Highlights

• CEI contends federal subsidies for EVs and renewables artificially inflate rare earth demand, strengthening China's market dominance rather than reducing U.S. dependency.
• While the critique of IRA subsidies has economic merit, it overlooks that global demand for critical minerals will surge regardless due to European, Asian, and defense sector consumption.
• Ending subsidies might ease short-term supply pressure but could paradoxically delay Western refining investment and the supply-chain independence advocates seek.

---

In a provocative new blog post, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) takes aim not at China’s stranglehold on rare earths—but at Washington’s own policy distortions. Author Ben Lieberman (opens in a new tab) argues that U.S. subsidies for “uneconomic” green technologies are inflating global rare earth demand, worsening dependency, and misallocating resources. It’s a libertarian salvo in a debate often dominated by industrial policy advocates. But does the argument hold water—or just ideological steam?

Stop with the subsidies—Ben Lieberman

The Core Claim: Government as the Demand Driver

CEI’s thesis is simple: federal subsidies for electric vehicles, wind turbines, and solar panels drive unnecessary consumption of neodymium, dysprosium, terbium, and other critical elements. These technologies, Lieberman contends, rely on magnets, batteries, and motors that require far more rare earths than their conventional counterparts. By subsidizing them, Washington is effectively “artificially” increasing demand—amplifying China’s leverage rather than diminishing it.

From a pure supply-chain logic standpoint, he’s not wrong. Each new EV motor and turbine blade feeds a market still dominated by Chinese refiners and magnet producers. But the critique assumes that unsubsidized fossil infrastructure doesn’t impose its own distortions—an omission worth noting.

The Economics of Ideology

Where CEI shines is in identifying how the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and its subsidies can backfire by bottlenecking scarce resources and inflating prices. But where it stumbles is in treating market intervention as the sole villain. Transition energy systems—especially EVs—aren’t just political darlings; they are technological inevitabilities driven by consumer and regulatory forces worldwide.

Moreover, “uncompetitive” is a shifting target. As processing diversifies (Australia, Canada, the U.S.), and as recycling and substitutes advance, costs and dependencies evolve. CEI’s tone underplays that dynamism.

The Global Reality: Beyond Washington’s Grip

Lieberman is correct that the One Big Beautiful Bill trimmed many of the Inflation Reduction Act’s most distortionary incentives. Yet America can’t decouple from global demand curves. Europe, Japan, Korea, and China are all plowing ahead with their own “green industrial” agendas. Even if the U.S. retreats from subsidy-driven expansion, the world’s appetite for rare earths will surge regardless—fueled by hybrid vehicles (cheaper and more scalable than full EVs), AI data centers, robotics, drones, and of course the voracious defense sector. America no longer singlehandedly steers the global economy; it rides within it. And the sooner DC’s think tank crowd wakes up to this reality, the better.  Investment, policy decisions, strategy, and statecraft must be based on the realities of the unfolding truth if we are to make optimal decisions.

Policy Provocation or Market Wisdom?

Lieberman’s call to “stop artificially increasing demand” is a coherent market argument but a politically narrow one. Ending subsidies might ease short-term pressure on supply—but it would also slow the scaling of alternatives that, in turn, drive private investment into Western refining. Ironically, reducing demand could delay the very independence CEI champions.

Summary

Rare Earth Exchanges finds CEI’s analysis provocative but partial. Its critique of distortionary subsidies is economically sound, but it oversimplifies the interdependence between green technology demand and supply-chain evolution. Investors should note: free markets alone won’t fix a monopolized sector—strategic coordination will.

© 2025 Rare Earth Exchanges™ – Accelerating Transparency, Accuracy, and Insight Across the Rare Earth & Critical Minerals Supply Chain.