, fund training for Agreement States to harmonize licensing processes, fast-track environmental reviews, and ensure international alignment via IAEA. 3.1.2 Accelerate Grid Integration & Deployment: Direct FERC to expedite interconnection for clean, firm power and enable co-location with large industrial loads. 3.1.3 Incentivize Progress: Tie federal investments to concrete milestones while creating incentives through tariff code adjustments and targeted exemptions for fusion components. 3.2 Build the supply chain that a successful fusion industry will need: 3.2.1 Onshore and Friendshore Manufacturing Capacity: Use tax credits (45X, 48C), Loan Programs Office, and international partnerships for key enabling components (HTS tape, power electronics, heating devices, laser diodes). 3.2.2 Strategically Manage Critical Materials: Ensure domestic commercial production of raw materials (copper, beryllium, gallium, germanium, lithium, silicon carbide, tungsten, molybdenum, graphite). 3.2.3 Ensure Commercial Sources of Fusion Fuel Materials: Ensure commercial availability of deuterium, startup tritium, enriched lithium-6, and alternative fuels like helium-3. 3.3 Strategic Fusion Workforce Investment: 3.3.1 Scale Graduate and Postdoctoral Fusion Talent: Support 100 additional graduate students and 100 postdoctoral researchers annually at DOE through 2030. 3.3.2 Leverage AI to Accelerate Workforce Development: Co-develop AI-enabled tools for training, simulation, and plant design. 3.3.3 Support Regional Partnerships and Training Pathways: Fund regional partnerships across universities, community colleges, and vocational schools, and create a fusion-focused update to the National Defense Education Act. Conclusion: The Path to Fusion Dominance The United States stands at a critical juncture in the race for fusion energy leadership. China's substantial investments and infrastructure-first strategy threaten traditional U.S. advantages. Without immediate action, the United States risks falling behind in a technology that will reshape the global balance of power and can unleash energy dominance at home and abroad. Our recommendations demand bold investment and unwavering resolve—even substantial investments will be far less costly than the price of inaction. Fusion energy will transform the shape of the economy, domestically and abroad. The nation first to master this technology will gain advantages that may prove decisive in the competition for global leadership in the 21st century. America's scientific capabilities and private sector remain the most innovative in the world. But these advantages alone are not enough. We need a coordinated national strategy, sustained investment, and focused execution—and we cannot afford to lose. By declaring fusion a national security priority, setting an ambitious and achievable National Fusion Goal, organizing and streamlining DOE to drive fusion commercialization, shaping favorable regulatory authorities, fostering a robust domestic supply chain, and investing in the fusion workforce, America can still win the race for fusion energy. With decisive action and unwavering commitment, America can seize this pivotal moment and secure its place at the forefront of the fusion energy revolution, shaping a future of prosperity and security for generations to come. Appendix 1: Roadmap for Authorities to Deploy Fusion Energy Introduction As fusion energy moves closer toward commercial deployment, U.S. policymakers have an opportunity to shape a regulatory system that will not only accommodate but actively encourage the deployment of fusion power plants, both today and in the years ahead. Recent federal actions mark significant progress. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) decision to regulate fusion separately from fission, coupled with the 2024 ADVANCE Act (which effectively codified that separate regulatory treatment), signals a growing recognition that the path to commercial deployment exists and the United States simply needs to execute. The regulation of fusion under 10 CFR Part 30, as particle accelerators, is a step forward for the fusion industry, accurately reflecting the inherent safety of fusion technology. The Agreement State framework will allow fusion machines to be built in and regulated by the states most eager to facilitate their deployment. These moves represent a strong foundation, but they are just the beginning. Fully unlocking fusion’s promise as a clean, firm, domestically produced energy source can be accelerated by proactive, coordinated action across multiple levels of government and jurisdictions. Failing to leverage these opportunities to accelerate fusion’s deployment could result in China beating the United States to commercial fusion deployment, adding to a concerning trend of American inventions turning into Chinese products. This appendix, which includes the Progress Report on Fusion Authorities and the Fusion Authorities Matrix, identifies pivotal decision points—such as forthcoming NRC rules, updates to state policies, or siting and permitting processes—and spotlights areas where planning has yet to begin for fusion regulatory needs. Why a Coordinated Approach Matters Much like the nation’s electrical grid, the regulatory landscape for energy in the United States is complex and highly distributed. At the federal level, agencies like the NRC, Department of Energy (DOE), and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) oversee nuclear safety, uphold international obligations, and manage transmission and wholesale power markets, respectively. Meanwhile, states play a critical role in siting facilities, granting permits, and implementing energy policies tailored to local needs. International frameworks—such as those governing export controls and nonproliferation—will be another relevant layer down the road, helping to shape the global deployment of fusion energy and ensure American energy dominance. Building any new energy infrastructure, like a fusion power plant, can be challenging. Thankfully, because of fusion’s attributes, it can avoid some of the same permitting challenges affecting other technologies. Fusion can be sited close to where the demand for power exists (as opposed to where the resource is located, requiring lengthy and challenging transmission buildouts). Because of its inherent safety profile, the radioactive materials licensing process can be successfully navigated in a fraction of the time and costs associated with new fission reactors. Fusion power plants are not expected to trigger the National Environmental Policy Act based on their licensing alone, as this is done at the state level, and should not be subject to it unless they are being built on federal lands or are leveraging substantial federal funding. Status of Regulatory Progress by Topic - Resolved (Green): Legal separation of fusion from fission under 10 CFR Part 30 and ADVANCE Act § 205; byproduct material classification. - In Progress (Yellow): Clear risk-informed, performance-based regulatory framework under Part 30; tritium control and environmental safety protocols; international export control framework; tech-neutral tax credits (45Y, 48E). - Not Started / Unaddressed (White): Ensuring NRC and Agreement States have resources/training; accelerated grid interconnection pathways; codified behind-the-meter co-location with data centers; domestic supply chain strategy for critical materials and fusion fuels. Wildcards ● Prioritized Decision-Making: Speed and direction depend on priority assigned by DOE and National Energy Dominance Council. ● Environmental Permitting Reform: Recognizing fusion's safety profile to avoid outdated, lengthy review processes. ● Interaction with Financial Incentives: Leveraging 45X and 48C credits to drive commercial scaling. ● Trade and Tariff Policies: Establishing Harmonized Tariff Schedule codes and exemptions. What to Watch ● Finalization of NRC Part 30 Rulemaking. ● Agreement State Readiness. ● Grid Interconnection Pathways. ● Nonproliferation and International Norms. ● Planning for Commercial-Scale Deployment. Fusion Authorities Matrix [SAFETY] - Separation of fusion machine regulation from nuclear fission reactor regulation | Authority: Federal NRC | Status: Resolved | Source: NRCSRM-SECY-23-0001; ADVANCE Act (§205) - Establishment of a clear risk-informed, performance-based regulatory framework for fusion machines within 10 CFR Part 30 | Authority: Federal NRC | Status: In Progress | Source: NRCSRM-SECY-23-0001; ADVANCE Act (§205) - Ensuring NRC and Agreement States have the resources and expertise they need to license fusion machines | Authority: Federal NRC, State Agreement States | Status: Not Started | Source: Not Applicable - Efficient licensing process to support at-scale deployment of mass-manufactured fusion machines | Authority: Federal NRC, State Agreement States | Status: In Progress | Source: ADVANCE Act (§205(c)); Preparing for At-Scale Deployment of Fusion Energy: Novel Licensing Pathways - Tritium control and environmental safety protocols | Authority: Federal NRC, State Agreement States | Status: In Progress | Source: NRC Draft Fusion Machine Guidance - Decommissioning and byproduct material management protocols for fusion facilities | Authority: Federal NRC, State Agreement States | Status: Resolved | Source: NRC Rulemaking: Requirements for Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material - Recognition that the current international nonproliferation regime addresses the minor risks of fusion at scale & establish export control framework that enables global deployment | Authority: Federal DOE, State, DOC, NRC; International IAEA | Status: In Progress | Source: DOE Fusion & Nonproliferation workshops; IAEA Fusion Key Elements; Nuclear Suppliers Group - State & local siting and permitting of fusion power plants separate from nuclear fission and ability to leverage any clean energy benefits | Authority: State Regulators, Energy Councils; Local City, County | Status: In Progress | Source: State Nuclear Bans; WA State: Promoting the Integration of Fusion Technology Within State Clean Energy Policies [ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & LOCAL PERMITTING] - Expedite federal environmental review for fusion power plants when federal review is required | Authority: Federal FPISC, NRC, DOE, CEQ | Status: Not Started | Source: FAST-41; Fiscal Responsibility Act Permitting Reforms - Streamlined environmental review for fusion power plants leveraging zoning/land use decisions, prior state/federal project reviews, or generic assessments | Authority: Local City, County; State Regulators, Ecology, Energy Councils | Status: Not Started | Source: WA RCW 36.70B: Local Project Review; WA RCW 43.21C.150: State Environmental Policy [DEPLOYMENT & SUPPLY CHAIN] - Accelerated grid interconnection pathways prioritizing clean, firm energy sources (including fusion) | Authority: Federal NRC, DOE, CEQ, FERC; State PUCs, Interconnect Entities (e.g., PJM) | Status: Not Started | Source: PJM Interconnect Process; FERC Amazon Data Center Rejection - Codified pathway to provide behind-the-meter energy to large loads (e.g., data centers, industrial sites) | Authority: Federal FERC; State PUCs, Interconnect Entities | Status: Not Started | Source: State Nuclear Bans; WA State: Promoting Integration of Fusion - Maintain "tech-neutral" tax credits to support commercial fusion's deployment in the United States | Authority: Federal Treasury | Status: In Progress | Source: One Big Beautiful Bill Act - A secure domestic supply chain for critical fusion energy materials & components | Authority: Federal DOC, Treasury, DOE, OMB; State Equivalents | Status: Not Started | Source: DOE Loan Programs Office; IRS 45X; IRS 48C [RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT] - Robust intellectual property regime for fusion, which enables domestic and international information sharing | Authority: Federal DOE | Status: In Progress | Source: FESAC (p. 58); NASEM (p. 77, 88) - Fund commercially relevant research and development focusing on an applied materials project, facilities/test stands to close science and technology gaps important to deploying and scaling fusion power, and a robust milestone program for first power plants | Authority: Federal DOE | Status: In Progress | Source: FESAC (p. 7, 13, 55–61); NASEM (p. 28–31, 74–76); DOE Milestone Program Appendix 2: Commission Staff and Contributors Commission Staff: Dr. Paul “P.J.” Maykish David Lin Jenilee Keefe Singer Abigail Remler Nina Badger Caleb Barnes Nicholas Furst Nyah Stewart Advisors to the Commission: Sachin Desai Andrew Holland Dr. Scott Hsu Dr. Anantha Krishnan Dr. Costa Samaras Dr. Nadia Schadlow Sam Wurzel Expert Briefers: Jean Paul Allain, Jimmy Goodrich, Will Regan, Caroline Anderson, Andrew Holland, Amy Roma, Rian Bahran, Brian Holmes, Adam Rutkowski, Laura Berzak Hopkins, Scott Hsu, Kyle Schiller, Brian Berzin, David Kirtley, Kiyoshi Seko, Troy Carter, Edward Lewis-Smith, Beth Shelton, Michael Churchill, Andrew Lo, Brian Spears, Guy Cohen, Tammy Ma, Ryan Umstattd, Stephanie Diem, The Honorable Jeffrey Merrifield, Bibake Uppal, Kieran Furlong, Ed Moses, David Warden, Darren Gale, Bob Mumgaard, Patrick White, Conner Galloway, Carlos Paz-Soldan, Howard Wilson, Jennifer Ganten, Bruce Pittman, Brian Wirth, Jess Gehin, Conner Prochaska, Simon Woodruff, Michael Ginsberg, Dan Rasky, Avi Zevin. Additional Contributors: Jennifer Arrigo, Trent Bauserman, Sally Benson, Mike Hancock, Yesenia Henninger, Andrea Jarrett, Kate Kelly, Amber Krummel, Eric Lander, Liz Larsen, Greg Lewis, Naomi Mburu, Saskia Mordijck, Heena Mutha, Christian Newton, Scott Parent, Matt Platano, Jackie Siebens, Laura Thomas, Dave Turk, Ryan Wagner, Megan Wilson, Carrie von Muench.