Ukraine gets a long-term commitment for US investment in “a free, sovereign, and secure Ukraine”. The United States gets a stake in Ukraine’s future resource potential. And Trump gets to prove that he is, to quote White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt, “the great deal maker”.

Just don’t expect a Ukrainian critical minerals rush soon.

Yulia Svyrydenko, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister, posted on X that she does not expect the jointly-owned Reconstruction Investment Fund to pay out any dividends in the first 10 years.

Don’t mention the rare earths

At least everyone has stopped calling it the rare earths deal. The agreement covers all sub-soil resources, including oil, gas and a wide spectrum of metals.

Ukraine has a couple of rare earth deposits, which is not surprising given the size of the country and that rare earths are not as rare as their name suggests.

Deposits that are viable economically and technically are relatively unusual and how promising Ukraine’s are is unclear.

Even the best-mapped Novopoltavske field was last surveyed in 1982-1991. It is also inconveniently located just north of Chernihiv in Zaporizhzhia province, which is the wrong side of the front line from a Ukrainian point of view.

So are two of the touted lithium projects. Indeed, about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources are under Russian occupation, according to estimates by Ukrainian think tanks We Build Ukraine and the National Institute of Strategic Studies.

Unlocking the full value of the minerals deal will be impossible without a definitive peace and reconciliation of Ukraine’s and Russia’s competing territorial claims.

Long road from mine to market

Ukraine has other lithium deposits and also hosts reserves of critical minerals such as uranium, titanium and graphite.

But since existing production facilities are not included in the deal and many have been closed since the start of the war anyway, Ukraine will be building a minerals production chain from scratch.

That is a long journey.

The challenge with many of the metals on everyone’s critical raw materials list is not getting them out of the ground, although that can be capital-intensive enough, but in refining them into high-purity products ready for the manufacturing process.

Rare earths’ separation and processing is notoriously tricky and dominated by Chinese operators, which is another reason why no-one’s calling it the rare earths deal any more.

Mined uranium also needs to be enriched before it can be fed into a nuclear power plant and titanium ore needs to be processed into aviation-grade alloy before it can be used to build aircraft.

It’s an inconvenient truth that Russia is one of the world’s largest titanium processors and accounted for 27% of the enriched uranium supplied to US commercial reactors in 2023.

Russia, however, is explicitly excluded from benefiting from the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Price protection

Market price is another problem.

Ukraine’s graphite deposits are both on the right side of the front line and relatively well mapped. The Balakhivske project is at the feasibility study stage, according to the Ukrainian Geological Survey.

There is a ready European market for the material needed for the anode in electric vehicle batteries.

But will mining it in Ukraine be economically viable?

Canadian miner Northern Graphite, the only producer in North America, has announced it is putting its Quebec plant on care and maintenance due to a 50% collapse in the graphite price.

China controls 70% of the global supply chain and can exert huge influence over pricing, in this case flooding the market to undermine potential competitors.

The West’s lithium ambitions are being similarly stymied by Chinese over-supply and rock-bottom market prices.

Ukraine will find that private investment will need government help to shield start-ups from price turbulence.

The United States has already understood the need for direct federal action. The Department of Defense is a strategic investor in a domestic rare earths processing project being led by Australia’s Lynas Rare Earths.

Staking the metallic future

This minerals deal is clearly going to come with a long repayment schedule.

But it is a sign of the times. As the world transitions from a fossil fuel economy to a metallic future, minerals have become the new geopolitical currency.

In this new world order China is the dominant incumbent and the West the challenger.

The United States has just made a strategic move in the great global minerals game. It will not be the last.

Next up is the Democratic Republic of Congo, where another minerals-for-security deal is on the table.

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, Andy Home, a columnist for Reuters.)

(Editing by Barbara Lewis)

Developing mines that produce strategically important minerals in countries with established mining sectors such as Canada and Australia can take 10 to 20 years, mining consultants said on Thursday.

But most mineral deposits in Ukraine have scant data to confirm they are economically viable. Investors may also baulk at funnelling money into a country where infrastructure such as power and transport has been devastated by Russia’s three-year-old full-scale invasion and future security is not guaranteed.

“If anyone’s thinking suddenly all these minerals are going to be flying out of Ukraine, they’re dreaming,” said Adam Webb, head of minerals at consultancy Benchmark Minerals Intelligence.

“The reality is it’s going to be difficult for people to justify investing money there when there are options to invest in critical minerals in countries that are not at war.”

While the financial benefits from the deal are uncertain, officials in Ukraine hailed it as a political breakthrough: They believe it will help shore up US support for Kyiv that has faltered under President Donald Trump.

Ukraine needs US support – especially weapons and cash – to withstand Russia’s military invasion.

On the US side, Trump heavily promoted the deal, especially the access it provides to Ukraine’s deposits of rare earth elements which are used in everything from cellphones to cars. So government policy could hasten investment.

The US does not produce significant amounts of rare earths and has ramped up a trade war with China, the world’s top supplier.

The text of the deal signed in Washington showed that revenues for the reconstruction fund would come from royalties, licence fees and production-sharing agreements.

The text mentions no financial terms, saying that the two sides still have to hammer out a limited partnership agreement between the US International Development Finance Corp and Ukraine’s State Organization Agency on Support for Public-Private Partnership.

The text details 55 minerals plus oil, natural gas and other hydrocarbons. According to Ukrainian data, the country has deposits of 22 of the 34 minerals identified by the European Union as critical, including rare earths, lithium and nickel.

“The transition from a discovered resource to an economically viable reserve requires significant time and investment, both of which have been constrained, not only since the onset of the war but even prior to it,” said Willis Thomas at consultancy CRU.

Ukrainian finance ministry data showed that in 2024, the Ukrainian state earned 47.7 billion hryvnias, or around $1 billion, in royalties and other fees related to natural resources exploitation.

But the joint fund created under the deal will only get revenue from new licences, permits and production-sharing agreements concluded after the accord comes into force.

Slow pace of mining licences

Ukraine was slow to issue new natural resources licenses before Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion. From 2012 to 2020, about 20 licences were issued for oil and gas, one for graphite, one for gold, two for manganese and one for copper, according to the Ukrainian geological service. There are 3,482 existing licenses in total.

Since the agreement creates a limited partnership, the two countries may be looking at direct government investment in a mining company, analysts said.

Chile, the world’s biggest copper producer and owner of state mining company Codelco, could be an example they follow, Webb said.

Another hurdle is that some potentially lucrative projects are on land occupied by Russia, and the agreement does not include any security guarantees. Washington has said the presence of US interests would deter aggressors.

Seven of 24 potential mining projects identified by Benchmark are in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine and include lithium, graphite, rare earth elements, nickel and manganese.

An official of a small Ukrainian company that holds the licence for the Polokhivske lithium deposit, one of the largest in Europe, told Reuters in February it would be tough to develop without Western security guarantees.

“The deal ties the US more closely into Ukraine in that now they’ve got a bit more of a vested interest in this war coming to an end so that they can develop those assets,” Webb said.

(By Eric Onstad, Pavel Polityuk and Christian Lowe; Editing by Veronica Brown and Cynthia Osterman)

MABC’s 2025 Economic Impact Study assesses the potential economic impact of 18 proposed critical mineral mines, six precious metal mines and three steelmaking coal mines.

The independent study examines 27 mining projects in advanced stages of development. Of the 27 projects assessed, 21 are new mining projects and six are extensions to existing mines.

BC mineral producers have among the lowest carbon footprints globally and are world leading suppliers of responsibly-produced materials, according to the report, essential for technologies like EV batteries, smartphones, MRI scanners, wind turbines and jet engines.

The study concludes the near-term economic impact of project construction represents over C$41 billion in near-term investment, thousands of jobs that will generate C$27 billion in labour income, and more than C$12 billion in tax revenues.

Mine construction would result in C$20 billion worth of goods and services being purchased from mine suppliers across the province, MABC said.

The study estimates the operation of these mines over several decades could reach C$984 billion in economic activity.

“BC has the minerals, precious metals and steelmaking coal the world needs. Mining has the potential to drive a new wave of economic growth – creating jobs, strengthening local and First Nations communities, and generating revenues for government services,” MABC CEO Michael Goehring said in a news release.

But British Columbia’s mining projects face challenging permitting backlogs. Last year, the province’s exploration sector had over 60 critical mineral projects waiting for permits in a C$38 billion ($27 billion) pileup of economic opportunities.

“BC and Canada must take urgent and bold action to assert our economic sovereignty amidst global trade disruptions and the potential for escalating trade wars. Persistent permitting delays must be addressed to accelerate the development of mining,” Goehring said.

Last year, Canada and British Columbia announced an investment of C$195 million ($142 million) into critical minerals infrastructure in northwest BC, aimed at bolstering development and safety within the region.

“The responsible development of BC’s critical minerals, precious metals, and steelmaking coal resources can secure BC’s economic future, resiliency and long-term prosperity. It’s time to get more mines built,” said Goehring.

The full report is here.

Launched in late 2023 by the US Department of Defense, the Open Price Exploration for National Security AI metals program is an attempt to counter China’s sweeping control of the critical minerals sector, as Reuters reported last year.

Now, more than 30 mining companies, manufacturers and investors – including auto giant Volkswagen – have joined the Critical Minerals Forum non-profit and will be its first users, according to Rob Strayer, a former US diplomat and the organization’s president.

“Everyone in the critical minerals sector is looking for more price transparency,” said Seth Goldstein, a lithium industry analyst with Morningstar. “Any tool like the CMF that could help would be welcome.”

Other members include copper miner South32, rare earths producer MP Materials and defense contractor RTX. The CMF held its first meeting with members in November. The privatization and CMF’s membership have not previously been reported.

Armed with the AI model, the CMF aims to help manufacturers curb their reliance on China by signing more metal supply deals with Western mines, according to more than two dozen industry consultants, purchasing agents, analysts, regulators and investors who told Reuters the program reflects one of the boldest efforts to date to transform the ways certain metals are bought and sold.

The goal is for the AI model to calculate what a metal should cost when labor, processing and other costs are factored in – and Chinese market manipulation is factored out – and thus give buyer and seller confidence in a deal’s economics.

Some deals with the CMF are beginning to take shape. Nevada officials this week said they would work with the CMF and its AI model to help attract copper smelting to the state. The US has only two copper smelters and as such imports nearly half of its demand for the red metal.

The program has already faced skepticism over whether it can achieve the goal of transforming the long-established ways metals are bought and sold.

Yet it is aimed less at heavily traded metals – such as aluminum – and toward lightly traded metals or metals that see heavy overproduction from some in an attempt to sway market pricing.

For example, the CMF model could help manufacturers forecast available nickel supplies in 2028 if the US were to impose a 100% tariff on that metal from Indonesia, the top global producer.

That data that could help a manufacturer determine whether to invest in a US nickel mine or agree to buy its future production, a step that would help obtain financing for a mine’s construction.

In such a scenario, the nickel buyer would use the AI model’s data to negotiate a long-term deal for guaranteed supply, regardless of whether Chinese miners boost production and drive down market prices, as they have done in recent years.

The CMF’s aim with the AI model does assume that a buyer would be comfortable paying more than the market price for a metal if supply were guaranteed.

China squeeze

The CMF’s entrance into the complex metals markets comes as Beijing restricts critical minerals exports, the very kind of market interference that the CMF officials said underscores the need to build more US mines and processing facilities to power the energy transition.

Prices on the London Metal Exchange and other futures exchanges for nickel, cobalt and some other battery metals have been dominated in recent years by overproduction from Chinese miners operating at a loss in Indonesia and Congo to boost market share.

Many niche-but-essential battery minerals on which Beijing has imposed export controls are not traded or lightly traded, including rare earths – a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into motion – as well as germanium and gallium.

In response to a request for comment about the CMF, the Chinese embassy in Washington, DC, said that China manages its exports of rare earths in accordance with rules from the World Trade Organization.

“China will continue to work with other countries to jointly undertake the responsibility of global rare earths supply,” said embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu.

Volkswagen and some other CMF members said they see the CMF as helping boost visibility into what can be an opaque critical minerals supply chain. MP Materials and RTX did not respond to requests for comment.

US President Donald Trump has already ordered his administration to work with private developers to boost US crucial minerals production, a step that could be aided by the data CMF aims to provide markets, program officials said. The president has also launched a study into potential tariffs on all US minerals imports.

Drawing on its government connections, the CMF aims to connect mining projects with potential investors and manufacturers needing more-secure metals supply, said Strayer.

Massachusetts-based rare earths processing startup Phoenix Tailings hopes the CMF can help create US-based prices for minerals tied to actual production costs, said CEO Nick Myers.

Phoenix aims to use data from the CMF as negotiating leverage with potential customers, including manufacturers that are themselves CMF members, Myers said. “In a sector that is opaque, it is one of the tools to get more information,” Myers said.

Not all market observers are convinced that the CMF’s AI model is revolutionary.

“I’ve tried to politely say I think this is worthless,” said Ian Lange, who teaches mining economics at the Colorado School of Mines. Lange contrasted the goals of the Pentagon’s AI model with the much-larger and more-complex global oil market.

“Can we predict the price of oil better now than five years ago? The answer is no. Machine learning doesn’t help,” Lange said.

‘Encourage more visibility’

The Pentagon’s AI model is being trained using more than 70 mining-related data sets and aims to guide investment decisions out for at least 15 years based on how unexpected market shocks – export restrictions, for example – could affect the production or price of a metal.

FactSet, Benchmark Mineral Intelligence and other pricing providers are supplying data, as is the US Commerce Department, officials said.

It is access to analysis of that data – some of which is not public – that the CMF says it believes sets the Pentagon’s AI program apart from ChatGPT or other AI programs.

And that data is the CMF’s biggest cost, part of the reason why the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) will fund it for the next few years while the CMF determines whether to charge all members or create a tiered structure with basic members getting free access and others paying for more granular data, officials said.

S&P Global, AI developer Charles River Analytics, and software firm Exiger with price reporting agency partner Metal Miner have developed the model, according to the Pentagon.

S&P Global declined to comment. Charles River Analytics did not respond to a request for comment. Exiger said it believes its data can help forecast a material’s cost and availability and boost supply chain visibility.

The CMF has been organized as a nonprofit trade association with a board of directors comprised of its members. Its staffing is small – fewer than 10 employees – and its annual budget is not disclosed.

DARPA does not have a representative on the CMF board, but is funding the program through at least 2029 and plans to transfer the AI model’s intellectual property to the CMF by the beginning of 2027, officials said.

There are no plans to make the CMF a for-profit entity, although there may be charges in the future for access to more detailed data sets, officials said.

The CMF is launching a campaign to attract more members – especially from the semiconductor, aviation and defense industries – and offering free membership for the next 14 months while the Pentagon funds data collection, Strayer said.

Foreign governments are also studying whether to join the CMF and use its data, including copper-rich Zambia and cobalt-rich Democratic Republic of Congo, CMF officials said, adding they aim to make the program international in scope to boost metals market transparency.

The Zambian and DRC embassies in Washington, DC, did not respond to requests for comment.

As Western miners begin to demand green premiums for their metals, those new agreements increasingly require the very market intelligence the CMF model aims to provide.

“Any mechanism that can give you better modeling of markets is obviously enormously valuable,” said Brian Menell, CEO of TechMet, a mining investor and CMF member.

The AI model introduces another variable for the LME to contend with, especially as the exchange is struggling as rivals in Chicago and Shanghai try to take market share for some niche battery metals.

The LME declined to comment.

(By Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Veronica Brown and Claudia Parsons)

The following is an overview of the critical minerals, including rare earths, and other natural resources in Ukraine:

What are rare earths and what are they used for?

Rare earths are a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into motion for electric vehicles, cell phones, missile systems, and other electronics. There are no viable substitutes.

The US Geological Survey considers 50 minerals to be critical, including rare earths, nickel and lithium.

Critical minerals are essential for industries such as defence, high-tech appliances, aerospace and green energy.

What mineral resources does Ukraine have?

Ukraine has deposits of 22 of the 34 minerals identified by the European Union as critical, according to Ukrainian data. They include industrial and construction materials, ferro alloy, precious and non-ferrous metals, and some rare earth elements.

According to Ukraine’s Institute of Geology, the country possesses rare earths such as lanthanum and cerium, used in TVs and lighting; neodymium, used in wind turbines and EV batteries; and erbium and yttrium, whose applications range from nuclear power to lasers. EU-funded research also indicates that Ukraine has scandium reserves. Detailed data is classified.

The World Economic Forum has said Ukraine is also a key potential supplier of lithium, beryllium, manganese, gallium, zirconium, graphite, apatite, fluorite and nickel.

The State Geological Service said Ukraine has one of Europe’s largest confirmed reserves, estimated at 500,000 metric tons, of lithium – vital for batteries, ceramics, and glass.

The country has titanium reserves, mostly located in its northwestern and central regions, while lithium is found in the centre, east and southeast.

Ukraine’s reserves of graphite, a key component in electric vehicle batteries and nuclear reactors, represent 20% of global resources. The deposits are in the centre and west.

Ukraine also has significant coal reserves, though most are now under the control of Russia in occupied territory.

Mining analysts and economists say Ukraine currently has no commercially operational rare earth mines.

China is the world’s largest producer of rare earths and many other critical minerals.

What do we know about the deal?

The two countries signed the accord in Washington after months of sometimes fraught negotiations, with uncertainty persisting until the last moment with word of an eleventh-hour snag.

The accord establishes a joint investment fund for Ukraine’s reconstruction as Trump tries to secure a peace settlement in Russia’s three-year-old war in Ukraine.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko were shown signing the agreement in a photo posted on X by the Treasury, which said the deal “clearly signals the Trump Administration’s commitment to a free, sovereign, prosperous Ukraine.”

Svyrydenko wrote on X that the accord provides for Washington to contribute to the fund. She also said the accord provides for new assistance, for example air defense systems for Ukraine. The US did not directly address that suggestion.

Svyrydenko said the accord allowed Ukraine to “determine what and where to extract” and that its subsoil remains owned by Ukraine.

Svyrydenko said Ukraine has no debt obligations to the United States under the agreement, a key point in the lengthy negotiations between the two countries. It also complied with Ukraine’s constitution and Ukraine’s campaign to join the European Union, she said.

The draft did not provide any concrete US security guarantees for Ukraine, one of its initial goals.

Which Ukrainian resources are under Kyiv’s control?

The war has caused widespread damage across Ukraine, and Russia now controls around a fifth of its territory.

The bulk of Ukraine’s coal deposits, which powered its steel industry before the war, are concentrated in the east and have been lost.

About 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources are now under Russian occupation, according to estimates by Ukrainian think-tanks We Build Ukraine and the National Institute of Strategic Studies, citing data up to the first half of 2024. They provided no detailed breakdown.

Since then, Russian troops have continued to advance steadily in the eastern Donetsk region. In January, Ukraine closed its only coking coal mine outside the city of Pokrovsk, which Moscow’s forces are trying to capture.

Russia has occupied at least two Ukrainian lithium deposits during the war – one in Donetsk and another in the Zaporizhzhia region in the southeast. Kyiv still controls lithium deposits in the central Kyrovohrad region.

What opportunities does Ukraine offer?

Oleksiy Sobolev, first deputy economy minister, said in January that the government was working on deals with Western allies including the United States, Britain, France and Italy on projects related to exploiting critical materials. The government estimates the sector’s total investment potential at about $12-15 billion by 2033.

The State Geological Service said the government was preparing about 100 sites to be jointly licensed and developed but provided no further details.

Although Ukraine has a highly qualified and relatively inexpensive labour force and developed infrastructure, investors highlight a number of barriers to investment. These include inefficient and complex regulatory processes as well as difficulty accessing geological data and obtaining land plots.

Such projects would take years to develop and require considerable up-front investment, they said.

(By Olena Harmash; Editing by Kirsten Donovan and Neil Fullick)

The Kremlin was silent on Wednesday’s agreement, but former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said it meant Trump had “broken the Kyiv regime” because Ukraine would have to pay for US military aid with mineral resources.

The accord, which was signed in Washington and heavily promoted by Trump, establishes a joint investment fund for Ukraine’s reconstruction as the US president tries to secure a peace settlement in Russia’s three-year-old war in Ukraine.

The agreement grants the US preferential access to new Ukrainian minerals projects. It is central to Ukraine’s efforts to mend ties with the White House, which frayed after Trump took office in January.

The deal will show the “Russian leadership that there is no daylight between the Ukrainian people and the American people, between our goals,” US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox Business Network in an interview.

“And again, I think this is a strong signal to the Russian leadership, and it gives President Trump the ability to now negotiate with Russia on even a stronger basis,” he said.

His remarks appeared to send a signal to Russia that Washington remains aligned with Kyiv despite question marks over its commitment to its ally since Trump’s return to power upended US diplomacy.

The Ukrainian parliament must still approve the pact.

Ukraine’s First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko, who signed the accord, told reporters in an online briefing that would happen in the next few weeks.

“We want to ratify it as soon as possible. So we plan to do it within the coming weeks,” Svyrydenko said, adding that some technical details had to be completed before a joint US-Ukraine investment fund could become operational.

“We really need to be more sustainable and more self-sufficient, and this is a real tool that can help us achieve this goal,” she said.

Ukraine’s Economy Ministry said the two sides did not expect the agreement to begin generating revenue this year.

Vatican talks were key

Senior Trump administration officials said three agreements had been signed – a framework deal and two technical accords – and that they expected Ukraine’s parliament to approve them within a week.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said he hoped there would be no delays in securing parliament’s approval, although some lawmakers said they expected it to take longer than a week.

Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal met parliamentary factions at a closed meeting on Thursday. Some members complained they had not seen the text of the agreement or been properly consulted.

“The agreement has changed significantly in the preparation process,” Zelenskiy said in a video posted on Telegram, hailing what he called a “truly equal agreement” that created opportunities for investment in Ukraine and the modernization of industry and legal practices in his country.

He and Bessent both underlined that talks between Zelenskiy and Trump in Rome during Pope Francis’ funeral on April 26 played an important role in securing a deal.

“In fact, now we have the first result of the Vatican meeting, which makes it truly historic,” Zelenskiy said.

Kyiv has been highly dependent on US military supplies since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 and says Moscow has intensified attacks on Ukraine since the US stepped up efforts to secure a peace settlement.

Washington has signalled its frustration with the failure of Moscow and Kyiv to agree on terms, and Trump has shown signs of disappointment with Russian President Vladimir Putin for not moving faster towards peace.

Medvedev, who is now a senior security official in Russia, suggested Ukraine had been forced into the agreement.

“Trump has broken the Kyiv regime to the point where they will have to pay for US aid with mineral resources,” he wrote on Telegram. “Now they (Ukrainians) will have to pay for military supplies with the national wealth of a disappearing country.”

Ukraine’s international debt rallied after the signing of the deal, which financial analysts said had come with better terms for Ukraine than they had originally thought likely.

Ukraine is rich in natural resources including rare earth metals used in consumer electronics, electric vehicles and military applications, among others. Global rare earth mining is dominated by China, which is locked in a trade war with the US after Trump’s sharp tariff increases.

Ukraine also has reserves of iron, uranium and natural gas.

(By Doina Chiacu, Susan Heavey, David Lawder, Anastasiia Malenko, Tom Balmforth, Karin Strohecker, Yuliia Dysa and Timothy Heritage; Editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Following the company’s annual general meeting in Perth on Thursday, chief executive Jakob Stausholm said the board had discussed rare earths this week and would take a “serious look” at their potential role in Rio Tinto’s portfolio.

Stausholm said that as the company continues to optimize its iron ore operations in the Pilbara and advances developments like the Simandou iron ore project in Guinea, it’s also reshaping its aluminum, copper, and lithium businesses to support the energy transition.

“So you could say, the next thing is to look a little bit deeper on critical minerals, and you have to think about that, not necessarily as separate mines,” Stausholm told reporters. He noted critical minerals are often present in Rio’s existing operations as a by-product, so “it’s a question of whether we should process them more deliberately.”

Rio Tinto already produces scandium as a by-product of titanium dioxide in Quebec and is weighing the production of gallium from its aluminum operations. Stausholm noted that the absence of a robust spot market for many critical minerals means Rio must ensure demand before scaling up production.

Chairman Dominic Barton echoed the cautious approach, pointing to the limited scale of the sector. “That’s why you don’t typically see the top five [largest miners] in this space,” he said. But with global supply chain diversification becoming a priority, Barton said they are asking themselves whether they should revisit what they already have and assess the economics.

Barton also said critical minerals could help strengthen Rio’s social licence to operate. “It’s interesting how often those with fewer resources are the most vocal,” he added.

Tariffs, Canada and the aluminum market

On tariffs, Barton said Rio could compete under the current global framework, though the company isn’t enthusiastic about trade barriers. “We’re not excited about tariffs, but we’ve got to live with what governments are doing,” he said, adding that if they’re applied uniformly, the company “would manage” because of its position on the cost curve.

Barton welcomed the recent Canadian election results, suggesting they provided a mandate for continued negotiations. He praised the country’s recognition of aluminum’s economic importance, especially given Rio’s workforce in Canada.

As a former Canadian ambassador to China, Barton said China’s economy could absorb short-term tariff impacts.

“Urbanisation, GDP consumption rates, and green infrastructure investment all support long-term steel demand,” he said. “We expect a new equilibrium despite near-term discomfort.”

Working in the US

Stausholm highlighted Rio’s significant presence in the US, including the Kennecott copper mine and smelter in Utah, a boron mine in California, and the Resolution copper project in Arizona.

“The US government is very, very keen on seeing us getting the most out of those assets, so it provides opportunities to serve the US government,” Stausholm said.

He added that tariff policies wouldn’t necessarily affect Rio’s long-term investment decisions. Last month, the US government fast-tracked permitting for the Resolution project, and Stausholm said the joint venture with BHP (ASX: BHP) is moving forward.

“Unlike Australia, the US has seen limited mining development in recent decades—this represents a shift”, he said.

Activist campaign fails

A proposal from UK-based hedge fund Palliser Capital to force a review of Rio’s dual-listed company (DLC) structure failed to gain traction. The company rejected the motion, with Barton stating the board had already reviewed the structure in detail last year with advice from five external consultants.

“All of this work showed that a unification of the DLC would be value destructive for the group and its shareholders,” Barton said.

Only 19.35% of shareholders supported the motion. Under UK law, a 75% majority is required to mandate a review, while 20% support would have have required the company to engage further with shareholders.

The agreement “signals clearly to Russia that the Trump administration is committed to a peace process centered on a free, sovereign and prosperous Ukraine over the long term,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement late Wednesday.

Ukrainian Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko also confirmed the deal on social media. In a post on X, she wrote: “Together with the United States, we are creating the Fund that will attract global investment into our country.”

The deal, as first reported by Bloomberg News, will grant the US priority access to new investment projects involving critical materials such as aluminum, graphite, oil and natural gas. It also establishes a reconstruction fund, managed by Washington, through which profits will be funneled.

The fund is intended to support Ukraine’s recovery and offset future US military assistance, the draft of the agreement reads.

Trump’s 100th day

The announcement comes as US President Donald Trump marks the first 100 days of his new term, amid mounting pressure to deliver foreign policy wins and restore his political standing. Trump, whose support Kyiv views as critical to any potential truce with Moscow, has expressed frustration with the pace of ceasefire negotiations.

“We made a deal where our money is secure, where we can start digging and doing what we have to do,” Trump told a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday. “It’s also good for them because you’ll have an American presence at the site … that will keep a lot of bad actors out.”

The agreement follows weeks of negotiations, including a visit by Ukrainian officials to Washington earlier this month. Talks had stalled over technical details until the sides agreed to finalize all components of the deal simultaneously.

Earlier in the day, the Financial Times reported the deal had hit a last-minute snag, with issues arising related to governance, transparency mechanisms and the traceability of funds.

Resource partnership

The reconstruction fund is designed to facilitate future cooperation in energy and resource development, including mining and technology. Kyiv views the pact as a strategic step toward its long-term goal of joining the European Union—an issue Ukraine insisted must not be compromised.

According to Reuters, while the agreement gives US preferential access to new Ukrainian natural resources deals, it would not automatically hand Washington a share of Ukraine’s mineral wealth.

US officials said that the deal does not require Ukraine to repay past military aid, estimated in the billions of dollars since Russia’s full-scale invasion began over three years ago. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal confirmed that Washington had dropped its earlier demand for retroactive compensation.

“This economic partnership positions our two countries to work collaboratively and invest together,” the US Treasury said.

Rare earths are a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into motion for electric vehicles, cell phones and other electronics.

The existing standard to refine these minerals, known as solvent extraction, is an expensive and dirty process that gradually became unpopular in the United States after it was developed in the 1950s but one that Chinese companies have mastered.

China’s exports of rare earths have ground to a halt, fueling a scramble across the West for replacements. Phoenix says its process can produce rare earths from mined ore or recycled equipment with little to no emissions.

Sumitomo’s Presidio venture arm, along with Builders Vision, Yamaha Motor, and venture capital funds Envisioning Partners, MPower and Escape Velocity, joined a $33 million tranche for Phoenix’s Series B funding round, which closed on April 25, the company said.

Phoenix declined to disclose each investor’s funding.

The company will use the funding as part of its construction of a $13 million facility in Exeter, New Hampshire, that can produce 200 metric tons of rare earths annually initially and should open later this year.

The company last December closed a first tranche of its Series B round worth $43 million, bringing the total round to $76 million.

A $10 million Series A funding round closed in August 2021.

(By Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

USAR is currently finishing the construction of a 310,000-square-foot facility in Stillwater, Oklahoma — also known as Innovation Lab — which it officially opened in late March, having already produced the first batch of sintered magnets earlier in the year.

The plant is designed to replicate the complete rare earth magnet production process, the company said. Following the recent commissioning, it will begin producing protypes for customers ahead of commercial operations in 2026.

At full capacity, the state-of-the-art facility is expected to produce 5,000 tonnes, or hundreds of millions of magnets annually, according to company estimates.

The company, which debuted on the NASDAQ mid-March, previously said that it would invest $100 million in the manufacturing facility.

As part of a vertically integrated supply chain strategy, USAR holds the Round Top deposit in West Texas, where it produced its first sample of dysprosium oxide in January.

The company has said it aims to bring the deposit towards production around the same time as the Oklahoma plant.

The $75 million funding was made via a private investment in public equity (PIPE), the company said.

“This sizable commitment from a single institution allows us to fully fund the capex required for the first phase of our rare earth magnet facility,” USA Rare Earth CEO Joshua Ballard said in a statement.

He also highlighted this as a “pivotal moment” in the company’s push to build what would be one of the largest sintered rare earth magnet facilities in the US.

Under the PIPE transaction, the investor would acquire 8.55 million shares of common stock, pre-funded warrants to purchase another 2.16 million shares and warrants to purchase the combined total number of shares at a strike price of $7.00 per share.

Despite the funding, USAR fell 18.3% at market close to $10.51 apiece, close to where it traded at when it first listed. The stock decline gives the company a market capitalization of $861.3 million.

The landmark agreement would grant Washington preferential access to new Ukrainian mineral and energy projects in exchange for future investment and military assistance, as reported by multiple media outlets.

According to unnamed sources cited by the Financial Times, Ukraine’s Minister of Economic Development Yulia Svyrydenko, who arrived in Washington on Wednesday, is aiming to revisit some of the terms that were initially agreed upon over the weekend.

The sticking points, according to sources cited by the Financial Times, revolve around governance, transparency mechanisms and the traceability of funds. In response, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and his team warned that Svyrydenko should “be ready to sign all agreements, or go back home”.

However, Ukraine refuted the American version of the events, adding that the only reason why they could not sign all the documents on Wednesday was because the fund agreement, which would complete the full minerals deal, must be ratified by the country’s parliament first.

A draft of the deal, previously reviewed by Reuters, indicates that it includes the establishment of a joint US-Ukrainian reconstruction fund, which would receive half of the profits and royalties earned by Ukraine from newly issued natural resources permits.

While this arrangement does not transfer direct ownership of assets or infrastructure, it ensures that the US — or designated entities — would have first access to new licenses and projects.

The draft clarifies that existing mineral or energy contracts will not be affected, and earlier proposals that would have given the US influence over Ukraine’s gas infrastructure have been dropped, Reuters reported.

In parallel reporting, Bloomberg said the deal’s scope includes development opportunities across a range of critical commodities such as aluminum, graphite, oil and natural gas. According to officials familiar with the process, the agreement has been in the works since February and will require ratification by Ukraine’s parliament.

As part of the arrangement, the US has agreed that only future military aid will count toward its contributions to the fund.

Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal confirmed this change on Sunday, noting that previously delivered assistance—worth tens of billions of dollars—will not be monetized under the new framework.

Shmyhal described the agreement as a “strategic investment partnership” to rebuild Ukraine and foster its long-term development. “It is truly an equal and beneficial international agreement,” he told Ukrainian television on Wednesday, according to CNN.

US President Donald Trump has linked the mineral partnership to broader questions around Ukraine’s ability to “repay” Washington for its support since Russia’s 2022 invasion.

The deal also aligns with Trump’s broader push for a negotiated ceasefire. However, progress on that front remains stalled as Russia demands complete control over contested eastern Ukrainian regions.

Despite the high-level tensions—including a failed signing attempt in February following a contentious Oval Office meeting—Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and President Trump appear to have restarted dialogue. The two met privately at the Vatican over the weekend during Pope Francis’s funeral.

Ukraine claims to hold nearly $15 trillion worth of mineral resources, making it one of the most resource-rich nations in Europe. The country is home to the continent’s largest reserves of lithium, titanium, and uranium.

Defense Metals is currently developing the Wicheeda rare earth element (REE) project in British Columbia. The property is located about 80 km northeast of the city of Prince George, covering an area of 118 sq. km.

“The interest shown by our potential strategic partner reflects growing industry confidence that Wicheeda could indeed become a strategically important source of rare earth elements based on the convincing results of our detailed pre-feasibility study published earlier this month,” Defense Metals CEO Mark Tory said in a news release.

“We still have a lot of work to do to turn our project into reality, but this MOU is certainly a major step in the right direction,” he added.

The company recently completed a preliminary feasibility study that demonstrated robust economics for the project, including an after-tax net present value of $1 billion, using an 8% discount rate, and an internal rate of return of 18.9%.

The Wicheeda REE deposit is estimated to hold 34 million tonnes of measured and indicated resources grading 2.02% total rare earth oxides (TREOs), for nearly 700,000 tonnes of TREOs.

PM and Liberal Party head Mark Carney, who’s leading in the polls, has pledged to approve resource projects within two years and broaden exploration tax credits as part of a plan to make Canada both an “energy superpower” and “the global supplier of choice for critical minerals.”

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, meanwhile, has vowed to open a resource-focused project office with an even shorter time limit – one year – to get “shovels in the ground” as fast as possible.  He also says he’ll build long-discussed infrastructure for Ontario’s Ring of Fire region, a set of three new roads and power lines linking future mines with the southern road network. Even so, his platform is thin on details about mining.

“Both parties would unlock stronger growth via major infrastructure and resource development, but each differs in approach,” Scotiabank Economics Vice President Rebekah Young said in a report issued Friday. “A complicated jurisdictional landscape, compounded now by global uncertainties, means either party would have its work cut out to spur greater investment.”

Critical minerals and industrial metals have emerged as essential economic building blocks in recent years as the world gears up for the coming energy transition. In the United States, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order to increase American critical mineral production to dent China’s dominance after launching a Section 232 probe on all critical mineral imports – a process that typically results in tariffs.

‘Energy superpower’ goal

“Making Canada an energy superpower starts with critical metals and minerals, vital components to build everything from solar panels to electric vehicles,” Carney said last week during a campaign stop in Vancouver. “The market for these minerals is currently dominated by China and Russia. That must change.”

In his first election campaign, Carney has pledged to “kick-start” the “clean energy supply chain” by investing in critical minerals, spurring private investment and supporting early-stage mining companies.

If elected, Carney is proposing to adopt “Buy Canada” standards for products such as steel and aluminum while putting an increased focus on feedstock for battery supply chain buildouts.

First and Last Mile

A key measure included in the 67-page Liberal platform is the creation of the First and Last Mile Fund, an investment vehicle that Carney says will connect critical mineral projects to supply chains by supporting on-site development, processing and refining capacity.

Carney also wants to broaden the Critical Mineral Exploration Tax Credit by including critical minerals necessary for defence, semiconductors, energy and clean technologies to the list of qualifying minerals.

A Liberal government would also expand eligible activities under Canadian exploration expenses to include the costs of engineering, economic and feasibility studies for critical minerals projects.

“All of these measures taken together will make Canada the global supplier of choice for critical metals and minerals,” Carney said.

Repealing obstructive laws

Poilievre, Carney’s main rival for the top job, has vowed to repeal various policies passed under former Liberal prime minister Justin Trudeau – including the Impact Assessment Act known as Bill C-69.

He calls Bill C-69 the “No More Development” law, saying it “makes it impossible to build the mines, pipelines and other major energy infrastructure Canada needs.” Removing it would trigger a boom in the country’s resource sector, he says.

“We will get big projects built again by repealing the Liberal anti-development laws and regulations that have cost us half a trillion dollars in lost investment over the last decade,” Poilievre said in a campaign document posted on his party’s website. “We’ll also work with Indigenous partners to process and sell our clean natural resources to get foreign countries off burning higher-emission fuels and fight climate change.”

Although the 30-page Conservative platform has a section on Canadian energy and resources, “mining” and “minerals” don’t appear at all in the document. The word “mines” is mentioned once.

If he becomes PM, Poilievre has vowed to accelerate priority resource projects and usher in “One and Done” approvals. He would create a single Rapid Resource Project Office to streamline all regulatory approvals into one application and environmental review, in cooperation with the provinces, with a target of six-month decisions and a one-year maximum timeline.

Fast-tracking projects

A key pledge for miners involves building the infrastructure project to Ontario’s Ring of Fire region, which is known for its vast potential but slow progress towards getting any mines built. A Conservative government would approve federal permits to harvest chromite, cobalt, nickel, copper and platinum in the area, Poilievre says.

In the Conservative leader’s view, these measures would give the Canadian economy a boost of several billion dollars, “allowing us to become less dependent on the Americans, while our allies overseas would no longer have to rely on hostile regimes for these metals, turning dollars for dictators into paycheques for our people.”

The US president has put pressure on Kyiv by threatening to stop the flow of military supplies to help it fight Russia’s invasion unless the US gets some payback for the billions of dollars the aid is costing.

But the deal is sensitive for Ukraine, which has a proud history of mining coal and iron ore and hopes to exploit seams of increasingly sought-after rare earths. Mineral revenues are a crucial pillar of the state budget.

In the city of Kryvyi Rih, on whose outskirts open-cast iron ore mines have gouged huge craters in the landscape, 71-year-old pensioner Oleksandr had little time for Trump: “You can’t trust that ginger guy, he’s not that kind of person.”

“From what I can see, they only want to take, not to give,” he said as he shopped near the UGOK iron ore mining and processing plant.

President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, himself from Kryvyi Rih, said on Monday the negotiations on creating a mineral revenue fund from which the US would draw had made progress since a memorandum of intent signed on April 18:

“The document has become much stronger – more equitable – and could be beneficial to both our peoples, for Ukraine and for America.”

‘Minerals belong to the people’

Zelenskiy knows he must win Trump over after a difficult relationship so far, but that there will be uproar at home if he makes a bad deal.

About 60 km (40 miles) north of Kryvyi Rih is the town of Zhovti Vody – or “yellow waters” – where uranium and iron ore were mined for decades.

“I hope that the people who are involved in this think about Ukraine and its people, because our mineral riches belong to the people,” said 71-year-old resident Nina Fesenko.

Olga Marynska, 68, said she hoped the government would prevent Ukraine being exploited.

“We don’t have to give them everything,” she said. “I don’t think we have to do it in such a way that they take everything out of that fund.”

Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said on Sunday that there was now agreement that the deal would not seek to pay for US aid provided to Kyiv in the past.

That may help to reassure Ukrainians who feel they have battled Russia since 2022 not only for themselves but also on behalf of the West: the US-led NATO defence alliance that they seek to join, and the European nations to which many Ukrainians feel much closer than to President Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

“I do think that for us as Ukrainians, it feels a little bit like another country is using our vulnerability, which was not created by us,” said Ukrainian legislator Inna Sovsun.

She said it was “critically important when we are designing the future to keep in mind that people will live here in the future”.

(By Vladyslav Smilianets, Thomas Peter, Anastasiia Malenko and Christian Lowe; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

On April 8, the Department of the Interior (DOI) issued approval for Dateline Resources (ASX: DTR) to continue its development of the Colosseum rare earths project situated within the Mojave National Preserve in San Bernardino County. Due to its location, the project has been stalled for years.

According to the Australian miner, the Department’s communication reaffirms that the company’s existing rights under the Mining Act and the California Desert Protection Act are now valid.

The DOI approval paves the way to the development of America’s second rare earths mine. Currently, the US has only one producing rare earths mine, the Mountain Pass held by MP Materials (NYSE: MP), located just 10 km to the south.

“The Department of the Interior’s public support and confirmation of our rights provide a strong foundation for moving the Colosseum project forward,” stated Dateline’s managing director Stephen Baghdadi in a press release.

The Colosseum project has a rich history of mining dating to the California Gold Rush, but it wasn’t until 1986 that industrial-scale gold mining took place on the property. Between 1989 and 1993, the mine, under ownership of Canada’s LAC Minerals, churned out 344,000 oz. from two open pits. Barrick Gold then held the project for two decades but conducted minimal activity.

Similarity to Mountain Pass

Dateline took over the project in 2021 and has since reviewed work undertaken by the USGS to identify radio metric signatures for the Colosseum – Mountain Pass corridor.

Upon completion of review, Dateline’s team concluded that the project shares the same geological setting as Mountain Pass, which started production in 1952 and was a primary global source of rare earth elements (REE) from the 1960s to the 1990s.

Technical assessments suggest the potential for REE-bearing ore within Colosseum’s claim boundary, Dateline said.

The project currently has no estimated resources for REE, only a JORC-2012-compliant gold resource of 1.1 million oz., with about two-thirds in the measured and indicated categories. A scoping study in August 2024 outlined an eight-plus-year mine life averaging 75,000 oz. of gold production per annum.

The ceremony was attended by key government authorities from the State of Goiás and the Municipality of Nova Roma, as well as representatives from federal agencies and international embassies.

The government officials expressed support for the project’s streamlined development, recognizing its strategic potential to position Goiás as a global center for sustainable production of heavy rare earths, particularly dysprosium and terbium, Aclara said in a press release.

“Our heavy rare earth production, dysprosium and terbium, will be essential for establishing a reliable and alternative supply chain for the permanent magnets used in electric vehicles, wind turbines, robotics and other advanced technologies,” CEO Ramón Barúa said.

Barúa also said the Carina project’s future production of these key elements “will enable the fabrication of approximately five million electric vehicles per year”, which he said would position Goiás at the forefront in the global energy transition.

At the Aparecida de Goiânia pilot plant, the company expects to process approximately 200 tonnes of clay material from the Carina project, resulting in an estimated production of 150 kg of heavy rare earth carbonates.

According to the company, the process flowsheet incorporated several optimizations that focused on increasing efficiency, reducing costs and improving the purity of the final product. This optimized approach builds on its previous piloting efforts in Chile, where it processed 25 tonnes of clay from the Carina project.

Aclara Resources’ stock traded flat on Monday morning at C$0.75 apiece, for a market capitalization of $163.3 million.

“With an estimated investment of R$2.8 billion ($500 million), the project will create thousands of jobs and position our state as a leader in the production of rare earths – strategic minerals for the future of clean technologies such as electric vehicles and wind energy,” Daniel Vilela, Vice Governor of the State of Goiás, said.

Production in 2028

The facility represents a key step in advancing the Carina project towards production in 2028. The project is currently in its permitting stage, with Aclara aiming to submit its environmental impact assessment mid-2025. Later in the year, the company plans to complete a pre-feasibility study, followed by feasibility study in 2026.

To fund these works, Aclara raised $25 million via a private placement last year.

The Carina project currently has an estimated resource of about 298 million tonnes grading 1,452 parts per million TREO (total rare earth oxides), all in the inferred category. This would support annual production of 191 tonnes of dysprosium and terbium, representing about 13% of China’s official production in 2023, Aclara estimates.

The company is also looking to build a rare earths separation plant in the United States. This facility will process mixed rare earth carbonates sourced from its mineral resource projects, separating them into pure individual rare earth oxides.

Additionally, through a joint venture with Chile’s CAP, Alcara is advancing its alloy-making capabilities to convert these refined oxides into the alloys needed for fabricating permanent magnets.

While pre-construction activities are underway, additional expenses are needed to mitigate wastewater challenges, Lynas said in a statement Monday. The company — backed by Australia’s richest person Gina Rinehart — is in discussions with the US government about the issue, it added.

Perth-based Lynas is the largest supplier outside China of rare earths, used in everything from smartphones to defense applications. The Asian nation’s dominance of the industry has caused angst in the US, which is seeking to bolster alternative supply chains. In response to punitive tariffs imposed by Washington, Beijing has added seven rare earths to its export control list.

“We are also reviewing the potential cost implications for the US project as a consequence of recent announcements on global tariffs,” Lynas said.

Lynas produces so-called ‘light’ rare earths, which are used in magnets for electric vehicle motors, wind turbines and munitions. It’s set to enter the ‘heavy’ industry with new refining capacity both in the US and in Malaysia, where it has an existing site that from later this year will start processing many of the metals restricted by Chinese export controls.

Lynas currently sources ore for its refineries from its Mt Weld mine near Kalgoorlie in Western Australia, according to its website. It will send ore from there to the Texas facility once it is operational.

(By Paul-Alain Hunt)

In an earnings call this week, Musk confirmed that production of its Optimus robots is being impacted by the “magnet issue” — referring to the key robotics component that now requires Beijing approval to be shipped into the US.

Earlier this month, China announced export restrictions on seven rare earth minerals in response to the punitive tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump. The export curbs also extend to rare earth magnets and other finished products, which have vital uses across various high-tech industries, and in some cases, are indispensable to military applications.

“China wants some assurances that these are not used for military purposes, which obviously they’re not. They’re just going into a humanoid robot,” said Musk in his Tuesday call.

In light of these measures, companies like Tesla are now required to apply to the Ministry of Commerce to obtain their export licences — a process that can range from six or seven weeks to even several months. Such a process, says Musk, would undoubtedly hamper the Optimus rollout plans.

Still, the Tesla boss — who pledged to take a step back from politics and refocus on his business ventures — told investors he remains optimistic of realizing the initial goal of churning out thousands of Optimus robots by year-end, then scaling up its production to 1 million units by 2030.

Musk also acknowledged that the robots’ production timeline is heavily dependent on the availability of critical components, stating that “Optimus production will move as fast as the slowest and least lucky component”.

Tesla’s first prototype of Optimus was launched in 2022. At that time, Musk said these general-purpose humanoid robots, which are designed to perform tasks that are dangerous, repetitive or boring for humans using advanced AI technologies, “has the potential to be more significant than its vehicle business over time.”

In addition to the Optimus project, Tesla’s core electric vehicle business is also expected to feel the impacts of China’s rare earth export restrictions.

A senior automotive executive told the Financial Times that the critical mineral restrictions would be “consequential” for Tesla, describing them as a “7 or 8” on a scale of 1 to 10 in terms of severity.

China currently produces around 90% of the world’s rare earth minerals, making it a key supplier to the US, which only has one producing rare earths mine – Mountain Pass in California.

Even as countries like the US start to explore options and ramp up production, China is still expected to dominate the global supply with a 54% market share by 2030, according to IEA projections.

​

Joint projects in the Arctic, as well as oil and gas and rare-earth minerals, are among the options being considered under a partnership the US would offer as part of a peace pact, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing matters that aren’t public.

Russia, encouraged by President Donald Trump’s talk of economic deals that could follow a peace agreement, is drawing up a list of projects and assets that officials hope might interest the US, according to people in Moscow involved in the effort. The ideas are collected by Kirill Dmitriev, President Vladimir Putin’s envoy for economic relations, who’s become a key conduit to the White House.

The two sides aren’t discussing plans directly at the moment, the people said. Any effort to rekindle economic ties would face enormous hurdles, from the thousands of sanctions still in place on Russia from the US and its Group of Seven allies to the Kremlin’s longstanding reluctance to allow foreign investors control in strategic sectors like energy.

The focus on possible business deals, especially in the energy sector, highlights the Trump administration’s transactional approach to foreign policy. If the agreements are realized, they could also leave US companies with a major role in the flow of gas, oil and electricity from Russia and Ukraine, including to Europe.

The effort follows on the heels of Trump’s push for a comprehensive investment agreement with Ukraine that would give the US a major role in projects to exploit the country’s mineral deposits and rebuild its infrastructure.

The US is driving for a quicker peace accord and has threatened to walk away from negotiations if the parties won’t agree to halt the hostilities. The US will demand that Russia accept Ukraine’s right to develop its own adequately equipped army and defense industry as part of a peace agreement, people said earlier this week, while Ukraine may be expected to give up some territory.

US envoy Steve Witkoff met with Putin in Moscow Friday for talks that the Kremlin described as constructive. Dmitriev participated in the meeting, according to state media.

“The way that Trump likes to frame politics is in reference points that he can understand like business, and for now the Russians are happy to go along with this,” said Emily Ferris, a senior research fellow in the International Security Studies department at the Royal United Services Institute in London.

The US proposed lifting sanctions on Moscow as part of any peace deal, according to people familiar with the situation, though that would also require agreement with the European Union as many of the most stringent restrictions have been imposed by the bloc.

The US sees economic incentives as a key element in persuading Putin in the drive for peace, according to the people.

“We do not confirm or deny details of ongoing negotiations. When the President has something to announce, we will announce it,” White House spokesman James Hewitt said in response to a request for comment for this article.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio denied a report he and Witkoff had discussed lifting energy sanctions.

Trump posted on social media Apr. 20 that if Russia and Ukraine reach a deal, “BOTH WILL THEN START TO DO BIG BUSINESS WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

Some Russian officials are hopeful they can establish an economic partnership with the US even if talks over ending the fighting in Ukraine collapse, one of the people close to the Kremlin said.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov didn’t respond to a request for comment. Dmitriev’s office declined for comment.

“Russia’s trade with China is currently about 70-fold larger than its trade with the US, so that naturally limits the available options,” said Maria Snegovaya, senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. Still, the White House could adopt a more flexible approach to sanctions enforcement, potentially allowing US energy companies to secure meaningful stakes in Russian energy ventures, including in the Arctic, she said.

One US proposal would see American control of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which is now under Russian occupation, with the electricity output sent to both countries, the people said. Ukraine indicated that such an option at Europe’s biggest nuclear plant would come with numerous issues.

“If the US enters a format of managing this station, they will only be able to do so with the help of our technical personnel. Immediately, questions arise about access to water, infrastructure and security,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said earlier this week. It would be more acceptable if Ukraine and the US controlled the plant, though that option isn’t on the table, according to him.

The US has also discussed ways that the participation of American investors, either in production or transportation assets, might help restore some of Russia’s energy exports to Europe. The continent was Moscow’s largest market before the Kremlin’s February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine but has since slashed its dependence on Russian supplies.

The US has indicated an interest in working with Russia on projects in the Arctic and cooperating with energy giant Gazprom PJSC, although those contacts were not on an official level, Bloomberg reported in March. It has also informally explored the possibility of working with Russia to resume natural gas deliveries to Europe that were halted by Ukraine this year, two people said. That’s especially complicated as many states diversified supplies away from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine and the EU is working on a roadmap to phase out Russian fossil fuels.

The idea of allowing US companies to get access to Russian energy or transport assets has been discussed internally in Moscow, said a top executive of one state entity working with Gazprom and Rosneft PJSC. Selling stakes in energy projects or companies to the Americans, ideally those close to Trump, could be strategically useful, as it may ease the sales and cross border payment processes, he said, adding that he’s expressing a personal view.

It’s unclear which American companies could be involved in investments in the Russian energy sector and past relationships have been bumpy. The US itself is also competing with Russia for the European LNG market.

The US wasn’t among Russia’s top 10 biggest foreign direct investors before the war in Ukraine. American business in Russia was driven by brands ranging from McDonald’s Corp and PepsiCo Inc to the Ford Motor Co, while its presence in the energy and commodities sectors was less visible.

There were also big losses after the invasion of Ukraine. Exxon Mobil Corp eventually lost the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project as Putin signed a decree to transfer operations to a Russian entity.

Putin has also offered Russia’s rare earth deposits, following Trump’s repeated public expressions of interest in the critical minerals.

The Tomtor deposit in Yakutia in Russia’s far east is one potential candidate for cooperation with the US, one of the people close to the Russian government said. The deposit, one of the word’s biggest, in particular in niobium, is owned by former managers of the ICT Group since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and development was paused as sanctions prevented access to needed technologies.

American involvement in the project may help to resolve the issue as some sanctions could be eased, according to a person familiar with the situation. The deposit’s current owners weren’t available to comment.

Putin in November ordered to ensure the development of Tomtor either by its owners or with help from other investors or the state.

To be sure, even if a peace accord is reached to end the war in Ukraine, there’ll be a lot of political and economic uncertainty over the outlook for long-term investments in Russia.

“Many American companies lost a lot in Russia since 2014,” said Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. “Any significant influx of investors from the US is a utopia.”

CHARTS: Rare earth export restrictions, price spikes and the risks of demand destruction

“Ukraine, headed by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has not signed the final papers on the very important rare earths deal with the United States. It is at least three weeks late. Hopefully, it will be signed IMMEDIATELY. Work on the overall peace deal between Russia and Ukraine is going smoothly,” he said in a Truth Social post.

(By Katharine Jackson; Editing by Doina Chiacu)

Read More: US eyes post-war joint business with Russia in energy, metals

From January 2009 through August 2011, the monthly average price of dysprosium (Dy) oxide (China FOB) increased 26-fold, from $91/kg to $2,377/kg.

This price spike is often attributed to China halting rare earth exports to Japan amidst a territorial dispute, but in reality the rally had started months prior and was accelerated by a multitude of different forces; namely, falling Chinese export quotas, rising Chinese export duties, China’s weaponization of rare earth exports, a clampdown on illegal production in the nation, and resultant speculation and panic buying by end users.

This year, with China imposing export restrictions on a suite of rare earth materials earlier this month, including Dy oxide and other Dy-containing products, such as NdFeB magnets, flows from China to global end users are currently being bogged down by bureaucracy as sellers in China apply for and await the receipt of export licenses for affected orders – a process expected to take upwards of 45 business days.

Over the long term, these restrictions will have lasting impacts on global rare earths trade through the galvanization of supply chain development efforts in the US, Europe and elsewhere. In the near term, however, global end users – mindful of the 2010/11 price spike – face major uncertainty with respect to supplies and prices.

For the most part, rare earth prices have responded negatively to the new export restrictions, despite a sustained reduction in supplies from Myanmar and the recent stoppage of concentrate exports to China by MP Materials. Interestingly, prices were also initially indifferent when China halted exports to Japan in September 2010, but three months later embarked on a historic upswing that remains unmatched to this day.

Below is a summary of key developments from January 2009 through August 2011 that led to Dy oxide’s meteoric price rise.

January 2009: $91/kg

As of January 2009, China’s rare earth export quotas (i.e., the amount it permitted for export) had fallen steadily since 2005, down 13% in four years, raising concerns among end users.

Over the same period, China re-introduced export duties on rare earths in 2006 and gradually ratcheted them up from 10% to as high as 25% for a strategic selection of products, including neodymium metal, as well as dysprosium and terbium carbonate and chloride.

August 2009: $114/kg

With export quotas down and duties up, China’s MIIT released a draft report in August 2009 that hinted Beijing would ban the export of five rare earth elements within the next five years.

The following month, the New York Times reported that China was planning to further reduce its export quotas in 2010.

The price of dysprosium jumped 26% versus January but went largely unchanged thereafter through the end of 2009.

January 2010: $129/kg

In January 2010, China raised export duties on Fe-Dy alloy, a key input for high performance NdFeB magnets, from 10% to 20%, lifting the price of Dy products, including Dy oxide, by a similar rate month over month.

At the same time, China slashed its first of two export quotas for the year, as foreshadowed by the New York Times, leading the price of Dy oxide to more than double by July as end users raced to secure material.

In July 2010, China announced a 72% reduction to its second export quota for the year, exacerbating concerns while propelling the price of Dy oxide 26% higher month-over-month.

Two months later, in September 2010, China temporarily banned rare earth exports to Japan amid a territorial dispute.

Nevertheless, the price of Dy oxide and many other rare earths increased just modestly between July and December 2010, but the fever was nearing a boil.

In December 2010, Reuters reported that China planned to reduce its export quota for the first half of 2011 by another 35%, fueling a January price jump and a historic upswing to follow.

January 2011: $343/kg

Following the Reuters report, the five-month-stagnant price jumped 18% in January, 19% in February, 28% in March, 31% in April and 17% in May to a record $799/kg – a historic rally that remains unmatched to this day.

August 2011: $2,377/kg

A month later, in June 2011, the price soared 80% to $1,440/kg as the Chinese government cracked down on illegal mining in the nation and by August 2011 prices topped $2,377/kg, a 26-fold increase in just 31 months.

For the next five months, the price began to deflate but held above $2,000/kg into January 2012.

In February 2012, the average price fell to $1,633/kg and by December 2012 was down to $748/kg.

The following three years (2013/14/15) saw the price drop by roughly 33% each year to a floor of around $180/kg in 2016.

Short lived spike, long lasting fallout

While the price spike was short lived, the fallout was profound and enduring. In the years that followed, a quiet revolution unfolded in the electric vehicle sector. Where REE-powered motors once reigned uncontested, their dominance eroded as some manufacturers adopted or pivoted to alternatives.

From a negligible share of less than 1% in 2010, EVs powered by REE-free motors surged to over 12% of global sales by late 2017.

Adamas Intelligence points to this as a textbook case of engineered demand destruction – a deliberate shift to alternatives born of caution, catalyzed by the trauma of the 2010/11 price surge.

Companies, burned by volatility and unwilling to remain at the mercy of China’s whims, sought refuge in innovation, re-engineering their futures to sidestep the rare earth chokehold.

By 2018, however, with prices low and volatility tempered, REE-powered motors quickly recaptured market share, with 97% of all EVs sold each year since 2017 using them.

In 2017, when REE-free motor adoption peaked, the EV industry was still a relatively small end-use category and thus the impact on overall demand was less substantial than it would be today.

Undoubtedly, China recognizes this and will play its hand carefully this time around.

April 2025: China announces new export controls

Fast forward to this month and China is at it again, unveiling export controls on select rare earth products. But this time, the playbook feels different – less blunt force, more scalpel.

Adamas sees a calculated precision in Beijing’s approach, an intent to wield its resource dominance with surgical intent.

The likely targets? Initially, industries like defense contractors and drone makers, sectors where REE scarcity could deliver maximum disruption to rivals, particularly in the West.

Meanwhile, China appears poised to spare others, like the EV industry, from the worst of the fallout – perhaps a nod to its own stake in the green revolution or a bid to keep global markets from spiraling into further chaos.

Unlike the reckless two-order-of-magnitude price surge of the early 2010s, this move suggests a China keen to inflict pain where it hurts most while dodging the collateral damage of a full-blown crisis.

The message is clear: China knows the power it holds and is learning to wield it with chilling finesse.

For the rest of the world, the echoes of 2010/11 still linger – a haunting reminder of vulnerability, a call to diversify, innovate, or risk being caught in the crosshairs of a prolonged resource war where the stakes only grow higher.

The order, which Trump signed in private, seeks to jumpstart the mining of both US and international waters as part of a push to offset China’s sweeping control of the critical minerals industry.

Reuters first reported last month that the order was under deliberation.

Parts of the Pacific Ocean and elsewhere are estimated to contain large amounts of potato-shaped rocks known as polymetallic nodules filled with the building blocks for electric vehicles and electronics.

More than 1 billion metric tons of those nodules are estimated to be in US waters and filled with manganese, nickel, copper and other critical minerals, according to an administration official.

Extracting them could boost US GDP by $300 billion over 10 years and create 100,000 jobs, the official added.

“The United States has a core national security and economic interest in maintaining leadership in deep-sea science and technology and seabed mineral resources,” Trump said in the order.

The order directs the administration to expedite mining permits under the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resource Act of 1980 and to establish a process for issuing permits along the US Outer Continental Shelf.

It also orders the expedited review of seabed mining permits “in areas beyond the national jurisdiction,” a move likely to spark friction with the international community.

The International Seabed Authority – created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the US has not ratified – has for years been considering standards for deep-sea mining in international waters, although it has yet to formalize them due to unresolved differences over acceptable levels of dust, noise and other factors from the practice.

Supporters of deep-sea mining say it would lessen the need for large mining operations on land, which are often unpopular with host communities. Environmental groups are calling for all activities to be banned, warning that industrial operations on the ocean floor could cause irreversible biodiversity loss.

“The deep ocean belongs to everyone and protecting it is humanity’s global duty. The sea floor environment is not a platform for ‘America First’ extraction,” said Emily Jeffers of the Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group that opposes the practice.

Any country can allow deep-sea mining in its own territorial waters, roughly up to 200 nautical miles from shore, and companies are already lining up to mine US waters.

Impossible Metals earlier this month asked the administration to launch a commercial auction for access to deposits of nickel, cobalt and other critical minerals off the coast of American Samoa.

Shares of The Metals Company – among the most prominent of deep-sea mining companies – rose on Thursday by roughly 40% to hit a 52-week high of $3.39 per share after the Reuters report earlier in the day on the executive order.

“With a stable, transparent, and enforceable regulatory pathway available under existing US law, we look forward to delivering the world’s first commercial nodule project, responsibly and economically,” said Gerard Barron, CEO of the company, which aims to extract nodules from a vast plain of the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Mexico known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.

Beyond The Metals Company, others eyeing deep-sea mining include California-based Impossible Metals, Russia’s JSC Yuzhmorgeologiya, Blue Minerals Jamaica, China Minmetals, and Kiribati’s Marawa Research and Exploration.

Other mining steps

US access to critical minerals – especially those produced by Chinese companies – has dwindled in recent months as Beijing has limited exports of several types. That, in turn, has ratcheted up pressure on Washington to support efforts to boost domestic mining.

Last week, Trump officials fast-tracked permitting on 10 mining projects across the United States and implemented an abbreviated approval process for mining projects on federal lands.

The administration also said it would approve one of the country’s largest copper mines.

Trump’s Thursday order uses the term “rare earths” to broadly refer to all critical minerals and is not meant to imply the administration believes the nodules contain neodymium and the 16 other rare earths, the administration official said.

(By Jarrett Renshaw and Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Aidan Lewis and Daniel Wallis)

Under the new directive, environmental reviews that normally take up to a year will now be done in just 14 days. More detailed reviews, which usually take two years, will be completed in 28 days.

“The United States cannot afford to wait,” said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. “We are taking decisive action to remove bottlenecks and ensure that America’s energy future is secure.”

The accelerated process will apply to projects involving crude oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, biofuels, lease condensates, geothermal energy, kinetic hydropower, and refined petroleum products. It also includes initiatives focused on critical minerals.

To enable the streamlined timelines, the Department will implement an alternative compliance process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), allowing for more concise documentation and faster review. Additionally, the Endangered Species Act’s Section 7 consultation process will be expedited through emergency consultation procedures coordinated with the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Sovereign wealth fund for US miners

The Trump administration is also considering a sovereign wealth fund to invest in domestic mining and processing of critical minerals.

Speaking at a conference organized by the Hamm Institute for American Energy this week, Burgum said the administration is evaluating a range of financial tools to boost domestic production of rare earths and other strategic resources.

“We are exploring all options to ensure a reliable, American-controlled supply of critical minerals,” he said. “Reducing reliance on foreign imports is a matter of national security.”

The proposed policy changes mark a significant shift in how the federal government manages its natural resources, and could have far-reaching impacts on the US mining and energy sectors.

The new facility will be the company’s first global REE (rare earth elements) recycling operation focused on the separation of permanent magnets from end-of-life products previously not recovered, using its proprietary MagCycle process.

REEs are an essential component of permanent magnets, which are found in data centers, wind turbines, cell phones, electric vehicles and military applications.

The facility is expected to process 25,000 tonnes of end-of-life components containing rare earth permanent magnets a year.

Cyclic said it is establishing a feedstock supply network that will serve the entire US, and while it has secured partnerships in the Southwest, it is actively expanding its reach nationwide to develop a more robust and scalable supply chain.

“We are excited to begin commercial operations in the US in early 2026,” CEO Ahmad Ghahreman said in a news release. “We have chosen the Southwest for our first US and global site to be close to feedstock that will support our mission to address the global supply-demand imbalance for rare earth materials.

“By developing circular supply chains, we can reduce dependence on overseas sources and secure a more stable REE supply for the future,” he added.

“This new facility will not only create good-paying jobs for our community but also position Arizona as a leader in the critical rare earth element recycling industry, an important step in strengthening our economy and securing a sustainable future,” Senator Ruben Gallego stated.

Cyclic Materials raised $57 million in its Series B equity round last year, backed by global industry leaders including Microsoft, Hitachi Ventures, BMW iVentures, and specialized funds ArcTern Ventures and Fifth Wall.

In January, it secured $2 million from InMotion Ventures, the investment arm of Jaguar Land Rover.

The proposed funding — structured as debt over a 15-year indicative term — comes through EXIM’s China and Transformational Exports Program (CTEP), a strategic initiative aimed at strengthening US supply chain security by supporting critical mineral projects that reduce dependency on China.

Though non-binding, the offer could pave the way for Victory Metals to access additional US government financing under CTEP.

“This is a major milestone for Victory and a clear signal of the strategic importance of our project not only to Australia but to our allies abroad,” Victory Metals chief executive Brendan Clark said. 

The US move follows Japan’s Sumitomo taking interest in the North Stanmore deposit, underscoring growing international attention on the project, which lies outside the gold mining hub of Cue in Western Australia.

Victory Metals expects the support will boost its leverage in talks with downstream partners, original equipment manufacturers, and defence-aligned industries pursuing alternative supply chains.

North Stanmore hosts valuable heavy rare earth elements, along with scandium and hafnium—materials increasingly essential to clean energy, aerospace and defence technologies.

The offer comes amid the ongoing trade war between Washington and Beijing. A recent executive order by US President Donald Trump called for an investigation into the country’s dependence on imported processed critical minerals — primarily from China. In parallel, Beijing has imposed export controls on several rare earth elements, including scandium, dysprosium and terbium, which are vital to defence, nuclear power, medicine, and electronics.

Earlier this month, the company — a subsidiary of American Resources Corporation (NASDAQ: AREC) — completed a round of capital fundraising to support the procurement and commissioning of new commercial-scale equipment for the Noblesville facility to expand its production capabilities, in light of China’s recent export restrictions on rare earth elements.

China dominates the global rare earth sector, accounting for over 70% of mine production and nearly all of the world’s processing capacity. In response to the recent US tariffs, China began to weaponize this dominance by imposing export restrictions on seven rare earth minerals.

The US, meanwhile, has limited production and had been heavily reliant on China.

Expansion projects

On Monday, ReElement announced that it has completed the second phase of plant expansion to double its production of finished rare earth oxides, and is now undergoing a Phase 3 expansion that could triple the production over Phase 2. The company did not disclose the production capacity levels, only that the expansion is scheduled for May/June.

The latest equipment expansion highlights the modular and scalable characteristics of ReElement’s refining technology, allowing for swift and flexible growth to meet the surging demand for ultra-pure, domestically produced rare earth oxides, the company stated in a news release.

This added refining capacity will significantly increase the facility’s daily refining volumes of key rare earth elements, including neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium and terbium, ReElement said.

ReElement’s modular, multi-feedstock refining platform — born from decades of research at Purdue University — is currently the only US-based scalable solution capable of economically separating and purifying rare earth elements.

“By investing in and leveraging our innovative refining technology, our Noblesville facility is able to rapidly scale to meet the unprecedented customer demand we are seeing from our growing customer base,” ReElement Technologies COO Jeff Peterson said in a news release.

“Our Noblesville facility, located in an urban setting, demonstrates not only the scalability of our technology but also our commitment to environmentally responsible production of both heavy and light rare earth oxides,” CEO Mark Jensen said.

While the Noblesville plant, covering a space of 700 square metres, represents ReElement’s flagship facility, the company has plans to build a larger centralized industrial space (over 50,000 sq. m) in Marion, Indiana, with a targeted initial capacity to produce 1,000 tonnes per year of ultra-pure (>99.5%) rare earth oxides. The Marion campus was once home to American technology giants such as Thompson Electronics, Farnsworth Radio and RCA.

“While the [Noblesville] site was not originally intended to be commercial, growing customer demand, especially following recent global trade shifts, has made it an essential part of our operations as we continue developing our larger Marion facility,” Jensen added.

The report said China’s commerce ministry delivered the message in letters to Korean companies which make power transformers, batteries, displays, electric vehicles, aerospace and medical equipment, all of which use the key materials.

The letters said Korean companies could face sanctions if they violate the export restrictions, the report said.

South Korea’s Industry Ministry was not immediately available for comments outside business hours.

Early this month, China placed export restrictions on rare earth elements as part of its sweeping response to US President Donald Trump’s tariffs, squeezing supply to the West of minerals used to make weapons, electronics and a range of consumer goods.

(By Hyunjoo Jin; Editing by Kim Coghill)

Two weeks into the second quarter, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.36 trillion, up $79.7 billion so far in 2025.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies remains almost $400 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.

This snapshot was taken at the close of trading on 17 April and not at the start of Q2 as usual to avoid some of the market distortions brought on by the chaotic weeks following Trump’s on-again off-again tariffs.

This flatters the index to some extent as gold stocks rode the coattails of the record setting bullion price and almost all big names regained some ground after the severe sell-off during the first week of April.

Newcomers

The volatile trading saw the greatest number of new entries – six in all – in a quarter since MINING.COM started tracking the Top 50 six years ago. From $6.7 billion at the end of 2024, the lowest ranked entry must now be worth $8 billion.

Mining and metals arguably suffered some of the biggest swings and roundabouts as the economic effects of a trade war and the focus on critical minerals played havoc – exemplified by the volatility on copper markets.

The bellwether metal hit a record high in the US at the end of March, only to plunge more than 20% over the next week and a half and then make up a big chunk of those losses going into the long weekend.

Amid the hectic trading, copper producers and diversified companies with large base metal portfolios lost a combined $53 billion to April 17 and are now trading $205 billion below their collective peak end-Sep 2024 as the sector’s ranks thin.

Lundin Mining dropped out of the Top 50 during Q1 following another copper counter, Poland’s KGHM, which did not make the cut off in Q4 last year. Q1 was a mixed blessing for the Canadian mining empire with the copper producer making way for Lundin Gold, entering the Top 50 for the first time after doubling in value in USD terms to $10.1 billion in Toronto.

Huayou Cobalt’s inclusion proved to be short-lived while South32 failed to make the cut for the first time since being spun out of BHP a decade ago. The base metals sans copper producer sits at position 51 after being narrowly edged out by Shanjin International Gold, so the stock may well return if (and not necessarily when) profit-taking in gold and gold stocks starts to make sense.

Another notable mover of 2025 is Amman Mineral, the worst performer in the index which lost over $10 billion in value as reality about its piercing run since its debut in Jakarta early 2023 continues to set in. The Indonesian copper-gold company is now worth an eye-catching $20 billion less than its high point at the end of Q2 last year, even after investors ran up the stock more than 20% just in the last week.

Nothing counters gold

While the direction of the copper price over the last few months was almost impossible to judge, gold’s record breaking run looked inevitable. At $3,420 per ounce gold at the time of writing, the yellow metal has now finally also surpassed its 1980 peak in inflation-adjusted terms.

Unsurprisingly, precious metals counters dominate the best performer list and make up the majority of new entrants. Gold, silver and PGM miners and royalty companies now represent a third of the value of the Top 50. The strength in precious metals has also seen Canada overtake Australia for the first time in terms of the value of miners headquartered there.

At 22% of the index, the 13 Canadian companies collectively are worth a smidgen under $300 billion compared to $275 billion for the now eight Australian firms with the inclusion for the first time of Sydney-based gold stock Evolution Mining. In their current form Melbourne-based BHP and Rio Tinto have been the top two global mining stocks since the turn of the century, together worth $220 billion today.

The MINING.COM Top 50 tracks stock value in USD terms not share price gains on local exchange and many stocks in the ranking benefitted from strengthening currencies against the USD.

South Africa’s Harmony Gold tops the gainers after jumping 24 spots to enter the ranking at no 37 following a 117% advance since end-2024. Like Harmony, Goldfields also benefited from the strong rand against the greenback, lifting the Johannesburg-based company’s shares by 83% year to date.

Russia’s Polyus, which added $14.4 billion in Q1, was only beaten by the top two gold stocks Newmont and Agnico Eagle which added $18.6 billion and $19.9 billion year to date in market cap gains. The ruble has strengthened by 20% against the US dollar in 2025 and Norilsk Nickel, thanks to captive investors on the MCX, has maintained its good standing in the Top 50 despite sanctions and trading restrictions. Norilsk is still worth north of $20 billion but still a far cry from its peak position as the world’s number 5 most valuable mining company reached mid-2021.

London-listed Fresnillo returns to the index after years in the wilderness thanks to a 74% surge in value for the Mexican silver and gold miner, majority owned by Mexican industrial group Peñoles. Together with Southern Copper, owned by Grupo Mexico, the country now represents nearly 6% of the value of the Top 50.

Gold counters are likely to only increase in number and size over the rest of 2025. Kazatomprom dual-listed in London and Astana in 2018, and Uzbekistan is now readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer later this year.

Rare earth representation

China Northern Rare Earth is the only producer of the 17 elements in the ranking and despite the frenzy surrounding the sector as China tightens control. There are no obvious REE candidates that could join the Top 50 in short order.

MP Materials, which operates the Mountain Pass mine in California, has surged by 69% in value year to date but the Las Vegas-based company is still worth only $4.3 billion.

The company’s valuation peaked above $8 billion in March 2022, but the whole mining industry was riding high at the time and the high price ticket for entry at the time meant it fell just outside the ranking. Australia’s Lynas Rare Earths have also come close in the past and is up 26% this year for a valuation of $5.3 billion.

Lithium down to a single stock

Lithium’s representation in the ranking is down from six companies to a single stock – Chile’s SQM languishing in position 42 and worth less than $10 billion – following the exit of China’s Tianqi and US-based Albemarle during the quarter, with the latter dropping by 38% in 2025.

The value destruction caused by the slump in lithium prices has been nothing short of astonishing. Lithium stocks in the index peaked in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion.

While Albemarle now worth $6.2 billion may well make a comeback (the longer term prospects for lithium demand remains bright), the absorption of Arcadium by Rio Tinto makes it unlikely that the Top 50 will see a rush of lithium stocks any time soon, a rebound of the commodity notwithstanding.

Zangge Mining, which does derive a good proportion of income from lithium, but is mostly a fertilizer producer, is bubbling under at number 53. The Chinese company may not stick around either – it’s the subject of takeover overtures by Zijing Mining, which also helps explain the 25% rise in the stock on the Shenzen exchange in USD terms.

Notes:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close April 17/18, 2025 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry, and how far upstream is the bulk of its revenue, before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or even warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec.

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialized financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

With other groups like Mexico’s Penoles where refining and chemicals make up a substantial part of the business where possible the Top 50 would include separately listed operating subsidiaries that are dedicated to mining. This is also why Southern Copper represents Grupo Mexico in the ranking.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology: email Frik Els at fels@mining.com with Top 50 in the subject line.

Two weeks into the second quarter, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.36 trillion, up $79.7 billion so far in 2025.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies remains almost $400 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.

This snapshot was taken at the close of trading on April 17 and not at the start of Q2 as usual to avoid some of the market distortions brought on by the chaotic weeks following Trump’s on-again off-again tariffs.

This flatters the index to some extent as gold stocks rode the coattails of the record setting bullion price and almost all big names regained some ground after the severe sell-off during the first week of April.

Newcomers

The volatile trading saw the greatest number of new entries – six in all – in a quarter since MINING.COM started tracking the Top 50 six years ago. From $6.7 billion at the end of 2024, the lowest ranked entry must now be worth $8 billion.

Mining and metals arguably suffered some of the biggest swings and roundabouts as the economic effects of a trade war and the focus on critical minerals played havoc – exemplified by the volatility on copper markets.

The bellwether metal hit a record high in the US at the end of March, only to plunge more than 20% over the next week and a half and then make up a big chunk of those losses going into the long weekend.

Amid the hectic trading, copper producers and diversified companies with large base metal portfolios lost a combined $53 billion to April 17 and are now trading $205 billion below their collective peak end-Sep 2024 as the sector’s ranks thin.

Lundin Mining dropped out of the Top 50 during Q1 following another copper counter, Poland’s KGHM, which did not make the cut off in Q4 last year. Q1 was a mixed blessing for the Canadian mining empire with the copper producer making way for Lundin Gold, entering the Top 50 for the first time after doubling in value in USD terms to $10.1 billion in Toronto.

Huayou Cobalt’s inclusion proved to be short-lived while South32 failed to make the cut for the first time since being spun out of BHP a decade ago. The base metals sans copper producer sits at position 51 after being narrowly edged out by Shanjin International Gold, so the stock may well return if (and not necessarily when) profit-taking in gold and gold stocks starts to make sense.

Another notable mover of 2025 is Amman Mineral, the worst performer in the index which lost over $10 billion in value as reality about its piercing run since its debut in Jakarta early 2023 continues to set in. The Indonesian copper-gold company is now worth an eye-catching $20 billion less than its high point at the end of Q2 last year, even after investors ran up the stock more than 20% just in the last week.

Nothing counters gold

While the direction of the copper price over the last few months was almost impossible to judge, gold’s record breaking run looked inevitable. At $3,420 per ounce gold at the time of writing, the yellow metal has now finally also surpassed its 1980 peak in inflation-adjusted terms.

Unsurprisingly, precious metals counters dominate the best performer list and make up the majority of new entrants. Gold, silver and PGM miners and royalty companies now represent a third of the value of the Top 50. The strength in precious metals has also seen Canada overtake Australia for the first time in terms of the value of miners headquartered there.

At 22% of the index, the 13 Canadian companies collectively are worth a smidgen under $300 billion compared to $275 billion for the now eight Australian firms with the inclusion for the first time of Sydney-based gold stock Evolution Mining. In their current form Melbourne-based BHP and Rio Tinto have been the top two global mining stocks since the turn of the century, together worth $220 billion today.

The MINING.COM Top 50 tracks stock value in USD terms not share price gains on local exchange and many stocks in the ranking benefitted from strengthening currencies against the USD.

South Africa’s Harmony Gold tops the gainers after jumping 24 spots to enter the ranking at no 37 following a 117% advance since end-2024. Like Harmony, Goldfields also benefited from the strong rand against the greenback, lifting the Johannesburg-based company’s shares by 83% year to date.

Russia’s Polyus, which added $14.4 billion in Q1, was only beaten by the top two gold stocks Newmont and Agnico Eagle which added $18.6 billion and $19.9 billion year to date in market cap gains. The ruble has strengthened by 20% against the US dollar in 2025 and Norilsk Nickel, thanks to captive investors on the MCX, has maintained its good standing in the Top 50 despite sanctions and trading restrictions. Norilsk is still worth north of $20 billion but still a far cry from its peak position as the world’s number 5 most valuable mining company reached mid-2021.

London-listed Fresnillo returns to the index after years in the wilderness thanks to a 74% surge in value for the Mexican silver and gold miner, majority owned by Mexican industrial group Peñoles. Together with Southern Copper, owned by Grupo Mexico, the country now represents nearly 6% of the value of the Top 50.

Gold counters are likely to only increase in number and size over the rest of 2025. Kazatomprom dual-listed in London and Astana in 2018, and Uzbekistan is now readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer later this year.

Rare earth representation

China Northern Rare Earth is the only producer of the 17 elements in the ranking and despite the frenzy surrounding the sector as China tightens control. There are no obvious REE candidates that could join the Top 50 in short order.

MP Materials, which operates the Mountain Pass mine in California, has surged by 69% in value year to date but the Las Vegas-based company is still worth only $4.3 billion.

The company’s valuation peaked above $8 billion in March 2022, but the whole mining industry was riding high at the time and the high price ticket for entry at the time meant it fell just outside the ranking. Australia’s Lynas Rare Earths have also come close in the past and is up 26% this year for a valuation of $5.3 billion.

Lithium down to a single stock

Lithium’s representation in the ranking is down from six companies to a single stock – Chile’s SQM languishing in position 42 and worth less than $10 billion – following the exit of China’s Tianqi and US-based Albemarle during the quarter, with the latter dropping by 38% in 2025.

The value destruction caused by the slump in lithium prices has been nothing short of astonishing. Lithium stocks in the index peaked in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion.

While Albemarle now worth $6.2 billion may well make a comeback (the longer term prospects for lithium demand remains bright), the absorption of Arcadium by Rio Tinto makes it unlikely that the Top 50 will see a rush of lithium stocks any time soon, a rebound of the commodity notwithstanding.

Zangge Mining, which does derive a good proportion of income from lithium, but is mostly a fertilizer producer, is bubbling under at number 53. The Chinese company may not stick around either – it’s the subject of takeover overtures by Zijing Mining, which also helps explain the 25% rise in the stock on the Shenzen exchange in USD terms.

Notes:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close April 17/18, 2025 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry, and how far upstream is the bulk of its revenue, before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or even warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec.

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialized financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

With other groups like Mexico’s Penoles where refining and chemicals make up a substantial part of the business where possible the Top 50 would include separately listed operating subsidiaries that are dedicated to mining. This is also why Southern Copper represents Grupo Mexico in the ranking.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology: email Frik Els at fels@mining.com with Top 50 in the subject line.

ERG, a Luxembourg-based producer of copper, cobalt, aluminum and iron ore that is 40%-owned by the Kazakh government, said last year it had formed a task force to explore deposits of rare earth and rare metals in Kazakhstan.

Those minerals have gained particular attention in recent months as US President Donald Trump’s administration seeks alternatives to China to supply its domestic industry as a trade war between the countries escalates.

According to a source close to the company, talks between ERG and Cameron have been going on since the end of last year. Cameron shares a name with the Academy Award-winning film director, but the two are not related.

ERG, the Kazakh government, and Cameron, once a board chairman of former FTSE 250 mining firm Petropavlovsk, did not comment.

According to Cameron’s letter to the ERG board, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, Goldman Sachs is in preliminary talks to advise on the deal.

“The financing will come from a combination of my own funds, as well as equity contributions from other investors in the United States, and possibly Australia and the Middle East,” the letter said.

Another source close to the transaction told Reuters the investor’s interest in ERG is partly linked to Kazakhstan’s potential in critical minerals exploration and mining. Kazakhstan aims to lift rare and rare earth metals output by 40% by 2028, with ERG seen taking a major role in the initiative.

This month, Kazakhstan’s government announced that its geologists had discovered a large rare earth deposit with estimated resources exceeding 20 million metric tons.

Kazakhstan’s Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov said last year that data concerning the country’s deposits of rare and rare earth metals, a state secret since Soviet times, is being gradually declassified.

If confirmed, this discovery could position Kazakhstan among the top three holders of rare earth reserves globally, following China and Brazil.

ERG once produced one-fifth of the world’s gallium, a rare metal used in microchips and included on the US list of critical materials. However, it ceased production after China increased its output of the metal in 2012.

Beijing in December banned gallium exports to the US after a crackdown by Washington on China’s chip sector.

In 2013, ERG was taken private in a $4.5 billion buyout by its three founders, who each owned approximately 20% of the company, along with the government.

Last month, one of ERG’s founders and its board chairman, Kazakh-Israeli businessman Alexander Mashkevich, passed away, leaving only one of the original founders, Patokh Chodiev, among the current shareholders.

(By Gleb Bryanski and Mariya Gordeyeva; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge and Jan Harvey)

China is the world’s largest producer of antimony, germanium and gallium, which have niche but vital roles in clean energy, chipmaking and defence. Since 2023, Beijing has gradually added the metals to its export controls list. In December it banned exports to the US.

For any item on the control list, exporters must apply for licenses, an opaque process which allows Beijing to exert the dominance it has built for years over the mining and processing of important minerals.

Fresh customs data released on Sunday reinforced a pattern building since controls were imposed: exports are down and some buyers, especially in Europe, are cut out of the supply chain.

Exports of antimony and germanium products in the first quarter were down 57% and 39%, respectively, compared to a year earlier.

March exports of gallium hit their lowest level since October 2023. Quarterly shipments were up on last year, but the current trend is still well below 2022, the last full year before curbs.

Minerals that are exported, in the case of antimony, are going to a smaller set of countries.

After a five-month hiatus, small shipments of antimony were sent to Belgium and Germany in March, but exports were well below historic levels and former large buyers like the Netherlands haven’t received shipments since September.

The pattern across the three metals raises questions about how many export licenses China will approve for the seven rare earth elements it added to the control list this month – and how fast. Exporters say they expect to wait months for licenses and even longer if selling to the United States.

There have been no antimony exports to the United States since September last year and none since 2023 for germanium and gallium.

Fewer exports from China have left overseas consumers scrambling to source material, pushing prices higher, which in turn has supported prices in China.

Chinese spot prices of antimony , for example, have jumped by nearly two thirds so far this year to a record high of 230,000 yuan ($31,509) a ton on April 18, LSEG data showed.

($1 = 7.2995 Chinese yuan renminbi)

(By Lewis Jackson and Amy Lv; Editing by Ros Russell)

MP Materials, which owns the only US rare earths mine, said on Thursday it had stopped shipping the critical minerals to China because of the 125% tariffs Beijing has slapped on US imports in retaliation for US tariffs on Chinese goods imposed by President Donald Trump.

Rare earths are a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into motion for electric vehicles, cell phones and other electronics. China, the world’s dominant producer, this month halted exports of seven rare earths added to a retaliatory export control list.

While China dominates the refining of rare earths it imports some concentrate mined elsewhere to feed its processors, including large amounts by MP Materials.

“We have built a diversified supply channel of rare earth raw materials, with supply from Sichuan and other countries as well as monazite used as alternatives,” Shenghe said in a statement. “The supply contract with MP is still valid.”

Shenghe did not provide details.

The company and MP Materials renewed an offtake agreement in January 2024 through Shenghe’s subsidiary in Singapore, which will be in effect for in two years and can be extended for another year after expiration.

China’s imports of rare earth raw materials from the US have been on the decline for two years, by 13.7% in 2023 and 16.9% last year, customs data shows.

(By Amy Lv and Lewis Jackson; Editing by William Mallard)

The document paves the way towards an “economic partnership agreement and the establishment of the investment fund for the reconstruction of Ukraine,” Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister and economy minister Yulia Svyrydenko, said in a thread on X.

The memorandum signing follows remarks by US President Donald Trump earlier in the day that a deal on Ukraine’s critical minerals will be signed next Thursday.

Present at the memorandum signing was US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who was the first cabinet-level official in Trump’s administration to visit Ukraine earlier this year to hold initial talks. Bessent hinted earlier that the deal would be signed around April 26.

“We have a minerals deal which I guess is going to be signed on Thursday,” Trump said during a meeting with Italian Prime Minster Giorgia Meloni in the Oval Office. “And I assume they’re going to live up to the deal.”

A draft of the deal under discussion earlier this month would give the US access to Ukraine’s mineral deposits and require Kyiv to place all its income from the exploitation of natural resources in a joint investment fund. Ukraine holds sizable deposits of critical minerals, including rare earth elements that are essential to a variety of high-tech applications, as well as graphite, lithium, titanium and uranium.

The partnership accord would see the US have first claim on profits transferred into a special reconstruction investment fund under its control. Kyiv has been pressing for better terms in the negotiations, including US security guarantees, and had refused to recognize the past US aid as debt.

After a new round of talks, the Trump administration has agreed to bring down its estimated assistance to Kyiv since the start of Russia’s invasion closer to Ukraine’s own estimate of $90 billion, Bloomberg reported.

Still, even with a deal in the offing, Trump remains critical of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, with whom he had a heated exchange late February in the White House when the two parties had planned to sign a deal.

“I don’t hold Zelenskiy responsible but I’m not exactly thrilled with the fact that war started,” Trump said, referring to his Ukrainian counterpart’s role in its fight with Russia.

MP Materials Corp., which operates a mine and processing facility in California, said Thursday it would halt sales of its rare earth elements to China as part of an effort to “reindustrialize” the minerals supply chain in the US.

The move follows Chinese restrictions announced earlier this month that are expected to have broad impacts on companies making optical lasers, radar devices and high-powered magnets used in wind turbines, jet engine coatings and other advanced technologies. China is the world’s dominant supplier of rare earths, while the US produces and refines little of its own.

“Selling our valuable critical materials under 125% tariffs is neither commercially rational nor aligned with America’s national interest,” the company said in a statement. “Manufacturers across critical industries have urgently reached out in search of a secure, resilient source of materials and magnets. We are uniquely positioned to answer that call.”

Shares of MP Materials dropped as much as 10% in midday trading in New York.

(By Jacob Lorinc)

Read More: Rare earth stocks rally on signs Trump supports sector

Rare-earth magnet player USA Rare Earth (NASDAQ: USAR) has jumped 71% this week as of 11:02 a.m. on Thursday, while TMC The Metals Company Inc., a Vancouver-based company that’s seeking permission from the US to gather metals at the bottom of the ocean, is up 52%.

Shares of MP Materials Corp., a miner and refiner of rare earth elements, have gained 17% and are set for their best performance since September in the short trading week.

All three soared on Monday after the Financial Times reported over the weekend that the Trump administration is planning an executive order to enable the stockpiling of critical metals found on the floor of the Pacific Ocean.

The US was responding to China’s efforts to limit exports of its own rare earth supplies. MP Materials and USA Rare Earth jumped again on Wednesday after Trump launched a probe into the need for tariffs on critical minerals.

“It seems the moves that they’re making would suggest that they understand that we have to build out our supply chain here,” Steven Schoffstall, director of ETF product management at Sprott Asset Management, said of the Trump administration.

“If you want to tariff something, presumably you want to build up that industry within the US borders, and the hope there is that investment will follow.”

The actions have become a central part of the escalating trade tension between Washington and Beijing. China is the dominant producer of metals that are vital to making crucial products like computer chips, nuclear reactor rods and fighter planes, and Beijing appears to be using that position to push back against Trump’s tariffs. As Washington looks to boost domestic production, Trump’s trade probe could cover all minerals defined as critical by the United States Geological Survey, a list that includes rare earth elements alongside other materials like lithium, cobalt and zinc.

MP Materials bills itself as the sole fully-integrated producer of rare earths in the US, with capabilities ranging from mining and refining to magnet manufacturing.

USA Rare Earth is building a magnet factory in Oklahoma that’s scheduled to come online commercially next year, and it owns a rare earth deposit in Texas where it plans to extract ore for its own facility and other sectors such as the defense industry.

TMC aims to gather nodules that contain metals such as cobalt and nickel used in electric vehicle batteries. Its move to seek approval from the Trump administration has drawn condemnation from an organization affiliated with the United Nations that regulates the commercialization of deep sea resources.

Trump’s moves have made the three stocks winners even as his trade war has punished broader markets. TMC and MP Materials are up double digits since Feb. 19, a period that’s seen the S&P 500 Index fall 14%. Rare Earth USA shares have been volatile since the firm went public last month by merging with a special-purpose acquisition company, but they’ve more than doubled this month.

Uranium miners including Energy Fuels Inc. and Uranium Energy Corp. notched their own advances on Wednesday after Trump signed an order calling for the trade probe. Energy Fuels jumped again Thursday after saying it had developed technology to produce most of the rare earth compounds subject to new Chinese export curbs.

Despite the indications that mining companies will be favored by the administration, tariffs could present complications by raising costs for parts of the supply chain that remain outside the US. For rare earths, opening new mines in the US could take years, while new processing facilities may have a hard time competing with long-running international ones, Benchmark analyst Subash Chandra said.

“Once you sort of unthread it all, there is no clear line of sight of a non-Chinese feedstock through a non-Chinese processing facility to the end user,” Chandra said. “If we say we’re going to penalize everything that’s not American, yes there’s a benefit to these companies, but there’s also cost to these companies.”

(By Matthew Griffin)

Shares of Energy Fuels were up 5.2% by midday Thursday in Toronto on this update, trading at C$6.49 apiece for a market capitalization of C$1.37 billion.

Earlier this month, China restricted its exports of seven types of rare earth elements (REEs) in retaliation against new tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump. These minerals are niche materials specific to technological processes or alloys and are hard to replace. The US relies heavily on foreign imports, as it has only one producing rare earth mine, Mountain Pass in California.

Colorado-based Energy Fuels operates the White Mesa mill in Utah, the only fully licensed uranium mill in the US and last year began producing neodymium-praseodymium (NdPr) oxides on a commercial scale.

Neodymium and praseodymium, which are used to build permanent magnet motors, are the most common rare earths, and are excluded from the Chinese export restrictions, for now.

The Phase 1 separation circuit at White Mesa, according Energy Fuels, has the capacity to produce between 850 to 1,000 metric tonnes of NdPr per year.

The company has been conducting lab- and pilot-scale REE separations since 2021, leveraging the high REE content in monazite — a low-cost byproduct of heavy mineral sands mines found in the US.

The company believes that, through its ongoing testwork, it has the technical know-how to expand the existing infrastructure to produce six other rare earth oxides — samarium, gadolinium, dysprosium, terbium, lutetium and yttrium — all of which are subject to the Chinese export controls

“We now have the data, knowledge and much of the infrastructure in place to produce ‘light’, ‘mid’ and ‘heavy’ rare earth oxides at scale at the White Mesa mill,” Energy Fuels CEO Mark Chalmers said in a press release Thursday.

The expansion is expected to increase the mill’s monazite concentrate processing capacity sixfold, from 10,000 tonnes a year to 60,000 tonnes. While the company has secured decades of monazite supply, it anticipates these US mineral sands mines would only begin producing in 2028; before that, its supply would have to come from third parties.

Energy Fuels said it is now in the process of updating its 2024 prefeasibility study to a feasibility study to include the planned expansion.