The new US National Defense Authorization Act includes quite a few statements on additive manufacturing, some of which will affect product sales.
The NDAA is effectively the budget for the US Department of Defense for 2026, and it lists not only the amounts of funds to be spent, but also in many cases how it is to be spent.
The document is in fact enormous, and it’s unlikely any actual humans could read through it in entirety. However, thanks to search functionality, we can easily find the portions that refer to additive manufacturing.
This is always notable to me, as it was only a few years ago that the technology would have been ignored totally. Now we find it not only mentioned in a proper budget document, but there are whole sections dedicated to the technology.
But what do those sections say?
Section 220A, “Dual-Use and Defense Advanced Manufacturing Innovation Hubs”, talks about establishing “one or more” manufacturing hubs to make use of the technology more efficient within existing manufacturing programs, and also “meet annual production benchmarks for defense applications”. Recommendations are required by September 2026.
The document also lists a target of 1,000,000 certified AM parts by the end of 2027. That is quite an ambitious milestone and will certain require a huge effort by a number of government agencies and private providers.
There is a requirement to produce between 25-100% of parts required for unmanned aerial systems for surveillance and munitions.
One requirement will force “all military departments” to manufacture “three commonly used metal parts”. This is likely to ensure that at least some parts can be produced on demand using AM technology, which can be faster than traditional manufacturing.
There’s a lot more, but basically they intend on pushing AM technology forward in a very big way, that could lead to even bigger things later. Many of the goals, such as those listed above, focus on setting up scenarios where AM would be the default method for producing parts. The presumption would be that later on AM would be the standard method of production.
All of this is amazingly good news for 3D printer manufacturers, who would see increased sales of equipment, materials and services.
But not quite all.
Another section of the NDAA, 880, is entitled “Prohibition on operation, procurement, and contracting related to foreign-made additive manufacturing machines”.
The new rule states that any agency cannot “operate, enter into or renew a contract” for AM machines that were manufactured in a “covered foreign country”, use software developed in said countries, or use network connectivity in those countries.
What are the covered countries? Here’s the list:
- People’s Republic of China
- Iran
- Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
- Russian Federation.
In other words, the usual suspects. Mostly this list is meaningless, except for one entry: China. China is the world’s leading country for manufacturing AM equipment of all levels. By imposing this rule, it means that the powerful and low cost Chinese equipment options will no longer be available to US military departments and agencies.
While there is not significant use of Chinese equipment, this NDAA requirement dashes any hopes of notable US expansion for many Chinese AM equipment manufacturers. This includes not only the manufacturers of large industrial systems, such as Farsoon or Bright Laser, but also smaller professional systems that can produce parts in large farms, such as Bambu Lab or Creality.
However, they may see sales rise indirectly as a result of this military budget. It would seem that the US DoD will absorb a huge amount of AM technology, creating voids in the market elsewhere. It could be that those voids might be filled by inexpensive Chinese equipment in some countries.
Via US Congress
