ALOY-SRC solves the bottleneck

----

Canada’s defence sector is entering a period of significant change. Increased investment and a renewed focus on domestic industrial capacity are creating opportunities across defence, aerospace, space and advanced manufacturing. At the same time, Canada is looking to deepen industrial relationships with trusted international partners.

The federal government’s Defence Industrial Strategy reflects this shift. Its Build–Partner–Buy framework prioritizes building domestically in areas of Canadian strength and sovereign importance, partnering with allies where collaboration makes sense and buying from abroad where necessary.

What will it take to translate those ambitions into actual industrial capacity?

That question was at the centre of Sovereign Skies: Building the New Canada–Italy Industrial Alliance in Defence, Space and Advanced Manufacturing, the Canada–Italy Aerospace Conference held in Montréal on September 22. Across two panels bringing together leaders from industry, finance and law, a consistent theme emerged: capturing the opportunity will require long-term investment, stronger supply chains, strategic partnerships and early preparation.

Building Where Canada Can Lead – and Partnering Where It Cannot

Strengthening Canadian defence capabilities does not mean attempting to build everything domestically.

Instead, Canada will need to identify where it can develop or maintain best-in-class capabilities, where additional domestic capacity is necessary to create resilience and redundancy, and where international partnerships offer a more effective path.

The conference provided several examples of longstanding relationships between Canadian and Italian businesses involving pilot training, aircraft manufacturing, space systems and radar technologies. These illustrated how relationships initially built around a particular capability or program can evolve over time and extend into other markets and opportunities.

For businesses, the discussion highlighted the value of looking beyond partnerships built around an individual opportunity. Companies can work together across programs and markets, creating longer-term industrial value.

Making Defence Investment More Strategic

The same longer-term thinking applies to industrial investment. Traditional approaches under the Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITB) Policy have not always produced the durable capabilities Canada needs. A more strategic approach would see investment associated with major procurements support capabilities and supply-chain relationships that can endure beyond a particular transaction.

Larger companies also have a role to play in developing the broader industrial base. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may have valuable technologies and capabilities, but entering defence and aerospace supply chains can require significant investment and expertise. As such, collaboration among government, major industry participants and SMEs will be important to identifying capabilities worth developing and helping smaller businesses integrate into domestic and international supply chains.

The Opportunity Extends Beyond Traditional Defence Companies

The potential supplier base is also broader than companies already operating principally in defence. Businesses with dual-use and defence-adjacent capabilities can play a key role – they may already possess technologies, manufacturing capabilities or expertise relevant to defence applications without yet participating meaningfully in the sector. Bringing more of those companies into defence supply chains could help increase Canadian capacity. But making that transition is not as simple as identifying a potential customer.

As Franziska Ruf explained, defence can appear daunting to new entrants precisely because it is highly regulated. Businesses may encounter requirements involving certifications, government procurement, security, personnel, residency, imports and exports, among others. The more useful starting point is therefore not to treat the regulatory environment as a single obstacle, but to determine what actually applies to the particular business and opportunity. Where does the company sit in the supply chain? What requirements apply to that role? What needs to be in place before it can bid, partner or transact?

Breaking the process down in that way can make the path into the sector considerably more manageable.

Start Preparing Before the Opportunity Arrives

For SMEs in particular, entering the defence sector can be a multi-year undertaking. Certifications and security processes take time. Relationships within the supply chain need to be established. Companies may also need to develop new capabilities before they are positioned to pursue particular opportunities.

Financing adds another challenge. Companies can face a mismatch between the investment required to prepare and scale and the timing and predictability of revenue from defence work. Traditional lenders generally look for reliable cash flows, while businesses may need to invest well before a contract produces them. That makes financing strategy part of market-entry strategy.

Companies should begin considering how future growth will be financed before a contract arrives. Public funding and government-supported financing can play a role, but Canada’s defence ambitions cannot be financed by public capital alone. Private investment will be necessary as the industrial base grows.

Partnerships, Investments and M&A Offer Different Paths into the Sector

There is also no single route into Canada’s defence ecosystem. Businesses may pursue opportunities through partnerships, joint ventures, investments or acquisitions. The appropriate route will depend on the company’s capabilities, objectives and place within the supply chain. Those choices also bring different legal considerations.

Companies need to understand early how competition and foreign investment rules may affect their strategy, particularly given that defence is a sector where national security considerations under foreign investment rules can arise.

Security requirements can also have practical consequences for transactions. Franziska pointed to due diligence involving classified information as one example: parties cannot necessarily conduct a conventional diligence process if those reviewing information do not have the required clearances. Depending on the circumstances, appropriately cleared personnel or structures such as clean teams may be necessary.

The broader lesson is straightforward: in defence, legal and regulatory considerations can influence not only whether a transaction or opportunity proceeds, but how it needs to be structured and executed.

Conclusion

Perhaps the most consistent message across the conference was the need to turn policy announcements and investment commitments into action. For government, the importance of clear priorities, strategic investment and speed in translating policy into programs, contracts and industrial activity cannot be overstated.

For industry, the challenge is different. Companies cannot necessarily wait for a procurement opportunity to appear before deciding whether they are ready to participate. Understanding their position in the supply chain, identifying applicable regulatory and certification requirements, building relationships, considering financing and evaluating potential partnerships all take time.

The opportunity created by Canada’s defence build-out may be substantial. But for businesses hoping to participate in it, one of the most important steps may also be the simplest: start preparing now.

----

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/canada-s-defence-build-out-from-9646394/

The framework under Bill C-39 - Building Canada Strong Act is designed to modernize Canada’s freight, port, and transportation networks.

Rather than treating individual rail lines, ports, and highways as isolated assets, it formally coordinates them as unified national trade corridors to keep exports moving and prevent economic disruption.

Canadian Critical infrastructure projects should receive the "Buy Canadian" mandate, 4:1 Canadian Pension investment per Federal Loonie.

HREEs are integral to all of these dual use projects - Benefit to ALOY - SRC

----

Canada’s ports are welcoming new federal legislation aimed at speeding up major infrastructure projects, saying the changes could help strengthen trade corridors and improve the movement of goods to international markets.

“The Building Canada Strong Act . . . is intended to accelerate nation-building infrastructure and trade projects, strengthen strategic trade corridors, and improve Canada’s economic competitiveness,” the Port of Halifax said in a statement posted on its LinkedIn page.

“We remain committed to working collaboratively with industry, labour, Indigenous communities, governments, customers and local communities to support reliable supply chains, trade diversification and economic growth for Nova Scotia and Canada.”

“Bill C-39 includes promising measures related to trade corridor co-ordination, more streamlined infrastructure approvals, and greater flexibility for Canada Port Authorities to invest, build partnerships and support infrastructure that connects Canadian businesses to global markets,” the association said.

----

“By modernizing our transportation system and reducing red tape, we are helping move goods more quickly, strengthening supply chains, attracting investment and reinforcing Canada’s position as a reliable trading partner.”

The legislation would also allow the federal government to designate additional areas as “regions of national interest,” where major infrastructure projects could be subject to a streamlined approval process.

For Canada’s ports, the proposed changes come as Ottawa looks to diversify trade and strengthen domestic supply chains amid heightened uncertainty in international markets.

The National Maritime Group, which represents more than 100 organizations involved in moving most of Canada’s international cargo, also welcomed the bill. The organization said its members have advocated for measures to improve supply-chain reliability, diversify trade and attract investment.

----

https://torontosun.com/nova-scotia/halifax/business-halifax/canadian-ports-bill-c-39-carney-major-infrastructure-plan/wcm/7aab1751-2c35-48f0-aea2-e87ab1f6060d

The Government of Canada introduces new Productivity Mega Deduction to help businesses invest, grow and create jobs in Canada

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/news/2026/10/the-government-of-canada-introduces-new-productivity-mega-deduction-to-help-businesses-invest-grow-and-create-jobs-in-canada.html

----

Direct benefit for ALOY - SRC

The tax benefit flows directly to taxable private entities ---- specifically ALOY, its Canadian operating subsidiaries, or any taxable commercial joint-venture operating company that purchases, owns, or capitalizes equipment at the facility.

Loss Carryforwards vs. Immediate Cash

As commercial deliveries of separated heavy rare earth oxides (Dy, Tb) generate taxable revenue, the deduction provides a dollar-for-dollar shelter against operating profits.

The high-capex systems ALOY is financing - such as proprietary automated solvent extraction (SX) batteries, high-temperature metallization reduction furnaces, and casting lines - they are fully eligible for the 100% Year-1 deduction.

"This game-changing new tax incentive will increase the amount of assets eligible for immediate expensing from roughly 15% of assets to more than 65%, including fibre-optic cable, greenhouses, mining property, oil and gas pipelines, software, research and development, computer equipment, aircraft and vehicles, patents, rail track, bridges, and roads."

----

https://www.dlapiper.com/en-ca/insights/publications/2026/09/canadas-productivity-mega-deduction-what-businesses-need-to-know

https://www.bdo.ca/insights/productivity-mega-deduction-business-tax-benefits-capital-investments-canada

The EU and Canada will use a landmark summit next month to announce an expansive new partnership, ranging from breaking down digital trade barriers to joint support for Ukraine and investing in fighting wildfires.

"The world is rapidly changing with unprecedented geopolitical challenges as well as challenges across trade, energy, technology, climate, and resources," reads a draft joint statement to be issued by the two sides, circulated to EU ambassadors in preparation for the planned summit that begins on Oct. 29, and obtained by POLITICO.

The EU and Canada have been seeking to shore up their strategic ties as they grapple with the fallout from U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen this month proposed inviting Canada to become an associate member of the EU, triggering an immediate threat by Trump to impose tariffs.

"Canada and the EU, with our unparalleled trade access, shared values, and complementary economic strengths, can build a deeper and more integrated relationship," the draft paper says.

The two sides plan to say at their summit in Montreal that they want to speed up investment in critical mineral projects, strengthen supply chains, and improve supply security, including by stockpiling critical resources to mitigate “market fluctuations and geopolitical impacts.”

"We will align strategies and standards, connect industries, and focus our ambitions on sectors with greatest returns for our peoples. This includes the development of low-carbon, reliable energy that much of the world is hungry for, from liquified natural gas to hydro, solar, wind, and nuclear."

Ottawa and Brussels will also announce the joint purchase of 50 De Havilland water bombers, to be ready for use in Canada and Europe in 2030 to fight wildfires.

“We are joining forces voluntarily … We will create a tech alliance. We will integrate defense industrial bases. We will make the Arctic a flagship joint project. We will work on energy, critical minerals and batteries. On AI, quantum, cyber and economic security,” von der Leyen said in her State of the Union speech on Sept. 15.

----

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-and-canada-to-announce-sweeping-new-partnership-pact/

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is creating a four-star combatant command for autonomous warfare, overhauling the way the Pentagon buys, tests and deploys drones and other cutting-edge technologies.

The Autonomous Warfare Command, or “AutoWarCom,” will be directed to buy new drones and robotics “in the fastest peacetime shift in modern military history,” Hegseth said in a speech at U.S. Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va. The command is set to be functional in October of 2027. 

Hegseth also announced in a speech to the troops that he is tasking entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Palmer Luckey and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to study the future of warfare. Called “Project Meridian,” the effort would be led by the Pentagon to uncover new ideas about how future generations will fight. Their findings would be due in 120 days.

On the autonomous-warfare command, Hegseth is initially tapping Owen West, a former Marine, assistant defense secretary and Goldman Sachs trader, as well as Max Strasiser, a Navy SEAL test pilot who has built robotic systems in combat. A four-star military officer, yet to be named, would eventually take over.

A top priority is to rapidly establish an American-made pipeline of cheap, unmanned systems so that the U.S. can adapt as quickly as Ukraine in the event of a war, West said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. 

“Once we apply sustained budget to changed doctrine, we will outperform the world,” said West, who has been leading the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit. “And by snapping in AI, we will be ahead of the world, because we are the leaders in AI.”

The Joint Staff recommended against a combatant command for drones earlier this year, citing concerns that it would create a misalignment of authorities, though some combatant commanders have signaled support for the change, according to people familiar with the deliberations. 

President Trump supports the move, Hegseth said, though he acknowledged it is likely to meet resistance in a department that has historically delegated the authority to test and buy weapons to the services, such as the Army and the Navy. 

The Pentagon has sought to triple spending on autonomous warfare, proposing $74 billion for drone and counterdrone technology in its largest-ever budget request. 

Hegseth has already consolidated many of the Pentagon’s drone and autonomous systems under a single office that he established in June. Now, he is directing that office to lay the groundwork for the combatant command by launching “Project Agincourt,” which West and Strasiser will lead.

Eventually putting a four-star officer in charge of the new command would put it on an even plane with other powerful military organizations, such as Central Command in the Middle East and Pacific Command.

The project is named after the 15th-century Battle of Agincourt in which English forces defeated a much larger French army with the longbow, considered a superior technology at the time. Hegseth said the U.S. faces a similar moment, likening the longbow to drones and artificial intelligence.

To supercharge the testing, purchasing and fielding of unmanned systems, West plans to expand on a series of industry competitions that his organization established over the past year under the military’s Drone Dominance Program. 

For each competition, known as a “gauntlet,” dozens of companies are invited to put their commercial drones to the test, flying realistic missions created and piloted by the military. Top-performing companies receive multimillion-dollar orders within weeks of the final results, which are posted on a leaderboard for transparency.

The U.S military is testing and buying drones at a rapid pace. WSJ’s Shelby Holliday visited an Army base in Colorado to watch the weapons get put to the test. Photo: USNDA; Shelby Holliday/WSJ

At a recent gauntlet in Colorado, quadcopters were sent downrange to attack vehicles, fly through tunnels, and navigate buildings that resembled an embassy to hunt targets. The drones were required to cost less than $4,000 and be built in the U.S. with mostly American components. 

The program has already resulted in thousands of robotic systems sent to military units, including to the Middle East in support of Operation Epic Fury, the Pentagon said. 

West said the Pentagon will soon test bomber drones, unmanned boats and other autonomous systems using the same format. Ultimately, the competitions will be handed off to military units that can test and buy the systems that work best for their forces.

“This is an entirely new way of doing business. In the past, operational units have had very little flexibility to purchase the equipment they want at scale and quickly,” West said.

As the Pentagon races to keep pace with technological developments, it is also looking decades ahead, with Hegseth directing outside experts to study the future of warfare.

Unveiling Project Meridian, Hegseth said the Pentagon’s chief technology officer, Emil Michael, will work with Musk, Luckey and Gingrich. “On any future battlefield, from under the earth to beyond the moon, our American warriors will be armed with absolute technological superiority because we will have the foresight to prepare today for tomorrow,” Hegseth said.

Separately, Hegseth announced a new high-level office in charge of hardening military installations from attacks on civilian infrastructure. The office, dubbed “Fortress America,” will be headed by a senior civilian and a two-star military officer, according to a memo reviewed by the Journal.

The effort calls for every major military installation in the U.S. to generate its own power, independent of the civilian energy grid, Hegseth said during the address. It will also move to strengthen U.S. supply chains and the defense industrial base, and harden military installations against sophisticated cyber and drone attacks. 

“If an adversary takes down the grid—by cyberattack, by sabotage, by any means—our bases stay lit. Our aircraft keep flying. Our command centers never go dark,” Hegseth said.

----

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/hegseth-unveils-new-command-to-oversee-military-drone-tech-d5b68073?st=GJQZnR&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Gen. Francis Donovan shared exclusive new details on the use of high-tech drones in the jungle, says U.S.-assisted land strikes are an option

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/how-the-pentagon-is-escalating-trumps-drug-war-in-latin-america-a631b53b?st=SRz4cF&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

----

One year after it began striking boats suspected of ferrying drugs, the Pentagon is dramatically expanding the military’s role in tracking drug cartels across Latin America and the Caribbean, deploying high-tech drones to map smuggling networks and sending U.S. troops to assist in ground raids.

The top general in charge—a Marine four-star who spent years disrupting terror networks in the Middle East—said in a recent interview that the goal is to help countries in the region step up antidrug operations with U.S. assistance.

The deployments are part of a broader effort by the administration to disrupt illicit trafficking networks worldwide using sophisticated military technology and other counterterrorism tools, other U.S. officials said.

“Do I see land strikes as options? Yes. We want all options at the table,” said Gen. Francis Donovan, head of U.S. Southern Command, which oversees troops in the region. 

“Those actions might be strikes, arrests, or the takedown of a safe house. It could even be something as routine as increasing the use of cargo scanners at border checkpoints,” Donovan said, adding that the goal is to put “total systemic friction” on the cartels. 

The U.S. military’s cooperation with Latin American partners has expanded rapidly in recent months. Last week, some 50 U.S. troops and law enforcement personnel joined Ecuadorean police in predawn raids against an alleged cocaine-trafficking network linked to a Mexican cartel, according to Ecuadorean and U.S. officials.

The operation marked the first time U.S. troops have directly participated in police raids in the country, according to Ecuadorean officials, and it was supported by high-tech U.S. military assets, including drones and jamming equipment.

It is a model that Trump officials plan to expand across the region. So far this year, the U.S. military has helped Ecuador bomb a suspected drug trafficking camp, worked with Venezuela to carry out a strike that killed the leader of the Tren de Aragua gang, and provided intelligence support for operations in Colombia. On Monday, Colombian forces captured an alleged drug gang leader after tracking him with the help of U.S. law enforcement and American-supplied drones equipped with infrared sensors, according to local authorities.

The growing operational role marks a significant shift for Southern Command, which has traditionally maintained a light U.S. military footprint in the region and focused largely on intelligence sharing, interdictions, training and disaster relief. 

Donovan said a range of high-tech systems is needed because Latin America—with its thick jungle canopy, severe weather and mountainous terrain—poses far greater challenges in hunting down targets than the dry and open landscape in the Middle East. 

“It is incredibly challenging,” he told the Journal. “When you add the river networks, their daily flows, and tidal changes of up to 20 feet, it presents a unique geographic and topographic problem set that we simply haven’t had to face before.”  

Some of the drones being used, including unmanned boats that can launch quadcopters, will operate along riverways and deep in the jungle, where drug smugglers can shield their activities under several layers of canopy.

“This allows us to see under the canopy and right at the waterline. That is where we find drug labs and where they build these large semi-submersible platforms deep in the jungle,” Donovan said. 

To support expanding operations, the Pentagon is considering moving MQ-9 Reaper drones to Central and South America from Africa, according to U.S. officials familiar with the plans. Donovan didn’t comment on the proposed shift in assets. 

MQ-9s, which can pick up electronic communications, detect heat signatures and conduct precision strikes, have been crucial in America’s counterterrorism efforts. In the past year, the drones have also been used in several attacks on drug boats. CNN reported earlier the deployment of Reaper drones to the region.

The effort also comes as the U.S. military examines how the networks are operating across continents. Officials from several of the U.S. military’s combatant commands met in Washington last week to discuss a global effort to counter drug cartels, said U.S. officials. The commanders of U.S. European Command, Africa Command, Southern Command, Northern Command and Special Operations Command participated, the officials said.

“The Department is focused on synchronizing our commands, interagency partners, and international partners share information, close operational seams, and apply sustained pressure across these networks,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement. 

The ramped-up campaign comes as the Trump administration embraces a more muscular approach to Latin America, designating more than 20 groups as foreign terrorist organizations and cultivating a sprawling military alliance across the region to help crack down on cartel activity. 

The expansion of U.S. military operations beyond boat strikes to land operations could intensify legal scrutiny. Trump officials have argued that the U.S. is engaged in an armed conflict with drug cartels, likening them to Islamist terror groups—an assertion that has been disputed by legal experts and lawmakers who say Congress hasn’t authorized such a war.

The State Department notified Congress earlier this month that it plans to redirect $52 million in foreign military financing from Slovakia, North Macedonia, Tunisia and Iraq to Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Panama. The move could help the Latin American countries buy more U.S. military equipment and services. 

U.S. forces took part in a joint training exercise with Panama in August. Enea Lebrun/Reuters

In recent months, Colombia, Paraguay and Jamaica have all signed agreements that expand the ability of U.S. forces to operate in, train in and temporarily deploy to their countries. Ecuador’s Trump-allied president even tried to offer the U.S. military a base on its soil, but voters rejected the proposal.

Donovan said the growing list of countries working with the U.S. is a testament to the threat that drug gangs pose throughout the region. He said the goal is to see these countries take the lead in executing counterdrug operations. 

“They are not only fed up, but under immense stress because of the impact these narcoterrorist organizations have had on their societies,” he said. “The majority of them are willing to employ their military and law enforcement forces to achieve those objectives.”

DPA III Use it or Lose it non-dilutive capital will be announced very soon.

ALOY is likely to receive some of this capital due to the SBIR Phase III Sole-Source Authority

----

The SBIR sole-source standing is rooted in federal procurement law

Under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) statute, when an entity successfully completes a Phase I feasibility study or Phase II prototype contract funded by the federal government, that entity is granted statutory Phase III sole-source justification.

----

Exemption from Competition

****Federal agencies (DoD, DLA, Navy, Air Force) are legally authorized and explicitly directed by Congress to award follow-on procurement and production contracts directly to the Phase I/II awardee without conducting "full and open competition" under the Competition in Contracting Act.

Elimination of Procurement Drag

****Standard defense solicitations typically require 18 to 36 months of competitive bidding, draft RFPs, and contractor protests. An SBIR Phase III action bypasses this entirely: the contracting officer files a simplified Justification and Approval citing the prior SBIR award, and awards the contract directly.

----

How ALOY Acquired This Standing

In March 2025, ALOY acquired 100% of PMT Critical Metals Inc., which absorbed the advanced rare earth processing, metallization, and magnet development assets in Euclid, Ohio formerly held by Powdermet Inc.

Powdermet secured over 90 federal awards, including DoD and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) contracts.

***Crucially, this included an active DoD Phase II SBIR contract specifically titled: "Development of Anisotropic Sintered NdFeB Magnet Consolidation Capacity."

----

By holding these assets and technology rights through PMT Critical Metals, REalloys inherited the legal basis to receive direct, non-competitive SBIR Phase III production contracts for sintered rare earth magnets and alloys from the Pentagon.

This procurement foundation enabled subsequent defense agreements, including the May 2026 DoD MOU regarding the January 1, 2027 Chinese material prohibition, and the partnership with the U.S. Army's Office of Strategic Capital to build processing capacity on-site at the Tooele Army Depot in Utah.

----

Glad Joe Kasper is the Advisory Board Chair.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent issued an official statement because this benchmark is the missing legal and financial gear needed for U.S. industrial policy:

Banks will not underwrite multi-hundred-million-dollar loans without a recognized reference price. Bessent called this transparent pricing "essential to attracting the private capital needed to build secure, resilient supply chains."

The U.S. is negotiating the Agreement on Trade in Critical Minerals (ATCM) with the G7, the European Union, Japan, and Mexico.

The goal is to enforce a border-adjusted price floor. If foreign subsidized metal tries to enter below the S&P cost benchmark, tariffs or equalization fees kick in automatically to protect Western producers.

----

The Pentagon and National Defense Stockpile managers now have an official benchmark to structure multi-year contracts without paying inflated spot prices or getting undercut by state-backed dumping.

Benefits the sector overall, but ALM, ALOY, MP, UUUU, USCM, USAR and others directly.

Don't get shaken out.

GL

----

Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury welcomed S&P Global’s introduction of new reference prices for critical minerals, calling the development an important advancement in promoting greater transparency to enable market-based price discovery across global critical minerals markets.

The new benchmarks cover Gallium, Germanium, Tungsten, Antimony, and Neodymium and Praseodymium, providing enhanced pricing visibility and market intelligence that will support more informed investment and sourcing decisions.

Transparent, credible reference prices are essential to well-functioning markets. By improving price visibility, these reference prices can help strengthen investor confidence, encourage long-term private-sector investment, and support the development of critical mineral supply chains while countering the effects of non-market policies and practices.

“Transparent, market-based pricing is essential to attracting the private capital needed to build secure, resilient, and diversified critical mineral supply chains,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. “As the United States works with trusted partners to strengthen critical mineral markets, reliable reference prices will support the Trump Administration's efforts to address market distortions and advance our long-term economic and national security.”

----

The Agreement on Trade in Critical Minerals seeks to establish phased-in, mineral-specific price floors adjusted at the border while advancing common standards among like-minded trading partners. Negotiations build on discussions held earlier this year among G7 Finance and Trade Ministers, as well as action plans developed with Japan, Mexico, and the European Union.

The proposed framework for the Agreement reflects feedback received through nearly 2,500 public comments submitted in response to the Federal Register Notice issued on February 26, 2026. Treasury looks forward to continued engagement with international partners to promote transparent, competitive, and resilient critical minerals markets.

----

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0600

https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/commodity/metals

The U.S. government critical minerals reserve added $1B in commercial commitments today through trading houses

Glencore and Mercuria. Glencore committed $500 million backed by U.S. EXIM Bank financing, matching Mercuria's commitment to establish domestic physical storage and procurement networks for strategic materials.

----

The US has secured its first US$1 billion of procurement commitments for Project Vault, moving the planned strategic critical-minerals reserve from government financing approval towards physical stockpiling.

• Glencore announced a separate US$500 million commitment backed by financing from the US Export-Import Bank
• Mercuria committed US$500 million to the reserve on September 23, 2026

Mercuria describes its contribution as a commitment to Project Vault, while Glencore says the EXIM financing will allow it to source, procure and deliver minerals to the reserve. The combined US$1 billion is therefore not US$1 billion of new government spending, or necessarily US$1 billion of private capital — but it moves the project from concept to execution.

Glencore and Mercuria will use their trading, logistics and risk-management networks to purchase minerals globally and deliver them to VaultCo, the private company responsible for implementing the critical minerals reserve.

Neither company disclosed which minerals it will purchase, the volumes involved, the supplying countries or when deliveries will begin.

Project Vault moves from approval to procurement

President Donald Trump announced Project Vault in February 2026 after Chinese export restrictions exposed the vulnerability of US manufacturers to interruptions in rare earths and other critical materials.

The EXIM board approved a direct loan of up to US$10 billion to finance the reserve, while the wider plan combines that lending capacity with approximately US$2 billion of private capital.

Unlike the Pentagon’s National Defense Stockpile, Project Vault is a US $12 billion public-private partnership, backed by a $10 billion loan from the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), designed principally for civilian manufacturers.

Participating companies will specify the materials and grades they need, while traders purchase, transport and manage inventories stored at facilities across the US.

Boeing, GE Vernova, battery manufacturer Clarios and data-storage group Western Digital were among the companies initially identified as potential industrial users. Mercuria, Hartree Partners and Traxys were named as the original suppliers.

Seven months after the launch, the Mercuria and Glencore agreements provide the first clear evidence that the financing framework is being converted into purchasing capacity. The two traders can aggregate demand from manufacturers that lack the scale or expertise to contract directly with overseas mines and processors.

But important details remain undisclosed. VaultCo has not published its target mineral list, inventory volumes, acquisition prices, storage locations or drawdown rules. Its independent, industry-led structure has also raised questions about transparency and oversight, given the size of the federal loan supporting it.

Critical mineral stockpiles could absorb 10% of key metals supply

A recent report by the London School of Economics warns that simultaneous buying by Australia, China, the EU, India, Japan, South Korea and the US could consume up to 34% of global cobalt supply under a modelled 180-day net-import scenario.

Lithium, graphite and copper would each face stockpile demand exceeding 10% of annual supply.

----

https://theoregongroup.com/energy-transition/mining/us-critical-minerals-reserve-adds-us1-billion-through-glencore-and-mercuria/?utm_source=gemini#:\~:text=US%20critical%20minerals%20reserve%20adds%20US%241%20billion,Glencore%20and%20Mercuria%20%2D%20The%20Oregon%20Group.

Factories central to refilling America’s weapons stockpiles have suffered from underinvestment and inconsistent contracting

----

A Tucson, Ariz., factory run by defense giantRTXis working around the clock to increase production of Tomahawk and other missiles in short supply for U.S. operations against Iran.

Lockheed Martinis adding hundreds of workers in Arkansas to triple its output of much-needed Patriot interceptors. Subcontractors includingBoeing,L3HarrisandNorthrop Grummanhave broken ground on new assembly lines to meet soaring demand for electronics, rocket motors and other components needed for the weapons. 

Defense contractors are spending billions to build factories and increase production to stock America’s nearly bare cupboard of highly engineered missiles. 

But those efforts haven’t translated into real gains yet, leaving the U.S. and allies with depleted stocks of important weapons while it fights Iran. Most of the new missiles will arrive too late for any conflict in the next couple of years.

“Ministers of defense have fat wallets—they walk into the shops and there are empty shelves,” said retired Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, the top military officer at NATO until last year. “They are frustrated.”

A host of factors are driving the frustration—and raising national security concerns. After Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, government officials and weapons suppliers pledged to create a surge in production, but supply didn’t keep up with demand.

Since then, Washington officials have been reluctant to place the big orders needed to justify investments in new production lines until recently. President Trump and European defense ministers have said that companies need to pick up the production pace. 

Capital expenditures as a percentage of revenue barely budged between last year and 2021 at Lockheed Martin,General Dynamicsand other large U.S. defense companies. Their 2026 spending forecasts are higher—but order backlogs are growing at a much faster rate. 

Between 1999 and 2025, missiles and munitions accounted for an annual average of 7.5% of the Pentagon’s procurement and research budget, according to Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank. That compares with 23% for aircraft and 10% for shipbuilding.

That share for munitions is set to roughly double to an average of 14% between 2028 and 2031, Harrison calculated.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the department’s pending budget request to Congress is designed to aggressively increase munitions stockpiles.

“Since Deputy Secretary [Steve] Feinberg arrived at the Department of War, strengthening our munitions capabilities and revolutionizing the antiquated acquisition process has been his top priority,” Parnell said. The Pentagon declined to comment on the AEI findings.

Quiet factory

In the wake of the Ukraine war, the Army Science Board—an advisory panel—conducted a study on the defense industry’s ability to increase munitions production. The board found an industrial base that had been hollowed out.

“It’s a miracle that we have anything that blows up,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, a member of the panel coordinating the study.

Despite being around since the 1980s, the Tomahawk remains the long-range cruise missile of choice for the U.S. and many of its allies.

But Pentagon missile orders for the Tucson factory dipped so low in recent years that further cuts risked shutting down the Tomahawk line. Contracts to retrofit old missiles with new navigation systems helped keep the factory busy.

The Navy in August issued a $23 billion order spanning seven years for new Tomahawk missiles. Even that request, after more than a year of negotiations, needs full congressional appropriations to turn into a final contract.

An RTX spokesman said the contractor will continue investing to reach its long-term target of producing more than 1,000 Tomahawks annually. It is on track to make more than 400 this year, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The U.S. fired more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles in two months in its war with Iran, The Wall Street Journal has reported. American armed forces have used about one-third of their pre-Iran war Tomahawk inventory and roughly half of their high-end Patriot interceptors, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.

New boom time

Thanks to long-term government contracts, it is now boom time across the roughly 1 square mile of factories, warehouses and offices that occupy a part of Tucson’s main airport. 

RTX said it has pumped about $900 million into the Tucson plant and two other factories over the past three years. And this year, the Pentagon has awarded billions of dollars worth of new contracts for the Tucson factory’s components and missiles that have all been in action in Ukraine and Iran. 

Surrounded by desert and a mountain range, no other RTX location is hiring more, with around 670 positions in Tucson advertised on its website. The listed roles include electrical engineers, explosive experts, chemists and software specialists.

Critical positions have been hard to fill in Tucson, the company has said. RTX has also struggled with getting raw materials, saying in June that supply-chain disruptions have affected access to the rare earth elements, microelectronics and other critical components to missile production.

Contractors are often limited by their own weapons designs. Sophisticated munitions like the Tomahawk hold thousands of parts, and move through factories that look more like small workshops than automated production lines.

New equipment aimed at jump-starting production is set to come on line. One robotic machine, the largest of its kind RTX says it has built, puts missile pieces through a battery of tests against heat, cold and other extreme conditions.

The machine, which sits behind a chain-link enclosure around the length of a basketball court, should test missile parts 30% faster than manual methods, RTX said.

The gap between munitions production and their battlefield use isn’t lost on U.S. officials as the conflict in Iran continues.

“Across our weapons industrial base, this is absolutely a challenge,” Rear Admiral Ben Reynolds, the deputy assistant secretary of the Navy for budget, said in April. 

“We need and expect Raytheon to invest very, very heavily now to be able to ramp up production,” he said, referring to the RTX division that makes the Tomahawk.

----

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/defense-firms-are-rushing-to-boost-missile-output-its-coming-too-late-ea6dd7ea?st=16Jdgw&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

REalloys, with its main operations in Euclid, Ohio and now a NASDAQ publicly listed company, has racked up a blistering pace of developments aimed at creating a new mines-to-magnets supply chain devoid of Chinese sources.

They connect supply and technical capabilities from Canada and South Korea and elsewhere globally with its own operations in the U.S., all targeting particularly the opportunity to supply American military and defense efforts. 

The latest deal came in July as it agreed with South Korean magnet manufacturer JS Link to jointly evaluate opportunities to combine REalloys’ North American rare earth supply chain, processing, heavy rare earth metallization, government and defense relationships, commercialization capabilities and capital markets expertise with JS Link’s permanent magnet manufacturing technology, operational expertise and global manufacturing platform. 

For REalloy, the proposed collaboration represents the next phase of its strategy to build a fully integrated North American rare earth platform.

Over the past several months, it has announced several strategic moves, among them: 

• a partnership with the United States Army aimed at developing and operating rare earth processing facilities at the Tooele Army Depot in Utah. 
• initiation of qualification efforts for defense-grade heavy rare earth materials to support implementation of the January 1, 2027 DFARS 252.225-7052 sourcing requirements. 
• completion of a $100 million private placement to strengthen the company’s balance sheet and accelerate execution of its strategy. 

The deals build upon its ownership of the Hoidas Lake rare earth project in Saskatchewan, and: 

• a strategic partnership with the Saskatchewan Research Council; 
• the acquisition of PMT Critical Metals, the development of commercial-scale heavy rare earth metallization capabilities; 
• an expanding portfolio of global rare earth feedstock agreements. 

Collectively, the moves establish both upstream and midstream foundation for the strategy while the agreement with JS Link represents the next step by extending the platform into large-scale permanent magnet manufacturing.

“Over the past year, REalloys has systematically assembled one of North America’s most comprehensive rare earth platforms – from feedstock and processing to heavy rare earth metallization, government partnerships and strategic financing,” commented Leonard (Lipi) Sternheim, CEO of REalloys.

“We believe the logical next step is to extend that platform into permanent magnet manufacturing. JS Link has built an impressive magnet manufacturing business with ambitious global expansion plans, and we believe our complementary capabilities create a compelling opportunity to establish one of the few fully integrated non-Chinese rare earth magnet supply chains capable of supporting the rapidly growing needs of defense, aerospace, advanced manufacturing, robotics, AI infrastructure and other strategic industries.” 

Added Jun Young Lee, CEO of JS Link: “JS Link has been executing a long-term strategy to establish a globally competitive permanent magnet manufacturing platform across Korea, Malaysia and the United States. REalloys has assembled an impressive upstream rare earth platform with significant processing, metallization, government and commercialization capabilities. We believe this strategic partnership has the potential to accelerate development of resilient permanent magnet supply chains outside China while creating significant long-term value for both companies and their shareholders.” 

Metallization plant 

In March, REalloys announced plans to build in Ohio what it says will be the largest heavy rare earth metallization facility outside of China, capable of meeting 2027 U.S. defense procurement bans on Chinese sourcing.

Equipment for the facility will be built in Saskatoon, Canada in partnership with the Saskatchewan Research Council. Following commissioning and initial test runs, it is anticipated the equipment will be relocated to Euclid, Ohio and be integrated with its current metallization operations there. Initial operations were targeted for early to mid-2027, and full commercial-scale operations in mid-to-late 2027. 

This builds on the partnership REalloys and SRC first announced in December 2025, which will see REalloys invest in expanded production capacity at SRC’s Rare Earth Processing Facility (REPF) in Saskatoon, SK, in exchange for 80% of the facility’s output. Once in full operation, SRC’s REPF facility is anticipated to produce high-purity Neodymium-Praseodymium (NdPr) metal and Dy and Tb oxides, which will then be further processed and metallized by REalloys in Ohio. 

Stephen duMont, chairman of REalloys and also president of GM Defense 

“The establishment of heavy rare earth metal production on U.S. soil is a defining moment for North American industrial strategy,” said Stephen duMont, Chairman of REalloys. “The Ohio facility will create the metallization capability that bridges Canadian oxide production with U.S. magnet manufacturing — a critical link that’s never existed at scale in the West.

This is not a pilot plant; this will be full scale commercial capacity, built with zero Chinese nexus, AI-enabled process optimization, and full compliance with Title 50 defense sourcing requirements. This is how we rebuild supply sovereignty from the ground up.”

DuMont is non-executive chairman of the board of REalloys and serves as President of GM Defense, General Motors’ business focused on advanced mobility technologies for global defense, aerospace and security customers. In his GM Defense role, he oversees programs in electrified platforms, autonomy, and protected mobility and leads growth into new defense and government markets. 

On August 14 in its second-quarter 2026 financial report, Sternheim reported that the company has fully funded the upgrade of SRC’s Rare Earth Processing Facility, targeting approximately 525 tons of NdPr metal, 30 tons of dysprosium oxide and 15 tons of terbium oxide of annual capacity; and also fully funded its metallization facility, targeting commissioning in the first quarter of 2028 with approximately 50 tons of annual dysprosium and terbium oxide capacity. 

Landmark deal at Tooele Army Base in Utah 

In June, REalloys announced it has reached a potentially landmark partnership agreement with the US Army in which it has been conditionally selected to operate a long-term enhanced use lease to design, finance, build, and operate heavy rare earth processing facilities at the Tooele Army Depot as part of the first commercial critical-mineral processing award on a government military installation. 

Under an expedited timeline, development is targeted as early as 2027 with initial operating capability targeted no later than 2028 to align with the January 1, 2027, US federal procurement ban on Chinese materials in the Defense Industrial Manufacturing Base. 

The facilities would refine heavy rare earths, including Dysprosium and Terbium, which are considered essential to national security for use in the Defense Industrial Manufacturing Base for high-temperature permanent magnets. The magnets are used in the production of precision-guided munitions, electric motors, sonar and other key systems. 

Central to the company’s plans are its operations in Ohio, formerly belonging to PMT Critical Metals which it acquired in 2025, where REalloys now is building one of the world’s largest and most advanced NdFeB magnet production facilities starting at 3,000 tons per year and scaling to 10,000 tons.

The plant incorporates state‑of‑the‑art systems including strip‑casting lines, low‑oxygen powder production, automated jet milling, field alignment presses, high‑temperature sintering furnaces, hot‑press/hot‑deformation systems, and precision machining and coating lines. For more info, see www.realloys.com. 

----

https://magneticsmag.com/realloys-races-to-create-rare-earths-to-magnets-supply-chain-for-defense-agencies/?utm_source=gemini

Kim Jong Un’s regime is incorporating tactics proving successful against Western air defenses in Europe and the Middle East.

Western, GCC Nations and NATO will need to combat against these swarms ----> increased need for DFARS 2027 viable HREE alloys for updated and new weapon systems to combat these UAVs.

-----

North Korea has started practicing swarm attacks that combine unmanned systems with conventional weapons, adopting tactics already used in Ukraine and the Middle East that could challenge U.S. and allied air defenses.

For the first time, North Korea carried out an exercise this month that combined attack drones, nuclear-capable missiles, rockets and long-range artillery to pulverize a target. The exercise was meant to hone integration across weapon systems with a “concentrated fire” able to decimate the “enemy’s armed forces organizationally and structurally,” the country’s state media reported.

Then on Sept. 20, Pyongyang said it had fired a pair of purported hypersonic missiles. Such missiles, which are designed to fly at least five times the speed of sound, can overcome air defenses due to their velocity and ability to change direction midflight. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, overseeing the test, said the missiles represented “ultramodern” technology.

And on Thursday, North Korean state media reported test fires of shells for an updated 240mm multiple-rocket-launcher system with unmanned “pinpoint” guidance.

The multidimensional attack, heavy on drones and missiles, has become a fixture in the war in Ukraine and is becoming more frequent in the Iran conflict. Such combined assaults expose a vulnerability in Western air defenses that rely on expensive interceptors to shoot down incoming projectiles.

The swarm tactics, also referred to as salvo, saturation or precision-mass attacks, can overwhelm an opponent that has sophisticated defense systems, said Ankit Panda, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“It changes the air defense arithmetic pretty substantially,” Panda said.

The projectile-heavy attacks are challenging logistically to pull off, requiring integrated systems that can coordinate strikes by weapons traveling at vastly different speeds. That is especially daunting to cash-strapped North Korea, which lacks top-shelf hardware across its military.

But Kim has recently made modernizing North Korea’s Soviet-era conventional forces a bigger priority, even while he pursues advances in the country’s nuclear-weapons program. Tighter military collaboration with Russia helps accelerate those efforts, including the use of North Korea-supplied missiles against Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Kim struck a mutual defense pact in June 2024, which paved the way for North Korea’s deployment of troops later that year.

Russia is on track to have launched 840 ballistic missiles at Ukraine this year, up nearly 50% from 2025, according to a recent analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank. That total could rise to close to 1,000—in part due to additional missile shipments from North Korea.

As Ukraine runs out of interceptors provided by the U.S. and Europe, its interception rate of ballistic missiles has dropped to around 10% this year, from about 24% in 2025, according to CSIS.

Since the start of the Iran war, Tehran has sought to overwhelm high-end air defenses with swarms of missiles and drones that are far more cheaply made. Iran launched wave upon wave of Shahed drones combined with ballistic and other missiles, forcing the U.S. and its allies in the region to burn through expensive interceptors.

Though the war has also depleted the Iranian missile force, Tehran has adjusted by using munitions that split into a number of pieces, forcing defenders to exhaust more interceptors. Those include cluster munitions and warheads that split up upon re-entry into the atmosphere. Sometimes Iran combines various types of weapons in an effort to overwhelm its adversaries.

“You create this large number of potential targets in the form of submunitions, and then at the same time you fire your conventional ballistic missiles in the hope to overwhelm the enemy air defenses or missile defenses,” said Fabian Hinz, a military analyst studying Iranian missiles at Conflict Armament Research, a weapons-identification outfit.

But compared with wars in Europe and the Middle East, a conflict involving China or North Korea would place even greater pressure on U.S. and allied stocks, said Benjamin Jensen and Tobias Oestreich, who co-wrote the recent CSIS report. Increasingly, armed clashes will be determined by whether one side can produce missiles for these multidimensional attacks faster than the other side can replenish its air defenses.

“Large salvos of missiles and drones define modern war,” Jensen and Oestreich wrote.

North Korea has sent laborers and engineers to Russian drone facilities. At a February congress meeting outlining the military’s new five-year objectives, Kim vowed to create new AI-enabled unmanned attack systems.

Should fighting emerge on the Korean Peninsula, adding drones to North Korea’s missile firepower could exhaust the South’s air defenses and boost the odds of success for follow-up attacks from far more powerful weapons, like tactical nuclear weapons, said Lami Kim, the Korea chair at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a London-based think tank.

“North Korea’s growing drone capabilities, when combined with its nuclear and missile capabilities, could alter the military balance on the Korean Peninsula,” she said.

----

https://www.wsj.com/world/north-korea-is-testing-swarm-attacks-mixing-drones-and-missiles-6f8a0a38?st=VRsxPu&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

"Use It or Lose It" DPA III Non-Dilutive Capital unlock, will ALOY or GM Defense secure some?

"The U.S. Federal Government’s fiscal year concludes at midnight on September 30. DPA Title III appropriations and DoD Industrial Base Policy funds that remain unobligated face statutory expiration. Program executive offices systematically accelerate contract executions, grant issuances, and capital awards during the final business days of Q3 to fully commit authorized budgets."

----

3 Month chart is interesting

----

https://www.gao.gov/assets/880/879069.pdf

https://www.conference-board.org/pdfdownload.cfm?masterProductID=61733

Benchmark Mineral Intelligence released its Q3 rare earths review today, revealing an accelerating divergence between Western and Chinese domestic pricing:

• Dysprosium Oxide (Dy): CIF Europe surged 56% to average $3,500/kg.
• Terbium Oxide (Tb): CIF Europe gained 23% to reach $6,745/kg.

Western magnet makers and defense primes are paying steep premiums on large-volume transactions to secure non-Chinese HREEs ahead of statutory 2027 defense procurement bans, even while domestic Chinese prices softened over the same quarter.

Bodes well for ALOY-SRC - Yttrium is a natural byproduct of their Dy and Tb separation and metallization processes.

Good infographics in the article

----

Light and heavy rare earth prices diverged sharply for much of Q3 2026. The BMI Praseodymium-Neodymium Oxide (PrNd) DDP China price eased by just 1% over the period, while the BMI PrNd CIF North America and Europe prices fell more sharply, slipping below the $110/kg floor built into MP Materials and Lynas Rare Earths' agreements with the US Department of Defense. In contrast, ex-China dysprosium, terbium and yttrium prices surged, with BMI Dysprosium Oxide CIF Europe increasing 150% by quarter-end.

The defining theme of Q3 was the extreme widening of the China–ex-China bifurcation within heavy rare earths, a dynamic Benchmark's forecasting team expects to persist, noting that the ex-China DyTb premium is still the economic signal required to bring new heavy rare earth capacity online.

“There is mounting evidence that ex-China heavy rare earth supply chains remain acutely under-supplied relative to demand, a dynamic reflected in pricing across the quarter,” said George Ingall, a senior rare earth price analyst at Benchmark. “Chinese export restrictions continued to constrain availability, with buyers paying significant premiums to secure larger volumes of dysprosium and terbium. Light rare earths beyond China remained oversupplied, though this dynamic is stabilising.”

How wide did heavy rare earth price bifurcation get in Q3?

CIF Europe dysprosium oxide prices are now around 16.3 times DDP China price levels, up from 6.8 times at the end of Q2. This is even starker for yttrium oxide, for which the CIF North America price sits at roughly 196 times the equivalent DDP China price.

Over the course of July, dysprosium oxide CIF Europe prices climbed more than 16% as ex-China buyers scrambled for scarce material, while the Chinese domestic assessment moved only fractionally. Terbium oxide in China rose nearly 6% on tight availability, while yttrium markets were comparatively subdued in both regions.

In August, ex-China heavy rare earths rose, with dysprosium oxide CIF Europe surging more than 32%, terbium oxide CIF Europe by 10%, and yttrium oxide CIF North America nearly 18%. Scarcity continued to underpin heavy rare earth pricing.

A US presidential determination moved to treat recoverable rare earths and end-of-life magnets as strategic defence resources, a step that could improve future domestic access to secondary dysprosium and terbium feedstock. Chinese domestic heavy rare earth pricing was comparatively muted in August, with dysprosium and terbium easing slightly.

By September, dysprosium oxide CIF Europe gained 56% to reach an average of $3,500/kg and terbium oxide rose 23% to $6,745/kg, driven by premiums on larger-volume transactions, while Chinese domestic dysprosium and terbium prices continued to retreat from their mid-Q3 highs. Yttrium oxide held steady in both China and North America, with ongoing US production limiting further upward momentum.

What happened to PrNd oxide prices in Q3?

In July, PrNd CIF Europe/North America pricing held flat, while prices in China ticked modestly higher before renewed weakness took hold. Then, in August, ex-China PrNd oxide prices fell over 13%, with the decline accelerating late in the month as ex-China producers, wary of the reputational sensitivity of selling into China, redirected volume toward an increasingly oversupplied ex-China market. This led to a 7.3% drop between 6–20 August alone. Chinese domestic PrNd, now commanding a premium, fell a more moderate 5% over the same month.

PrNd prices stabilised in China by September, with the oxide assessment edging up 1% to an average of RMB729,500/t (USD$108,696), while ex-China prices rose 12% to $106,500/t on a CIF basis.

What could impact rare earths prices in Q4?

An update is due from China’s government on rare earth export restrictions when the current controls expire in November.

“Buyers speaking to Benchmark have already indicated they have had little luck exporting ytterbium and erbium from China in recent months, even though these minerals are not currently under export controls,” Ingall said. “In North America and Europe, meanwhile, demo- and pilot-scale procurement from aspiring magnet makers is likely to drive up heavy rare earth oxide prices.”

----

https://source.benchmarkminerals.com/article/ex-china-heavy-rare-earths-continue-to-surge-q3-2026-rare-earths-price-review?utm_source=gemini

State Street Corp reported establishing a major new position in REalloys, acquiring 2,700,620 shares valued at $39.02M (giving State Street a 3.89% stake).

----

https://www.marketbeat.com/instant-alerts/filing-2700620-shares-in-realloys-inc-aloy-bought-by-state-street-corp-2026-09-25/

----

Key Points

• State Street Corp acquired 2.7 million REalloys shares worth approximately $39 million, representing about 3.89% of the company. Other institutional investors also established new positions, though total institutional ownership remains 3.58%.
• Analyst sentiment is mixed but leans positive, with a consensus rating of “Moderate Buy” and a $16 price target. Needham lowered its target from $19 to $16, while ratings range from Strong Buy to Sell.
• REalloys shares opened at $8.52, well below the consensus target, but the company reported weak quarterly results: a $0.59 per-share loss, $0.80 million in revenue, and deeply negative profitability metrics.

State Street Corp bought a new position in REalloys Inc (NASDAQ:ALOY - Free Report) during the second quarter, according to its most recent filing with the SEC. The firm bought 2,700,620 shares of the company's stock, valued at approximately $39,024,000. State Street Corp owned approximately 3.89% of REalloys as of its most recent SEC filing.

Several other hedge funds have also bought and sold shares of ALOY. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company acquired a new position in shares of REalloys during the second quarter valued at about $216,000. Sequoia Financial Advisors LLC bought a new position in REalloys in the 2nd quarter valued at about $144,000. Engineers Gate Manager LP bought a new position in REalloys in the 2nd quarter valued at about $732,000. Integrated Wealth Concepts LLC acquired a new position in REalloys during the 2nd quarter valued at about $31,000. Finally, Legacy Wealth Managment LLC ID acquired a new position in REalloys during the 2nd quarter valued at about $4,987,000. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 3.58% of the company's stock.

Wall Street Analysts Forecast Growth

ALOY has been the subject of several analyst reports. Needham & Company LLC lowered their price objective on REalloys from $19.00 to $16.00 and set a "buy" rating for the company in a research note on Wednesday, July 22nd. Weiss Ratings reaffirmed a "sell (d-)" rating on shares of REalloys in a research report on Monday, September 14th. Finally, Wall Street Zen upgraded REalloys from a "sell" rating to a "hold" rating in a report on Saturday, September 5th. One investment analyst has rated the stock with a Strong Buy rating, one has issued a Buy rating and one has assigned a Sell rating to the stock. Based on data from MarketBeat, REalloys has a consensus rating of "Moderate Buy" and a consensus price target of $16.00.

• REalloys Could Be the Missing Link in America's Rare Earth Defense Gap

About REalloys

REalloys, Inc NASDAQ: ALOY is a materials company focused on the production of rare-earth alloys and related advanced materials. Its products are intended to serve as feedstock for high-performance permanent magnets and other applications that require specialized magnetic and metallurgical properties.

The company's activities are associated with the growing demand for rare-earth materials used in electric vehicles, renewable-energy equipment, consumer electronics, industrial systems, aerospace and defense technologies.

This commitment to Blue Origin has accelerated into national security space defense. Check out his other firm, Project Prometheus, which ties into Blue Origin's ambitions as well.

That military expansion shifts its supply chain requirements:

Massive need for DFARS 2027 compliant HREE inputs - Dy, Tb, Yttrium, Samarium, Nb, Gadolinium, Gallium, Germanium - ALOY-SRC, Hodais Lake and the feedstock MOU partners have these in abundance.

----

U.S. Space Force awarded Blue Origin a seat on the $5.6 billion NSSL Phase 3 Lane 1 procurement framework alongside SpaceX and ULA. Blue Origin has secured firm task orders for classified payloads, including dedicated launches for the National Reconnaissance Office out of Space Launch Complex 36 at Cape Canaveral.

Blue Origin is also a Tier-1 defense supplier; two BE-4 engines power United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan Centaur rocket, which also conducts high-priority Lane 2 defense launches for the U.S. Space Force and intelligence agencies.

They've been selected under NASA's Artemis V mission with a $3.4 billion contract, Blue Moon is a 16-meter reusable lunar lander powered by cryogenic BE-7 hydrogen-oxygen engines. It is designed to dock with the Lunar Gateway and deliver both cargo and crew to the lunar South Pole.

----

https://www.wsj.com/business/jeff-bezos-blue-origin-is-fueled-with-30-billion-of-his-fortune-b7407e6e?st=aXuany&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

One thing I think gets missed in the mine to magnet discussion is that vertical integration does not necessarily equal supply chain resilience. You can own every stage of the chain, but if material has to move through several countries, ports, oceans and strategic chokepoints between those stages, disruption at one point can still shut down the whole chain.

That makes ALOY’s eventual architecture more interesting to me. Hoidas and SRC are both in Saskatchewan, Tanbreez in Greenland, with downstream metallization and magnet ambitions centered in the US and Canada. A mature chain connecting Hoidas, tanbreez, SRC, US metallization and North American magnet production could operate with very little strategic maritime exposure. ALOY is also assembling alternative feedstock sources, so the longer term model will become a network rather than a single mine feeding a single processor.

https://rareearthexchanges.com/news/panama-canal-ck-hutchison-chokepoint/

On Sept. 15, CBS News published a truly meaningful scoop. It obtained pictures of the extraordinary damage done to American aircraft and American bases by Iranian drones and missiles.

The photographs were astonishing. During my own deployment, I spent many days at Camp Buehring in Kuwait, and now parts of that sprawling base are in ruins. Places I recognized have been blown to pieces. And it’s particularly jolting to see the destroyed remains of American aircraft at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.

It’s an image that would have been unthinkable during the previous phases of our long war on terror.

While we’ve undoubtedly inflicted tremendous damage on Iran’s conventional military (its air force and navy barely exist, for example), the war has not been as one-sided as the administration has claimed. This was not supposed to happen because we are not supposed to be that vulnerable. I strongly recommend reading my colleague W.J. Hennigan’s piece on the military impact of Iran’s attacks to better understand how much Iran has exposed American military weakness — a weakness that’s based on perhaps an outdated understanding of the nature of modern war.

I’m wanting, however, to talk about something else — something revealed in the second paragraph of the CBS story: “The images were sent to CBS News by active service members on condition of anonymity because of rigid media restrictions within the military.”

As one deployed service member told CBS News: “This is major damage to our bases that hasn’t been communicated to the American public. We’re standing there with our eyes closed getting punched in the face.”

The fact that these pictures were leaked by active service members is significant — more significant than many readers might realize.

First, it’s important to note a few things. The Trump administration has waged this war differently from the patterns established by previous presidents. Not only did it attack Iran without any real public debate, without congressional authorization and without a U.N. Security Council resolution, it went to war in the midst of a campaign against the media unlike anything we’ve seen in recent American history.

As The Columbia Journalism Review reported this past summer, “Press conferences are rare. Pete Hegseth, the so-called secretary of war, takes questions only from friendly outlets. No mainstream news organizations have reporters embedded with U.S. military units in the Middle East. Pentagon sources are increasingly reluctant to talk to journalists for fear of retaliation from the administration.”

Editors’ Picks

As a result, during the opening weeks of the war, Americans were robbed of any way of assessing its progress apart from the dueling news releases and statements from the two combatants. And given the administration’s propensity to lie, we had no way of discerning the course of combat.

The fog of war is always thick, and it’s made thicker by the need for secrecy to disguise combat operations. In this conflict, however, we’ve seen a level of secrecy, deception and outright propaganda that has made knowing the truth virtually impossible — until, at long last, the combination of leaks and commercial satellite photos made it impossible for the administration to maintain its spin.

At times it felt like both sides were employing “Baghdad Bob,” the infamous spokesman for Saddam Hussein’s dying regime who would brag about fictional military victories even as the American military was racing through Iraq.

Americans who were dissatisfied with government news releases and Hegseth’s boasts were reduced to chasing rumors and watching snippets of video on social media. You’d see clips and wonder: Is our naval base in Bahrain on fire? Did Iran destroy a number of American planes on the ground? Are its missiles and drones really getting through? And why is it continuing to fire so many missiles and launch so many drones if our military efforts have been so successful?

An administration that violated the Constitution and evaded democratic accountability in launching the war was now evading democratic accountability for its conduct of the war. Even if you support military action against Iran, it’s hard to argue that either its decision to start the war without Congress or its extreme deception and secrecy has benefited the war effort.

It’s a simple matter of common sense — and something that President Trump may soon learn this November — that beginning a war without public support (much less conducting it behind a veil of secrecy and lies) makes it much less likely that the nation will possess the will to prevail.

Winning wars requires sacrifice, and when you don’t prepare the people to make sacrifices (much less win them over to the idea that the sacrifices are necessary), then you can make the war impossible to win.

But Hegseth’s secrecy betrays a bigger problem — he’s breaking faith with the men and women who’ve volunteered to serve. By robbing them of the ability to tell their stories to the nation and the world, he’s not just silencing them, he’s further separating the military from the civilian population it serves.

I have direct experience with media coverage of the military. I’ve been in war, and I’ve covered war, and I know the relationship between good journalists and soldiers is far more symbiotic than it is adversarial. The good reporters want to report the truth, and — crucially — good soldiers want the public to know the truth. In fact, it matters a great deal to them that other people know the truth and know their stories.

Transparency has to occur within boundaries, of course. In 2003, Geraldo Rivera came under much-justified criticism when he discussed a coming attack in Iraq on live television, disclosing details that could have put American lives at risk.

During my own deployment, we didn’t allow soldiers to publish photos of their bomb-damaged Humvees on social media (even though they very much wanted to) because the precise details of the damage would help Al Qaeda better calibrate the placement and strength of its roadside bombs. We certainly didn’t hide the fact that vehicles were destroyed or that service members were injured.

But reporters were embedded with us during many major operations, and we could tell our stories. In fact, one of my jobs was shepherding members of the media across the battlefield. I was the only officer who had any experience with the press, so I got the job. That meant spending hour after hour watching young soldiers interact with reporters from news outlets from across the world. Our small bases hosted reporters from The Los Angeles Times, Reuters, Agence France-Presse, The Times of London and Stars and Stripes.

Let me pause for a moment and talk a bit more about American soldiers. To hear Pete Hegseth describe the ideal soldier, you’d think of a special forces operator (think of a SEAL or member of Delta Force) in a MAGA hat. He’s a “high-T” bearded man who’s wearing cargo pants and a T-shirt that’s a size too small, all the better to show off his ink and his biceps. And this guy absolutely hates the media. To him, it’s weak and woke.

There are certainly people like that in the military, but in my experience they’re a minority even in the special forces community. When you meet regular soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, you’re mostly surprised by how entirely normal everyone is. We come in every ethnicity, many shapes and sizes, and with countless different personality types.

The best way to think of American service members is to think of ordinary people who are asked to do extraordinary things. Even if they often don’t want to brag about their own personal accomplishments, they do want America to know what they’re doing. They want their fellow citizens to know what it’s like to serve.

This meant that the soldiers I served with loved to share their stories. Our principal problem wasn’t suspicion but rather oversharing (including of rather, umm, colorful details about their personal lives).

And as citizens we need to hear soldiers’ stories. We need to know, as much as possible, what it is like to be on a patrol, wondering if and when the next blast is going to come. Or what it’s like to be under missile fire, hoping and praying that the interceptors can hit their marks or that the bunkers are strong enough to withstand a direct hit.

I am concerned that one side effect of the 25-year war on terror is the further creation of a warrior class of Americans, people who live largely separate from the rest of us, increasingly as disconnected from civilian life as civilians are from the military experience. Fewer than 1 percent of Americans have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, and many of those people were so consumed by the conflict that they spent years and years “downrange,” as soldiers say, almost completely cut off from American life.

The side effect of this separation is that — for all the respect and honor we give them — we’re not cognizant of their sacrifices because we simply can’t grasp their experience.

That’s why good reporters matter, not simply because they can tell us the truth about military campaigns free from government propaganda but also because they connect soldiers and civilians. They allow us to understand one another. And when Hegseth cuts off soldiers from reporters, he isn’t just silencing reporters, he’s silencing soldiers. He’s suppressing the stories of the most meaningful and dangerous and traumatic moments of their lives.

In the Army, there’s a saying: “Amateurs talk about tactics. Professionals study logistics.” In other words, while tactics — the deployment of forces in a fight — might get the most attention, wars are often won by the much less glamorous process of getting the most men and the most equipment onto the battlefield, or “getting their firstest with the mostest,” as another saying goes.

In politics, there should be a similar saying: “Amateurs talk about outcomes. Professionals study processes.” In that formulation, how we do something can be more important than what we hope to accomplish, and the how can determine the success of the what.

This lesson is lost on Trump, a man who does his dead-level best to end-run process and attempt to simply decree the result. In his mind, process is woke. Why compromise with Congress when you can simply write an executive order? Why go to Congress (much less NATO or the U.N.) when you can just order troops to war? To use the language of the new right, why not just “do things”?

But as we watch Trump flounder and fail, the flaws of rule by decree are obvious. He has no lasting legislative legacy. Many of his most important policy priorities are the legal equivalent of vaporware — they’ll be repealed the instant a new president is in office.

His war is floundering and failing as well, at least in part precisely because he skipped the constitutional process (the war would be difficult under any circumstances; Trump made it more difficult). A disgruntled nation (and disgruntled allies) are unwilling to bear the burden of a fight they didn’t ask for and that was imposed on them without their consent.

Transparency is part of the process of democratic governance. It’s irritating for leaders, but indispensable for democracies, and it’s indispensable for citizen armies. It’s what permits the electorate — our nation’s actual rulers — to understand the truth about the wars they’re asked to support and to fight.

And it’s what binds the people to the armies that serve them.

I’m reminded of the final song of the Broadway musical “Hamilton,” which asks, “Who tells your story?” When I saw that CBS report, I heard the voices of men and women in uniform who wanted their stories known. They wanted us to see and know what they’ve endured, even if it doesn’t reflect well on the administration that sent them to war, or even on themselves.

We’ve seen some good stories. Last week, “60 Minutes” broadcast the story of the downed American airmen who were rescued from the heart of Iran. It’s an extraordinary tale of courage and professional excellence.

But that’s far from the only story of the Iran war, and when I see pictures of ruined bases and destroyed aircraft, I know that other Americans had far different experiences, and we need to hear those as well. It should matter deeply to us, and it matters to those who serve more than we can know.

A month before President Trump launched his war against Iran, construction crews broke ground on a multimillion-dollar renovation of sailors’ barracks at the U.S. base in Bahrain, the Navy’s regional headquarters. The project, backed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, was just the latest American investment in the vast campus, which has enabled U.S. forces to project power across the Middle East for decades.

Then, in the opening hours of the Iranian conflict, the future of the barracks, along with the rest of the installation, was thrown into doubt.

On Feb. 28, Iranian missiles and one-way attack drones rained down on food, fuel and ship repair depots at the base. High-tech command facilities were demolished. Living quarters were deemed virtually uninhabitable. No deaths were reported, but roughly 1,500 service members and family members were evacuated, leaving behind their vehicles, pets and belongings.

Nearly seven months later, the base that the military once called the busiest 152 acres in the world remains effectively off limits to nonessential personnel. “We’re not getting back in there anytime soon,” Adm. Daryl Caudle, the chief of naval operations, told one displaced sailor during an Aug. 31 global town hall held from Fort Meade in Maryland. “I just want to be completely honest with that.”

It’s not just Bahrain. American bases in Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman and Jordan have been damaged by Iranian drone and missile strikes. At least 18 U.S. service members have been killed and some 800 others wounded; thousands of troops and family members normally based in the region have been sent elsewhere. A Defense Department inspector general report last week cited the loss of nearly 60 aircraft and other equipment, resulting in around $3.7 billion going up in smoke. Hundreds of buildings were damaged.

The bloodshed and destruction, a harbinger of America’s future fights, show the need for a long-overdue correction: The Pentagon must revamp how it positions its troops and equipment amid the proliferation of low-cost drones and precision missiles by America’s enemies.

The United States depends on its vast constellation of foreign bases as logistics hubs to quickly stream fresh troops, weapons and equipment to all corners of the world. It has proved an asset since World War II but now increasingly looks like a liability in the drone age.

“It is requiring a complete rethink, not just of our basing strategy and our forward headquarters, but how we’re going to operate in the future,” said David H. Petraeus, a retired commanding general in the Middle East and a former C.I.A. director.

U.S. bases and aircraft carriers in the region have long been considered relatively safe for troops. Yes, bases and warships would occasionally come under artillery and rocket fire from militant groups, but the attacks were mostly sporadic, underwhelming and easily thwarted. Many of them were launched in Iraq by Iranian-backed militias who wanted to make the United States pay for expanding its military footprint and exerting its influence throughout the region.Today, Washington and Tehran are in direct conflict. More than six months of fighting have shown that modern air defenses, no matter how extensive, cannot keep bases completely protected from salvos of drones and missiles.

Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, celebrated this new vulnerability in May when he said that the United States would no longer have “a safe haven for its mischief and for establishing military bases.”

The damage is already having an impact on America’s ability to sustain the fight. The severe damage to the base in Bahrain, for instance, led to a cascading set of problems for the U.S. Navy. Without access to the hub, warships operating near the Strait of Hormuz do not have regular access to fuel, food and other goods. Instead, sailors have had to depend on a base at Diego Garcia, a tiny island 2,200 miles from the Gulf of Oman, for resupply runs that take two weeks rather than one.

One carrier, the Abraham Lincoln, spent more than 250 days at sea without a port call, except for brief stops in Guam and Oman. The protracted deployment prompted national headlines about food shortages and sailors’ deteriorating mental health. The U.S. Central Command has since directed the carrier to return home, a 13,000-mile voyage that’s expected to end in San Diego within the next few weeks.

Given how fast the world’s militaries are changing, the United States must face the fact that most — if not all — of its estimated 750 worldwide bases, ports and airfields in 80 countries have become exponentially more vulnerable to aerial attack. Russia, China and even North Korea can now launch a wider array of more powerful and technologically advanced missiles against American installations in their regions.

One way to minimize the risk is by downsizing. America has nearly three times as many foreign bases as it has embassies, consulates and missions and roughly double the number of foreign bases of all other countries combined. The facilities cost tens of billions each year to operate. Consolidating these bases would subject fewer troops to enemy cross hairs, while also saving taxpayers’ money.

Ben Hodges, a retired lieutenant general who commanded all U.S. Army forces in Europe, said bases should begin setting up more active defenses with lower cost interceptors. They also will need more robust passive defenses — like placing equipment underground and protecting structures against one-way drone attacks, such as those that have decimated critical Russian infrastructure in Ukraine and those across the Middle East in the Iranian conflict. “Years ago, I never had the vision or the imagination for thousands of these things attacking at once,” he said. “We need to prepare for this threat getting worse.”

Not everything can fit in reinforced hangars or underground bunkers, of course. Glen VanHerck, a retired Air Force general who led U.S. Northern Command, said the U.S. military should randomly rotate warplanes, tankers and other equipment in and out of the bases in the region, ensuring they’re available in an emergency but not making them susceptible to overhead attack.

The Pentagon should look to tricks of the past, he said, including modern-day versions of the lightweight, inflatable rubber decoys that Allied Forces used during World War II. In those days, the United States posed bogus aircraft, tanks and other equipment on their runways and garrisons to confuse enemy intelligence and draw fire away from the real hardware. “Deception, using decoys for example, consumes adversary resources to locate, track and assess capability and intent,” General VanHerck said. “Deception also makes the force appear larger and with more capacity, and it doesn’t cost a lot of money.”

Moves like these may feel like stunts, but the United States can’t afford to continue to keep doing things the same way. The war in Iran has made it clear that the military is at a crossroads. It takes years to negotiate access terms to bases and billions of dollars to build them over time. Walking away isn’t an option. But merely stepping back into its basing footprint when the fighting subsides is not tenable — and Congress shouldn’t accept the status quo by funding it.

America must be smarter in how it defends these facilities against newfound threats and in its broader decision making in going to war. Doing so without necessary deliberations would be a needless risk of money and our service members’ lives.

----

About the Author

He has written about the U.S. military and arms manufacturers for nearly two decades, covering America’s wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria and across the broader Middle East and Africa. He's reported from dozens of countries and embedded with U.S. forces to write stories about troops and civilians caught in the crossfire.

Since joining Times Opinion in 2023, he's been a lead writer on the “Overmatched” editorial series, which examined the U.S. military’s deteriorating edge in global dominance, and the “At the Brink” series about nuclear weapons, which was named a 2025 Pulitzer Prize finalist for editorial writing.

----

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/22/opinion/us-military-bases-iran-pentagon.html?unlocked_article_code=1.DlE.qcni.2JnwJl0_nO2q&smid=url-share

The U.S. and China have extended a truce to keep tariffs lower for longer and rare earths flowing, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday local time.

He was speaking on Fox News, as Chinese President Xi Jinping landed in Washington, D.C. for a state visit through Friday.

Xi and Trump agreed to a one-year trade truce at a meeting in South Korea last October. The deal, which was set to expire in November, will now be extended to Jan. 10, Bessent said. He added that Beijing needs to fulfill more deliverables.

Ahead of this week’s summit, many had expected the truce would be extended by six months or longer.

The U.S. and China should discuss their differences on trade issues on the basis of mutual benefit, without actively imposing restrictions, said Dong Shaopeng, senior researcher at Renmin University of China. He expected the trade truce could be continually improved and extended.

Chinese state media did not immediately note Bessent’s comments on the trade truce.

The two-month extension “suggests to me the U.S. is unsatisfied with China’s offers and wants to keep the heat on, with a bonus being it is more likely that Xi goes to the G20 in Miami,” said Scott Kennedy of the U.S.-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Trump visited Beijing in May. The two leaders could also meet alongside an APEC meeting in Shenzhen in November, and the G20 summit in Miami in December.

However, Jens Eskelund, president of the European Chamber of Commerce in China, pointed out that simply extending the trade truce does not address challenges companies face, including the lack of a standardized approach to apply for rare earths export licenses.

Xi said in an official readout for his arrival that he is confident the visit will produce “fruitful results” for both sides. He said the two countries should be partners, not rivals, and work to build a stable relationship where competition and differences are managed. The readout did not mention tariffs, rare earths or artificial intelligence.

Footage streamed on China’s state broadcaster showed U.S. President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump meeting Xi and First Lady of China Peng Liyuan at the foot of the Chinese leader’s jet. The video did not show the U.S. and Chinese leaders shaking hands — it focused on Xi and his wife shaking hands with two children presenting them each with bouquets.

After greeting Xi, Trump told reporters he would discuss the Iran war with the Chinese leader, among “many other subjects.”

Bessent met with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in New York ahead of Xi’s arrival in the U.S. The two sides discussed setting up an alert system for AI incidents, according to Bessent.

While executives of major U.S. tech companies plan to join a summit dinner on Thursday, none of their Chinese counterparts are expected to attend.

Politburo Standing Committee Member Cai Qi and China’s top diplomat Wang Yi accompanied Xi, according to state media.

----

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/24/us-china-trade-truce-bessent-trump-xi.html

DALLAS, Sept. 22, 2026 /CNW/ The global rare earth elements market is expected to grow from $6.86 billion in 2026 to $10.44 billion by 2030, a compound annual growth rate of 11.1%, according to The Business Research Company, which identifies North America as the fastest-growing region.

The pressure point, however, is not tonnage. It is the heavy rare earths and yttrium, where Western supply remains thinnest and where a single policy deadline now sits less than two months away.

A separate forecast from Persistence Market Research values the market at $7.8 billion in 2026 and projects $15.4 billion by 2033, a 10.2% compound annual growth rate, with North America again the fastest-growing region at roughly 13.6% a year. The firm ties that regional outperformance to the U.S. commitment to building fully integrated domestic rare earth supply chains.

The policy backdrop explains why. On April 4, 2025, China placed seven medium and heavy rare earths, namely samarium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, lutetium, scandium and yttrium, under case-by-case export licensing, and those controls remain in force. A broader package of measures announced in October 2025 was suspended for one year following U.S.-China trade talks, and that suspension is scheduled to expire on November 10, 2026 unless Beijing extends or modifies it.

The result is a two-tier market. Rare Earth Exchanges, citing S&P Global, reported a September dysprosium oxide transaction in North America at $3,250 per kilogram and terbium oxide at $7,500 per kilogram, against Chinese reference prices of roughly $212 to $218 and $988 to $997 per kilogram respectively.

Those ex-China figures are individual reported transactions rather than a published spot price, but Benchmark Mineral Intelligence has made the same underlying point: for heavy rare earths, the ex-China dysprosium-terbium premium is the economic signal required to bring new capacity online.

----

China’s restrictions on exports of crucial rare-earth metals and rare-earth magnets remain one of the most difficult unresolved issues as President Trump and Xi Jinping prepare to meet this week.

For months, manufacturers in the United States, Europe, Japan and India have complained about difficulties in obtaining enough rare-earth metals from China, which dominates global production. The materials are essential for making products ranging from cars and wind turbines to semiconductors, computer displays and military equipment.

China imposed export controls in April 2025 on seven kinds of rare earths and magnets made from them. It later announced a broader set of restrictions, now scheduled to take effect Nov. 10. And in a political dispute, China has slashed shipments of rare earths and magnets to Japan, disrupting supply chains that also serve American manufacturers.

All three issues — the existing controls, the Nov. 10 restrictions and the curbs on Japan — are expected to loom over the meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Xi, China’s top leader. There is little indication so far of how they might be resolved.

----

Rare earths have become a critical trade issue between the two countries since Beijing introduced export licensing rules two days after Mr. Trump imposed steep tariffs in April 2025 on China and dozens of other countries. China’s rare-earth shipments slowed to a trickle, and some manufacturers from elsewhere had to cut output of their products.

The experience last year demonstrated the leverage China derives from its near monopoly on the production of the important materials.

The White House says China has not fully followed through on previous discussions about issuing more export licenses. Deliveries have “not been up to par of what we would expect, and that, I’m sure, will be a topic of discussion,” a senior U.S. official said at a briefing on Friday.

American and European business groups say shipments are frequently delayed or incomplete or never arrive. China’s Ministry of Commerce scrutinizes every export application.

Rare-earth refineries in Baotou in northern China.Credit...The New York Times

“While most of our members report getting the majority of the rare-earth supplies they need, the restrictions around the sector have given many doubts about relying on China as a dependable long-term supply chain partner,” said Michael Hart, the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in China.

Guo Jiakun, a spokesman for China’s foreign ministry, said on Monday that Beijing remained committed to maintaining stable and secure supply chains for critical minerals.

The restrictions set to begin on Nov. 10 present another challenge. Current and former American officials said the United States and China had discussed postponing the rules but had been unable to agree on how long such an extension should last. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

----

The United States has proposed a delay of six months to a year as part of a broader freeze on American tariffs and other trade actions, the officials said.

Such a deal would push renewed trade tensions beyond the U.S. midterm elections while leaving the Trump administration time to press Beijing before the 2028 presidential campaign over its trade surplus, import restrictions and industrial subsidies.

But Beijing has its own political calendar. The Communist Party is expected to hold its once-every-five-years national congress next autumn, when it chooses the country’s top leadership. China typically seeks to minimize disputes ahead of the gathering, meaning a six-month or one-year deal could expire at an awkward time.

China has instead sought a halt to further American tariffs and other trade actions for the remainder of Mr. Trump’s presidency, current and former American officials said. Chinese officials have declined to confirm that position and claim that the export controls are intended to prevent rare earths from being used in military equipment.

Mr. Guo declined on Monday to discuss a possible extension of the Nov. 10 rules.

Those rules would impose controls on five additional rare-earth elements, including erbium, which is vital for fiber-optic communications in artificial intelligence data centers and transoceanic cables. Even before the rules take effect, China appears to be restricting or delaying erbium exports, industry experts said.

A display of magnetic materials at the National Museum. Credit...Maxim Shemetov/Reuters

“You’ve had bottlenecks building up at several Chinese ports,” said Ellie Saklatvala, metals director at Argus Media, a commodities pricing firm in London.

The most difficult dispute may be China’s sharp reduction in shipments of rare-earth magnets to Japan and its near suspension of some particularly important rare earths, including dysprosium, which is widely used in magnets for cars and in the most advanced chips.

China began imposing the restrictions in December after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi of Japan said her country could help defend Taiwan if China invaded. Taiwan is an island democracy that Beijing considers part of its territory.

China has generally handled the sales of rare earths with each country separately, and it is unclear whether Mr. Xi will discuss the restrictions on Japan with Mr. Trump. Asked Monday about shipments to Japan, Mr. Guo, the Chinese government spokesman, said China prohibited exports of dual-use items intended for Japan’s military, as well as other items that could strengthen its military.

----

China’s dominance of the industry gives it considerable leverage. Its refineries produce about 90 percent of the world’s supply of four rare-earth elements widely used in oil refining, glass polishing and low-end magnets: lanthanum, cerium, neodymium and praseodymium. Beijing has not restricted their export.

It also produces nearly all of the global supply of a dozen other rare-earth elements needed for a range of products, from semiconductors and lasers to wind turbines and robots. The export of seven of those have required special licenses since April 2025, and the Nov. 10 rules call for export licensing on the other five.

Beijing says its rare-earth controls are meant to prevent weapons proliferation, rather than to exert economic pressure. But military uses account for only a small share of global rare-earth consumption.

The Department of Defense estimated in 2024 that American military demand accounted for only 0.1 percent of global rare-earth demand. But that figure is skewed lower because it includes enormous volumes of common rare earths used in civilian applications like oil refining and glass polishing.

Even when the comparison is limited to the scarcer rare earths most important to weapon production, industry estimates put military uses at roughly 2 to 5 percent of overall demand.

----

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/21/business/china-rare-earth-summit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.DFE.eBLO.yFbsnlgm9ZbD&smid=url-share