Venn Strategies Executive Vice President discusses US supply chain resilience, battery innovation, and global partnerships shaping the future of the industry.

by Joe Darrah

The United States’ shifting administrative landscape continues to impact the global supply chain, creating challenges across markets, investment, trade, and policy. Uncertainty in Washington, D.C., and global investment hubs has led to market fluctuations in goods such as minerals and battery technologies, reshaping relationships between the US and its international partners, particularly amid growing competition with China.

Ben Steinberg, Executive Vice President and Co-Chair of the Critical Infrastructure Practice at Venn Strategies, will lead a plenary session at the Battery Show North America 2025 in Detroit, MI, titled “Leaders’ Roundtable: Industry and Policy Insights on Building a Resilient Battery Supply Chain for the Transportation and Energy Sectors.” The session will explore innovation growth, the policy’s role in supply chain resilience, and fostering partnerships. Ahead of his session, Battery Technology had the opportunity to interview him, and Steinberg shared insights on the future of US supply chain policy and the factors shaping resilience in the battery industry.

What would you say are the most significant contributing factors to the unprecedented growth and transformation of the battery supply chain currently?

Ben Steinberg, Executive Vice President and Co-Chair of the Critical Infrastructure Practice at Venn Strategies: We still have electric vehicle (EV) batteries being produced in key regions around the country and globally. You can’t shy away from the fact that transportation electrification is a huge driving force and where we’re headed as a global society.

You also have other downstream sectors, including grid storage—energy storage solutions paired with renewable energy—as well as dispatchable power for applications such as data centers that power artificial intelligence (AI) or industrial facilities like manufacturing and logistics centers. Finally, we’re seeing a further need for the electrified warfighter, whether it be soldier wearable, shipboard, or via drones. This is certainly playing out on the battlefield in Ukraine, and we will also see NATO alliance countries increasing their spending on similar technology in the coming years. Between transportation, electrification on the grid, the industrial market, and defense, we have a lot of growth opportunities for batteries.

There’s been speculation about the long-term impact of tariffs on the supply chain. What is the reality of the situation today?

Steinberg: I think it’s a huge concern. I certainly want to see the US succeed, but in order for people to produce in this country, we need to bring in talent, machines, and resources to be able to do the work. I’m one of the first people out there to say we need homegrown industries, and we need to be as self-sufficient as possible. But our country can’t do everything.

If you’re going to build a mine and do that in a sophisticated way with, for example, autonomous underground machines that can do the mining in the safest, most effective, and efficient way, those pieces of equipment are likely to be built only in other countries. We shouldn’t penalize our mining industry for going out and getting that equipment to do the project in a cost-effective, safe manner.

The US faces tough choices regarding trade deficits, revenue, and unfair trade practices, while aiming to support domestic manufacturing. A key challenge is China’s dominance in global resources, processing them, and selling technology at below-market prices.

The question is, what are we going to do in relation to tariffs and that relationship? And how do we use trade negotiations with others, even our allies, to influence their relationships with China? Ideally, we have a system that lessens the burden of working in the U.S. with our allies and ratchets up tariffs on those where we do not align.

How well is the industry adapting to policy changes stemming from the new administration, and what impact has it had on the supply chain?

Steinberg: The train of thought here is the president has declared an energy emergency, and he’s tied critical minerals to it. Critical minerals also include derivative products, which include batteries, EVs, semiconductor chips, and rare earth magnets.

You have to follow that train of thought to get to a conversation on batteries. It is an upstream, supply-side policy focus. And what industry needs to work on with Washington is that these minerals or materials need to go into something, like advanced technology, to have a thriving, productive society.

I think there’s also a wariness about whether or not we have the ability to be self-sufficient and do mineral and battery production work without burning through money while China is out there underselling products to take over the entire market.

On the other hand, there are opportunities for folks to engage on battery-related priorities with the government. For instance, we are seeing the Department of Energy open up some of the stalled minerals and battery projects from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and new funding opportunities are opening up for mineral processing associated with the battery industry.

Certainly, we already worked really hard with Congress this year on the writing of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which protects tax credits for the battery industry through production credits (45X) and investment credits for deployment (48E, 45Y). Final guidance for those credits will likely come out on those early to mid-next year.”

There’s a big opportunity here, and we’re right on the cusp of being able to seize it. But there is work to do from the industry standpoint to make sure that the government understands why the work is so important, that industry can really deliver on the promise of making batteries at home, and works with the government to seek the best opportunities.

The other area where I think there’s an opportunity to succeed is in these trade deals with countries such as Japan, which has offered to, as part of their trade deal, put $550 billion into the country. There’s a real opportunity to work with partners like that. Folks should be thinking about that, because Japan has a lot to offer in the battery arena.

I think about South Korea as well. Unfortunately, we’ve had a big issue with the LG Energy Solution/Hyundai raid recently. I think there needs to be a lot of work done on diplomacy on that front to fix those issues because they too are such a critical part of the American competitiveness story.

What are examples of innovations today that are impacting supply chain resiliency?

Steinberg: The key is building processing technologies at scale in the US. That is the bedrock. That’s where the slim margins are. There’s a lot of hesitancy among chemical companies and material processors to set up shop here and know that they’ll have battery producers and other large original equipment manufacturers to buy the product over the long term and at scale.

We have a lot of work to do from a financial standpoint and a policy standpoint to set up battery material processing facilities in the U.S. That is the biggest linchpin that the industry should be focused on in my opinion – those large partnerships.

Accelerating innovation in the battery sector is crucial, especially for startups struggling to enter large manufacturers’ supply chains, which currently takes years. The goal is to consistently reduce qualification timelines to one year, fostering greater innovation and learning from China’s advancements. It’s not to say that the large companies are not doing it – it’s that there is an opportunity to bring even more innovation into the system and to shorten those timelines.

How do you think supply chain resiliency will be defined years from now?

Steinberg: Certainly for this administration, supply chain resilience is America doing things itself. However, it also involves strong partnerships with our allies, enabling us to leverage each other’s resources, expertise, and workforce.

Supply chain resilience requires long-term policies recognizing batteries as vital to the U.S. economy and national security, alongside government and industry investments to drive reliable programs and projects. Strong public-private and international partnerships are essential to leverage financial and natural resources, fostering collective resilience and effective collaboration with allies.