4 critical materials scored · binding chokepoint: Tungsten (🇨🇳 CN 90% of refining) · 52 restrictive government measures on record
Subject
fraisa · 🇨🇭 CH
Sector
tooling
Materials scored
4
As of
2026-09-30
Risk Office verdict
High · 81/100Company supply-risk index
The binding exposure is Tungsten — 🇨🇳 CN controls 90% of global refining. On this company's production footprint that scores 88/100 (adversarial chokepoint; global 76). The register holds 52 restrictive government measures touching this company's materials — each traced to its primary source below.
Peer rank · TungstenFraisa SA is the 103rd-most-exposed of the 465 named companies we track on 🇨🇳 CN's Tungsten chokepoint; the most-exposed is Elbit Systems (88/100). Ranked on the same footprint-adjusted buyer score as above — a relative read of an existing metric, not a new one.
Competitor cohort · tooling
Fraisa SA ranks 9th of 34 verified tooling companies, tied with 1 other at 81.
86🇮🇹 Fidia S.p.A.Dysprosium
85🇵🇹 Durit GroupTungsten
83🇪🇸 Bellota AgrisolutionsTungsten
83🇩🇪 Hermle AGTungsten
83🇨🇿 Meopta-optika s.r.o.Tungsten
82🇫🇷 ErasteelTungsten
82🇵🇹 Palbit SATungsten
82🇬🇧 Renishaw plcTungsten
81🇨🇭 Fraisa SATungsten
81🇩🇪 Haimer GmbHTungsten
Company supply-risk index 81/100 — the binding chokepoint dominates, with a modest add for exposure breadth across 4 scored materials. Buyer-relative (first-order): weighted by where the company produces (CH 55% · HU 35% · DE 10%, estimated split — no cited source states these exact shares), applied across all materials — it does not yet trace each input to its specific sourcing step.
Fraisa SA
What they do
Fraisa SA (Bellach, Switzerland) is a precision solid-carbide cutting-tool manufacturer producing approximately 8,500 standard products — end mills, drills, thread cutters, and ball-nose / high-feed / radius cutters — plus roughly 3,000 custom solutions per year. Manufacturing runs across three sites: the Swiss headquarters, a modern 4,000 m² carbide-tools plant in Sárospatak, Hungary (serving the whole group), and a large-scale tool-reconditioning centre (FRAISA ReTool) in Willich, Germany that processes over 360,000 tools annually. Sales-only presences operate in the US, China, France, and Italy.
Critical-material exposure
Tungsten — the primary input. Solid-carbide tools consist of 50–90 % by
weight tungsten carbide (WC). There is no commercially viable substitute for WC in high-performance cutting applications; alternative tool materials (ceramics, CBN) address only narrow niches. China controls ≈80 % of global mine production and has export-restricted tungsten intermediates since 2023.
Cobalt — the metallic binder that holds WC particles together (typically
3–8.5 % by weight). Cobalt imparts toughness and prevents brittle fracture under machining loads. The DRC accounts for ≈70 % of global supply; the cobalt market is thin relative to battery demand, making industrial users price-takers.
Tantalum — tantalum carbide (TaC) is added to specialty cemented-carbide
grades to improve wear resistance and hot-hardness at elevated cutting temperatures (typically up to ~10 % of formulation). Rwanda and DRC dominate tantalite supply; the market is small and prone to concentration risk.
The exposure register
Ranked by buyer-relative risk, highest first.
2 of 2 of your scored CRMA-strategic materials breach the EU’s own Art. 5 65% single-third-country ceiling (global-production proxy).
Per-material factor scoring on a 1–5 likelihood×impact scale, mapped to the Art. 24(2)(b) risk-factor framework. The headline score above is a portfolio RAG; this matrix is the assessment — it is where two companies with the same binding chokepoint diverge.
For the conflict-minerals metals among this company's exposures, the named chokepoint refiners that US-listed manufacturers disclose dependence on in their SEC Form SD / Conflict Minerals Reports. This is the peer-disclosed supply base for the material — drawn from 29 US filers' reports — not necessarily this company's own sourcing (which requires its Tier-1 supplier data under Art. 24(3)). It names the specific facilities behind the concentration number.
The named refinersShowHide
Tungsten
China = 54% of filer-disclosed refiner mentions · 291 named refiners
Two independent lenses: USGS official puts China at 90% of global refining output (by tonnage); US filers' own disclosures independently name China for 54% of their refiners (by facility count). Different metrics — both rank China first.
Every new filing and every amendment (rate change, scope change, repeal) touching this company's materials in the window above. Append ?since=YYYY-MM-DD to this URL for a custom start date.
2026-09-11amendedIndonesia Kepmen ESDM No. 144.K/MB.01/MEM.B/2026 — Nickel Ore Multi-Element HPM Benchmark Price Reform— Kepmen ESDM No. 363.K/MB.01/MEM.B/2026 supersedes the Kepmen 144/2026 HPM formula for low-grade limonite: the nickel Correction Factor (CF) for 1.2%-Ni-or-lower ore is reset to 14% (falling 1pp per 0.1pp of grade below that), and the cobalt by-product coefficient is cut from 30% to 17%. Net effect on 1.2%-Ni ore: HPM falls ~45%, from USD 44.97/wmt to USD 24.89/wmt. The change targets the low-grade limonite/HPAL feedstock segment specifically — the 1.6%-grade CF set by 144/2026 is not disclosed as changed in available reporting.
The laws that threaten it
Restrictive government measures on this company's materials, newest first — each links to its primary government source.
The Art. 24(2)(c) vulnerability assessment, made explicit. For each leading exposure we model the move in this company's buyer-relative score under two distinct supply-disruption scenarios — the production footprint held fixed, only one lever moved at a time so each delta isolates one shock:
Both stress-test scenariosShowHide
Policy shock — the controlling country escalates to a full export-licensing / ban regime.
Concentration shock — the supply structure collapses to a single source (second-source loss / full monopoly).
Type
Scenario
Today
Stressed
Δ
Policy
Tungsten — 🇨🇳 CN escalates tungsten controls to a full export-licensing / ban regime
88
91
+3
Concentration
Art. 24(4) · mitigation trigger
Significant-vulnerability conclusion
No material crosses the significant-vulnerability threshold. The Art. 24(4) mitigation duty is not triggered on the factors we could score (1 of 20 inputs unrated across the materials bought). Absence of data is not evidence of low risk — an unrated factor enters the score as zero, not as an estimate, so this conclusion could change once those inputs are rated. The mitigations below are precautionary.
Stated threshold (so the conclusion is reproducible and auditable): buyer-relative band ≥ High AND substitutability hard/none AND ≥ 1 in-force restrictive measure on the material, assessed over the materials this company buys. The CRMA does not fix a numeric definition of “significant”; the company may adopt a stricter or looser threshold and should record it here.
Proposed — not yet law
Upcoming regulatory threats
Proposed, announced or draft regulation that is not yet in force but would touch this company's at-risk materials if it passes. Forward-looking early-warning — the likelihood shown is an honest band derived from the legislative stage, not a forecast or a fabricated probability. Kept separate from the enacted register above: nothing here is law yet.
The upcoming threatsShowHide
🇨🇩 DRC — Interministerial Arrêté Banning Export of Unprocessed Copper and Cobalt Concentrates (29 June 2026, replaces 4 August 2023 framework)
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 55d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — On 29 June 2026 DRC's Vice-Prime Minister for the National Economy (Daniel Mukoko Samba), Minister of Mines (Louis Watum Kabamba) and Minister of Foreign Trade (Julien Paluku Kahongya) jointly signed an arrêté interministériel regulating the commercialisation, export and nomenclature of marketable mining products, which for the first time BANS the export of unprocessed copper and cobalt concentrates outright — replacing the entire framework adopted 4 August 2023. Mining-rights holders, processing entities and buying counters (comptoirs) may seek a ministerial derogation to export less-elaborated products for up to one year, assessed against national mining policy and the technical/economic constraints of each mineral. A new tax regime for economically significant mining byproducts is introduced with a 3-month transition period. This is broader and more foundational than the existing filed/queued DRC cobalt-specific instruments — it is a national concentrate EXPORT BAN (not a quota or hydroxide-specific measure) covering BOTH copper and cobalt, issued under joint Economy/Mines/Trade authority rather than ARECOMS sectoral rulemaking. DRC = priority-tier chokepoint (cobalt, copper, tantalum). Severity 4 expected (national ban, dual-metal, replaces a 3-year-old framework).
What to watch next
Forward-looking read on the binding chokepoint, from the recent trajectory of policy on these materials. Directional, not a forecast.
The watch listShowHide
Tungsten is the line to war-game: 🇨🇳 CN already controls 90% of refining, and the policy lever is active. A single new licensing or export-control action on this material moves the binding score materially.
Cobalt carries 37 restrictive measures on record (🇨🇳 CN 78% of refining) — a secondary escalation candidate.
Niobium carries 5 restrictive measures on record (🇧🇷 BR 89% of refining) — a secondary escalation candidate.
Art. 24(4) · diversification & substitution
Priority mitigations
The mitigating efforts Art. 24(4) names — diversifying the supply chain and substituting the material — plus the standard levers against a concentrated, policy-exposed input. Prioritise around the binding input chokepoint (Tungsten).
The mitigation optionsShowHide
Map your real exposure to Tungsten. Trace it from the component back to the smelter/refiner and country of origin — most buyers discover the dependence is one tier deeper than their direct supplier.
Qualify a non-CN source. Identify and validate at least one supplier outside CN for the binding input before it is needed, even at a cost premium — optionality is the hedge.
Lead-time to re-source is ~9 months (6-12mo). The largest tracked non-CN producer of Tungsten is 🇦🇹 AT (~4% of refining); scaling it into a replacement is roughly a 6-12mo ramp. A share-of-stage substitution heuristic derived from current production share, not a firm supplier quote.
Design for substitution where feasible. Tungsten has at least partial substitutes; specify them into next-generation products to cut the dependence structurally.
Hold strategic inventory / contract forward. For materials with no substitute and active export controls, a buffer stock or long-dated offtake converts a shock into a managed cost.
Run a live policy tripwire. Monitor MOFCOM, EU CRMA and the exporting jurisdictions for new measures on your materials, with a pre-agreed escalation if a licensing regime tightens — this register is that monitor.
Annex A · regulatory basis
CRMA Art. 24 compliance crosswalk
Under the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (Reg. (EU) 2024/1252), a Member State identifies the large companies (Art. 2(29): >500 employees and >€150M net worldwide turnover) using strategic raw materials to manufacture a listed strategic technology (batteries, renewables, hydrogen, traction motors, heat pumps, aircraft, data-storage equipment, robotics, drones, satellites, advanced chips). Those companies must, at least every three years and to the extent the information is available to them (Art. 24(2)), assess their strategic-raw-material supply chain. Where suppliers do not provide the data on request, the assessment may rely on the Commission's monitoring dashboard (Art. 20(4)) or other publicly available information (Art. 24(3)) — which is the evidence base this report assembles. Board reporting (Art. 24(5)) is voluntary unless the Member State mandates it (Art. 24(6)).
The full crosswalkShowHide
CRMA provision
Obligation
Where addressed
Art. 24(1)
Member State identifies the company as in-scope (uses an SRM to make a listed strategic technology).
Scope & applicability
Art. 24(2)(a)
Map where the strategic raw materials are extracted, processed and recycled.
Exposure register + Supply-risk factor analysis
Art. 24(2)(b)
Annex B · Art. 24(1) · Art. 2(29)
Scope & applicability
Article 24 applies only when both size thresholds are met and a Member State has identified the company as making a listed strategic technology with strategic raw materials.
Scope detailsShowHide
Threshold test
This assessment
Average employees (last FY) > 500
company input
Net worldwide turnover (last FY) > €150M
company input
Uses a strategic raw material as an input
Yes — 4 scored SRMs on the input side (binding: Tungsten)
Manufactures a listed strategic technology
tooling (confirm against Annex)
Formally identified by a Member State authority
company input
Evidence & sources
Production-concentration figures: USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2026 + the production dataset behind each material page. Policy measures trace to the primary government sources below.
Each material's global supply-risk index blends five weighted factors: concentration of refining/processing (35%), active trade-control & policy pressure (25%), import reliance (15%), substitutability (15%), and price stress (10%). The buyer-relative score then scales the relational factors (concentration / policy / import) by this company's production-footprint alignment against each material's controlling country — bloc-neutral factors (substitutability, price) are left intact.
Caveats. The footprint is the company's assembly / manufacturing geography applied uniformly across all materials — a first-order proxy, not per-material input tracing. Scores are an analytical judgement on public data with a transparent weighting, not a market forecast or investment advice. Production shares reflect 2024-2025 figures and the policy position as of 2026-09-30; the register is continuously maintained and should be re-pulled against each new policy action.
Tip: the change log above defaults to the last 30 days. Append ?since=YYYY-MM-DD to this URL for a custom start date (e.g. ?since=2026-04-01).
Refresh SLA
New government measures — polled hourly; a filed action can appear on this report within the hour it's picked up.
Dossier verification (this company's exposure list, sourced against its own disclosures) — the auto-onboarded backlog drains on a 30-minute cycle; a specific company's upgrade timing depends on queue position, not a fixed date.
Live-quoted materials (currently: neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, terbium, indium, tellurium — see the price row on each material's page) — refreshed daily.
Other material prices — hand-maintained; flagged STALE on the minerals index past 45 days without a fresh source, rather than left silently out of date.
This is a description of the actual automated pipeline (verifiable against this repo's own cron schedule), not a contractual commitment.
80🇩🇪 EMUGE-FRANKENTungsten
80🇵🇹 Iberomoldes GroupTungsten
80🇩🇪 Kapp NilesTungsten
80🇩🇪 Paul Horn GmbHTungsten
80🇰🇷 TaeguTec Ltd.Tungsten
Same sector_primary, ranked on the company supply-risk index. Restricted to hand-verified dossiers — 3 further tooling companies are tracked but auto-onboarded, and excluded here because their exposure list is a sector template rather than company research. A peer scoring lower is the useful read: it usually means a different production geography or a qualified second source.
Niobium — niobium carbide (NbC) appears in advanced carbide grades as a
grain-growth inhibitor and secondary hardener. Brazil (CBMM) holds ≈90 % of global niobium production, creating single-country concentration risk despite historically stable supply.
Sources
1. Fraisa company portrait and manufacturing overview — https://www.fraisa.com/ch/en/company/portrait 2. Fraisa Group of Companies (site locations) — https://www.fraisa.com/ch/en/company/group-of-companies 3. Cemented carbide composition and supply-chain context — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cemented_carbide
You = buyer-relative score (this company's disclosed footprint vs. the controller). Global = buyer-agnostic supply risk. Substitute = ease of swapping the material out (none = locked in). Input share = the material's disclosed magnitude in the company's input basket (HIGH/MED/LOW only where a public filing quantifies it; — = unrated). Descriptive effect-size, never scored.
Art. 5 = does the global top single-country share breach the EU's own CRMA Art. 5 diversification ceiling (no more than 65% of a strategic raw material from a single third country)? A conservative global-production PROXY for the EU-import denominator — descriptive only, sits beside the score, never merged into it (— = non-strategic material). Reg. (EU) 2024/1252 Art. 5 ↗
1 = very low … 5 = very high — a standard supply-risk likelihood×impact scale (the form a competent authority expects for the Art. 24(2)(b) factor analysis, not a CRMA-numbered scale). Public-source factors are pre-filled from the engine's primary sources (USGS concentration, IPTM government actions, EU import data); the three rightmost factor categories need company / Tier-1 supplier data and are flagged as input under Art. 24(3). Hover any cell for its evidence.
Material factors (scored 4–5) — evidence
Tungsten
4Geopolitical: 16 restrictive actions, peak severity 5, 10 in last 24mo, less 2 liberalising actions
4Concentration: refining HHI 8126 (extreme); top CN 90%
5Price / market: price up, as of 2026-09-01
Cobalt
4Geopolitical: 37 restrictive actions, peak severity 5, 24 in last 24mo, less 4 liberalising actions
Niobium
4Concentration: refining HHI 7990 (extreme); top BR 89%
Tantalum
4Geopolitical: 12 restrictive actions, peak severity 4, 8 in last 24mo, less 2 liberalising actions
China = 43% of filer-disclosed refiner mentions · 243 named refiners
Two independent lenses: USGS official puts China at 50% of global refining output (by tonnage); US filers' own disclosures independently name China for 43% of their refiners (by facility count). Different metrics — both rank China first.
Tungsten — 🇨🇳 CN becomes the single source for tungsten — the second source is lost (full 90%+ monopoly)
88
92
+4
Policy
Cobalt — 🇨🇳 CN escalates cobalt controls to a full export-licensing / ban regime
75
81
+6
Concentration
Cobalt — 🇨🇳 CN becomes the single source for cobalt — the second source is lost (full 78%+ monopoly)
75
89
+14
Policy
Niobium — 🇧🇷 BR escalates niobium controls to a full export-licensing / ban regime
61
71
+10
Concentration
Niobium — 🇧🇷 BR becomes the single source for niobium — the second source is lost (full 89%+ monopoly)
61
68
+7
A zero delta means that lever is already modelled at maximum on that material — today's score already prices it in. This is why the two scenarios are shown together: where a material's policy lever is already maxed (zero policy delta), the concentration shock still carries a real delta, and vice-versa. Each stressed score isolates its one lever; all other factors are held at current values.
Caveat — ENACTED / already in force (signed 29 June 2026, five independent Congolese/international outlets corroborate the ministers, date and substance) but parked here per the standing DRC convention (mines. gouv. cd / primature. gouv. cd / jocc. cd unreachable per prior wakes — same constraint noted on the DRC Strategic Mineral Reclassification, ARECOMS forfeiture, and 5% Worker Equity entries elsewhere in this file). DISTINCT from: 2025-02-22-drc-arecoms-cobalt-export-ban-quota-system (ARECOMS sectoral cobalt-hydroxide quota system, cobalt-only), 2025-12-19-drc-artisanal-copper-cobalt-processing-suspension (artisanal-sector only), the queued ARECOMS H1-2026 quota-forfeiture entry above (operationalises the ARECOMS quota, not this arrêté), 2026-04-10-drc-strategic-reserve-minerals-arecoms, and 2026-05-29-drc-strategic-mineral-expansion-decree. This arrêté is the FIRST instrument in the register banning concentrate exports for BOTH copper and cobalt jointly and replacing the 2023 commercialisation/export/nomenclature framework wholesale — a materially broader legal basis than any of the above. Re-check mines. gouv. cd and jocc.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇿🇲 Zambia SI No. 43 of 2026 — Customs and Excise (Suspension) (Copper Concentrates) (No. 2) Regulations, 2026
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 66d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Minister of Finance, acting under s. 89 of the Customs and Excise Act, cut the copper-concentrate export duty to ZERO for tariff headings 2603. 00. 21 / 2603. 00. 22 / 2603. 00. 23 / 2603. 00. 29, capped at 271,742 t, effective 1 June 2026 with automatic lapse 30 September 2026, with per-entity tonnage caps and (per one secondary) a requirement that exempt shipments channel through Industrial Resources Limited. This is a SUPPLY-RELIEF (liberalising) action — a net EASING of a copper/cobalt chokepoint for ~4 months, explicitly to clear stockpiled unprocessed concentrate while Zambia's major smelters are down for extended maintenance. It is the "(No. 2)" successor instrument to the already-filed 2026-03-05-zambia-si-15-2026-copper-concentrates-export-duty-suspension (a distinct SI with its own number, tonnage cap and validity window). Severity ~2 expected.
Caveat — ENACTED / already in force per multiple independent secondary sources (all agree on SI number, exact citation title, s. org URL pattern that resolves for the parent SI 15/2026 (`/akn/zm/act/si/2026/43/eng@<date>`) across several plausible dates, all 404; zambialii's SI-list index page for 2026 also 404s directly. Parked here per the standing verify-or-don't-file convention (cf. DRC ARECOMS, Pakistan chloroform, China sulfuric-acid entries below) rather than filed on secondaries alone. Re-check zambialii.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
African Union — African Union / AfDB — continental harmonisation of mining legislation toward a ban on unprocessed critical-mineral ore exports (Abidjan Ministerial Forum outcome)
announced→low likelihood·flagged 66d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — On 10 July 2026 the African Development Bank Group, with the African Union Commission, the AfCFTA Secretariat and UNECA, convened African ministers of mining/energy/industry in Abidjan for the "Ministerial Forum on Critical Minerals Value Chain and Beneficiation: Pathways for African Transformation". The stated ambition is continental: move the bloc off raw-ore exports toward regional value chains and in-country processing, with reporting of a push to HARMONISE African mining legislation by end-2026 around a ban on unprocessed ore exports, alongside a headline mobilisation figure of ~USD 63bn for critical-minerals value-chain investment. Why this matters as axis-2 early warning rather than noise: the register already holds a dense cluster of INDIVIDUAL national instruments moving in exactly this direction — Zimbabwe's 2026-02-25 indefinite raw-mineral/lithium-concentrate export suspension, Guinea's 2026-06-19 raw-gold export ban + domestic-refining mandate, Gabon's announced 2029 crude-manganese export ban, Nigeria's RMRDC 30% value-addition bill, Indonesia-style downstreaming copied across the continent, and CEMAC's regional Common Mining Code (all already filed or queued). A binding AU/AfCFTA-level harmonisation instrument would convert that scattered set into a coordinated continental supply shock across cobalt, copper, bauxite, manganese and lithium simultaneously — which is a materially different exposure event from any single-country ban, because it removes the substitute-jurisdiction escape route that currently absorbs each national ban.
Caveat — DELIBERATELY likelihood=low, not moderate. com) is low-quality and was NOT relied on. AU-level harmonisation instruments historically take years and frequently stall at the model-law stage (cf. the known ecb-spf 400 pattern) to establish whether a formal Abidjan Declaration text exists and what it actually commits signatories to.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (low likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇨🇩 DRC — ARECOMS forfeiture & reallocation of unused H1-2026 cobalt export quotas to the state strategic reserve (in force ~29 June 2026)
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 77d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — On ~29 June 2026 the Autorité de Régulation et de Contrôle des Marchés des Substances Minérales Stratégiques (ARECOMS) ordered that all first-half-2026 cobalt export quotas left unused by 30 June 2026 be forfeited and recovered, with a 5 July 2026 cutoff, and reallocated into ARECOMS's discretionary "strategic quota" pool (already ~10% of the 96,600 t/yr authorised volume) earmarked for national-interest local-processing projects. This is an escalation/operationalisation of the filed 2025-02-22 ARECOMS cobalt quota system: it concentrates additional volume under state discretionary control, tightens the effective free-market allocation for producers (Glencore/KCC, CMOC, ERG) on the world's dominant cobalt chokepoint (~76% of mine supply), and — via the linked customs-notification malfunction that blocked quota-linked export declarations after 1 July 2026 — created a real short-run supply interruption. IPTM action would be an AMENDMENT to 2025-02-22-drc-arecoms-cobalt-export-ban-quota-system.
Caveat — ENACTED / already in force (not speculative) — parked here per the standing DRC convention (mines. gouv. cd / primature. gouv. cd / jocc. com, lentrevuemagazine, HCN Times). DISTINCT from filed 2025-02-22-drc-arecoms-cobalt-export-ban-quota-system (the quota framework this amends), 2026-04-10-drc-strategic-reserve-minerals-arecoms (the reserve's legal creation — this is the first operational feeding of that reserve via forfeited quotas), and 2026-05-29-drc-strategic-mineral-expansion-decree. Severity 3 expected.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇹🇿 Tanzania Critical & Strategic Minerals Strategy + statutory critical/strategic minerals LIST (Ministry of Minerals, Mavunde) — beneficiation-mandate licensing instrument
in-consultation→moderate likelihood·flagged 98d ago · not yet law·matches Niobium, Cobalt
If passed — Tanzania's Ministry of Minerals (Minister Anthony Mavunde) has FINALISED a Critical and Strategic Minerals Strategy that takes legal effect only once the Government formally approves and gazettes the official LIST of critical and strategic minerals — a distinct REGULATORY instrument (not the fiscal Finance Act). The strategy explicitly prioritises IN-COUNTRY BENEFICIATION for graphite, nickel, rare earths and lithium, and amends mineral-processing-licence conditions so that every processing licence now requires a domestic value-addition plan; it targets a 40-mineral beneficiation/local-processing scope plus technology-transfer partnership requirements. Once the list is gazetted, raw/unprocessed exports of the listed minerals (Tanzania = a structural graphite chokepoint via Faru/Lindi/Mahenge graphite, plus emerging niobium at Panda Hill and nickel at Kabanga) face value-addition-plan gating and likely export conditionality — re-pricing a major non-China graphite supply node and the Kabanga nickel/Panda Hill niobium projects.
Caveat — 196 levy) — those are FISCAL provisions under the Finance Act; THIS is the regulatory beneficiation-LIST instrument under the Mining Act framework (the official critical/strategic minerals designation that triggers value-addition-plan licensing). Also distinct from filed 2024-11-05-tanzania-written-laws-no-4-2024-mining-act-critical-minerals (that introduced the critical-minerals legal category; this is the operative STRATEGY + LIST that activates the beneficiation-mandate machinery) and from filed 2026-04-15-tanzania-mavunde-40-mineral-licences-revocation. Still in consultation, list not yet gazetted → moderate likelihood; severity 3 expected if the list+value-addition mandate is enacted (export conditionality on graphite/REE/lithium/nickel), severity 2 if it lands as a non-binding strategy only.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇸🇦 Manara Minerals (Saudi PIF / Ma'aden JV) — 15-20% stake acquisition in First Quantum Minerals' Zambian copper-nickel assets
announced→low likelihood·flagged 99d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Saudi sovereign mining vehicle Manara Minerals (PIF + Ma'aden JV) is in advanced negotiations to acquire a 15-20% equity stake (deal value ~USD 1. 5-2bn) in First Quantum Minerals' Zambian copper and nickel operations — i. e. the Kansanshi and Sentinel/Trident copper complex (Zambia's largest copper mines, ~0. 4-0. 5 Mt/yr combined) plus nickel. This extends the Gulf-SWF upstream-mining capital base (theme gcc-mining-upstream-fdi) directly into a binding African copper chokepoint, paralleling Manara's filed Vale Base Metals 10% stake (2024-03-01-sa-manara-minerals-vale-metals-10pct-stake) and its in-negotiation Reko Diq stake (queued below), and mirroring UAE IRH's Mopani (Zambia) acquisition. Gives Saudi Arabia an equity claim on a major non-China copper supply source and injects fresh capital into FQM as it recovers from the Cobre Panamá shutdown — a Gulf-capital re-pricing of Zambian copper supply risk that the exposure engine should track.
Caveat — As of 2026-06-28 this is in advanced negotiation, no signed SPA — hence announced/upcoming not enacted. DISTINCT from the Reko Diq (Pakistan) Manara stake queued below (different asset, different host country) and from the filed Vale Base Metals 10% stake. If completed, severity 2-3.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (low likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇧🇷 Brazil PNMCE — Política Nacional de Minerais Críticos e Estratégicos (PL 2780/2024)
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 108d ago · not yet law·matches Niobium, Cobalt
If passed — First federal statutory framework for critical and strategic minerals; establishes CMCE oversight committee, R$2B Mineral Activity Guarantee Fund (0. 2% gross revenue levy on critical-mineral companies), mandatory 0. 3% gross revenue R&D investment, 20% tax credits for domestic mineral transformation projects; limits raw-mineral exports where domestic processing capacity exists; covers niobium explicitly (CBMM/CMOC supply ~85% of global niobium — Brazil is a structural chokepoint); Chamber passed 343-97 on 7 May 2026, Senate review pending
Caveat — Consolidates 14 prior legislative proposals. Key contested provision: CMCE review/veto power over exports — mining lobby opposed, may resurface in Senate. Distinct from filed 2024-01-22-brazil-nova-industria-brasil-nib, 2024-09-11-brazil-brasil-semicon-program, 2024-08-02-brazil-lei-14948-low-carbon-hydrogen-framework, 2025-04-11-brazil-lei-15122-economic-reciprocity-law. First action to explicitly frame niobium as a strategic supply-chain anchor.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇪🇺 EU CRMA Strategic Projects — Second Designation Round
in-consultation→moderate likelihood·flagged 112d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Second wave of CRMA Art. 14 strategic projects (drawn from 160+ applications: 95 EU-domestic + 66 third-country including 40 from strategic-partnership countries) gains fast-track permitting (27-month EU cap, 15-month Member State cap), EIB/EBRD financing-hub priority, and off-taker certainty; 75 battery-value-chain projects + 21 REE-for-permanent-magnets in pool; widens the EU's 2030 extraction/processing benchmarks pipeline beyond the first 60 projects
Caveat — Second call for applications closed January 15, 2026 (September 2025 launch). Commission stated ~4-month assessment period → designation expected May–June 2026. As of 2026-06-15, no Commission press release or OJ publication confirmed. EUR-Lex CELEX 32026D0923 verified via web search to be an unrelated EU animal-disease implementing decision. Moved from filing. md 2026-06-15. Distinct from: 2025-03-25-eu-crma-strategic-projects-first-designation (60 projects, first round) and 2024-05-23-eu-crma-entry-into-force (base regulation). Severity 3 expected (same as first-round designation).
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇨🇩 DRC Strategic Mineral Reclassification Decree — 6 new minerals (lithium, tantalum, niobium, tungsten, uranium, REEs) elevated to strategic tier, royalty 3.5%→10%
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 113d ago · not yet law·matches Tantalum, Niobium, Tungsten
If passed — Royalty near-triples on Manono lithium project (Zijin Mining/La Cominière, DRC's first industrial lithium mine commissioning June 2026) and all DRC tantalum, niobium, tungsten, uranium, REE operators; reprices extraction economics across the entire DRC critical-mineral portfolio
Caveat — Council of Ministers adoption confirmed late May 2026 (Bloomberg May 31 2026: "Congo Triples Royalty Rate on Lithium With New Strategic Minerals Decree"; Zoom Eco June 1: "6 nouveaux minerais rejoignent la liste des substances stratégiques"; Jeune Afrique confirmed). Modifies décret n°18/042 of 24 November 2018. DRC gov websites unreachable as of 2026-06-14: mines. gouv. cd times out, gouvernement. cd times out, jocc. cd ENOTFOUND, primature. gouv. cd only shows 2020 content — formal text not yet accessible online. Moved from filing. md 2026-06-14. Secondary: https://africa. com/drc-moves-to-tax-lithium-as-a-strategic-mineral/
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Tantalum🇨🇳 today 53→60+7
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
Tungsten🇨🇳 today 88→91+3
🇺🇬 Uganda Mining and Minerals (Amendment) Bill 2026
in-consultation→moderate likelihood·flagged 114d ago · not yet law·matches Tungsten, Tantalum
If passed — Mandates 15% free-carried interest for Uganda National Mining Company (UNMC) in all new mining licences; introduces mandatory mineral buying centres; tightens local-content and value-addition obligations — changes joint-venture economics for all new Ugandan mining operations, raising effective cost-of-entry for foreign miners
Caveat — Amends the already-filed Uganda Mining and Minerals Act 2022 (UG action 1); expected to be enacted before end of 2025/26 parliamentary session per legal commentary; Bank of Uganda gold purchase programme and new mineral buying centres already being piloted — regulatory infrastructure being built ahead of formal enactment. Distinct from filed Uganda Gold Export Regulations 2024 (SI No. 30 of 2024).
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Tungsten🇨🇳 today 88→91+3
Tantalum🇨🇳 today 53→60+7
🇪🇺 EU CRMA Art. 22 Commission Implementing Decision — Strategic Raw Material Stock Benchmarks
awaiting-signature→high likelihood·flagged 112d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt, Tungsten, Niobium
If passed — Establishes the first legally binding "safe level" benchmark for EU strategic stocks of each of the 17 strategic raw materials listed in the CRMA Annex I; benchmarks used as reference by Member States, financial institutions, and industrial consumers to assess strategic supply risk; mandated every 2 years, so this is the first edition setting the baseline; informs CRMA Art. 23 monitoring obligations and is the evidential basis for Art. 24 corporate-reporting thresholds
Caveat — The May 24, 2026 deadline set by Parliament and Council in Reg. (EU) 2024/1252 has now passed. No OJ publication confirmed as of June 15, 2026 — Commission may have adopted quietly or is overdue. This is the first CRMA Art. 22 benchmark cycle and is legally distinct from: (1) the CRMA base regulation (filed 2024-05-23); (2) the Strategic Projects first designation (filed 2025-03-25); (3) the RESourceEU Amendment — CRMA revision (filed 2026-03-04). If confirmed adopted, severity=2 (establishes the measurement baseline for EU strategic material supply risk assessment and directly feeds corporate Art. 24 reporting obligations). Distinct from all filed EU-CRMA actions. Not in filing. md or upcoming. md.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
Tungsten🇨🇳 today 88→91+3
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
🇺🇸 USTR Plurilateral Agreement on Trade in Critical Minerals
in-consultation→moderate likelihood·flagged 109d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Binding plurilateral trade agreement among like-minded partners (US, EU, Japan and FORGE coalition members) establishing coordinated trade measures for critical mineral supply chains — including border-adjusted price floors, standards-based market access conditions, price-gap subsidies, and off-take agreement frameworks — to counter non-market pricing from state-backed producers and reduce concentrated supply-chain dependency; would create the first binding multilateral trade-law instrument specifically governing critical minerals flows, operating parallel to and distinct from the WTO goods schedule
Caveat — Distinct from FORGE (Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement, already filed as 2026-02-04-us-forge-critical-minerals-coalition — a diplomatic coordination platform, not a binding trade instrument); distinct from the filed bilateral action plans (US-Mexico 2026-02-04, US-Japan 2026-03-19, US-EU 2026-04-24 — these are bilateral work programmes, not the binding multilateral trade agreement being designed). Public comment period launched February 5, 2026; partners in scope include FORGE member states + EU. If finalised, this would be the highest-severity IPTM action in the register — creates a binding legal framework reshaping the economics of critical mineral trade globally. Context: companion to the US-EU-Japan joint statement of February 4, 2026 which directed the three parties to "develop Action Plans and explore a plurilateral trade initiative with like-minded partners on trade in critical minerals, which could include exploring the development of coordinated trade policies and mechanisms, such as border-adjusted price floors. "
Reference-class base rate
Bills at introduction (pre-committee) in US historically become law ~5% of the time (n=37,132, GovTrack — 117th–118th Congresses) — a base rate for comparable bills, not a forecast for this one. source ↗
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea Mining Bill 2025 — parliamentary enactment (replacement of Mining Act 1992)
announced→low likelihood·flagged 109d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Full replacement of the Mining Act 1992 with sweeping new statute: state acquires up to 30% equity in any new mining project (Kumul Minerals free-carry); special mining leases (SML) issued for initial 30-month periods with FID requirement to renew; mandatory landowner and community consultation before licence grant; Mining Development Authority (MDA) replaces current Mineral Resources Authority (MRA) as the sector regulator; CGT on extractive asset transfers now in force since the 2025 Income Tax Act (separate filed action); bill as drafted would reshape FDI terms for all existing and future mining permits including Wafi-Golpu (Newmont/Harmony 26 Moz Au, 4. 8 Mt Cu — SML long-delayed), Frieda River copper-gold (PanAust), and Ok Tedi expansion; PNG's 2023 Mining (New Porgera) Amendment Act handled Porgera separately
Caveat — The public-consultation-draft stage is already filed in the register as 2025-02-25-papua-new-guinea-mining-bill-2025 (filed action records the consultation launch). This upcoming entry tracks the NEXT stage: parliamentary enactment. Consultations closed April 4, 2025; minister aimed for September 2025 tabling but no confirmed passage found as of June 2026. Likelihood moderate — bill has broad government backing and a 15-year development history, but PNG legislative timelines are frequently extended; the May 2025 Marape cabinet reshuffle may have shifted ministerial priorities. Distinct from: 2023-10-13-papua-new-guinea-mining-new-porgera-amendment-act (single-mine statute); 2025-03-12-papua-new-guinea-national-petroleum-authority-act (petroleum, not mining); 2025-03-20-papua-new-guinea-income-tax-act-2025 (CGT on extractive transfers — already enacted separately).
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (low likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
CEMAC Common Mining Code — 6-member regional harmonisation (April 2026)
draft-published→moderate likelihood·flagged 107d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — If adopted, creates a unified mining regulatory framework across Cameroon, CAR, Congo-Brazzaville, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, and Chad — harmonising licensing regimes, fiscal terms, transparency obligations (EITI, KP, ICGLR), and environmental standards; would affect Eramet/Comilog manganese operations (Gabon), Sundance Resources iron ore (CAR), Chinese mining JVs (Congo-Brazzaville, CAR), and uranium projects across the region; if enacted, creates a regional investment-guarantee architecture that could facilitate cross-border mining finance and reduce individual-country treaty risk; structural precedent for pooled resource sovereignty in a region where individual states are renegotiating contracts (Gabon post-coup Décret 0276/2024 sovereign-equity mandate, CAR post-KP-readmission, Congo-Brazzaville mining-code review)
Caveat — Consultation meetings held April 2024 (Brazzaville), July 2024 (Riaba/Malabo), February 2025 (regional review workshop), April 2026 (Douala finalization session) — code still in draft form as of April-May 2026; CEMAC has a historically slow ratification track record (Tariff Union took ~15 years to operationalise); likelihood low until formal adoption at heads-of-state summit; DISTINCT from individually filed national mining code reforms: Gabon Décret 0276/2024 (sovereign substances regime), CAR Law 24-008 (new mining code). Filed upcoming 2026-06-20.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇹🇿 Tanzania Finance Bill 2026/27 — Parliament-passed June 23, 2026; mining: Mineral Research Fund (10% gross mineral revenue), Income Tax Act & VAT Framework Agreement exemptions
awaiting-signature→high likelihood·flagged 101d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt, Niobium
If passed — TZ Finance Bill establishes the Mineral Research Fund capitalised at 10% of gross mineral revenue (~TZS 141 billion/yr at 2025 collection levels); amends the Income Tax Act to formally recognise tax exemptions granted under individual mining Framework Agreements and introduces standard operating procedures — reduces discretionary government risk for large mining investors (Panda Hill niobium, graphite juniors, Buzwagi gold); parallel VAT amendments give equivalent statutory certainty for VAT exemptions; taken together, the bill moves Tanzania from discretionary tax administration toward a rule-of-law-based investor regime for all critical-mineral projects; budget targets Tanzania for top-4 niobium producer status (Panda Hill DA already signed March 24, 2026) and 50% geophysical survey coverage by 2030
Caveat — Tanzania fiscal year starts July 1; the Finance Act signature typically occurs last week of June. Budget speech delivered June 11, 2026 by Finance Minister Khamis Mussa Omar; Parliament approved June 23. Mining provisions in §§ amending Income Tax Act (Cap. 332) and VAT Act (Cap. 148) and establishing the Mineral Research Fund. Distinct from: filed 2025-06-30-tanzania-finance-act-11-of-2025 (prior year), filed 2026-03-24-tanzania-panda-hill-niobium-ferroniobium-development-agreement (the specific project DA), and filed 2026-04-15-tanzania-ministry-of-minerals-revokes-40-idle-mineral-exploration-licences. Severity 2: institutional reform that de-risks the investor regime rather than a direct trade restriction.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
🇨🇩 DRC Mines Minister Circular — 5% Worker Equity Enforcement (Articles 71 bis + 144 bis), January 30 2026
announced→low likelihood·flagged 104d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — All DRC mining operators (Glencore, CMOC, Ivanhoe Mines, Eurasian Resources Group, and 50+ others) must transfer 5% of share capital to Congolese employees by July 31, 2026 or face permit suspension; effectively forces equity restructuring across the entire DRC copper-cobalt belt; miners seeking moratorium as of June 18, 2026 — enforcement outcome by August 2026 will set the precedent
Caveat — Ministerial enforcement letter issued January 30, 2026 by Mines Minister Louis Watum Kabamba — activates dormant Art. 71 bis (5% employee equity in mining company capital) and Art. 144 bis (mechanics) of DRC Mining Code (Loi n° 18/001). Filed here (not filing. md) because DRC government websites (mines. gouv. cd, primature. gouv. cd) remain inaccessible per prior wakes — same constraint as the DRC Strategic Mineral Reclassification entry. Action IS already in effect and enforcement is underway (July 31, 2026 deadline); this is NOT speculative. DRC Chamber of Mines convened June 11, 2026 industry response meeting; companies arguing retroactive application is legally contested. Severity 3 expected if enforced. Distinct from: 2018-01-27-drc-mining-code-revision (underlying law), 2026-04-10-drc-strategic-reserve (ARECOMS mechanism), 2026-04-24-drc-tshisekedi-mining-export-revenue-audit.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (low likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇺🇸 US BOEM Proposed Rule — Administrative Revisions to OCS Hard Minerals Regulations (FR Doc. 2026-03690)
passed-committee→elevated likelihood·flagged 104d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Revises 30 CFR Part 580 to streamline 10 provisions governing prospecting, leasing, and operations for hard minerals (manganese nodules, cobalt-rich crusts, seafloor massive sulfides) on the US Outer Continental Shelf; eliminates environmental notification to adjacent state governors (§580. 31) and BOEM's own environmental review requirement (§580. 29); accelerates OCS hard mineral leasing pipeline in line with EOs 14285 and 14154 ("unleashing" OCS resources); comment period closed April 27, 2026; awaiting final rule
Caveat — First substantive revision of US OCS hard minerals regulatory framework in ~35 years; distinct from all filed US actions (no prior OCS hard minerals action in register). Severity 2: regulatory infrastructure that enables future OCS leasing rather than a direct production/export instrument; secondary-boem: https://www. boem. gov/newsroom/press-releases/boem-proposes-rule-changes-support-critical-mineral-exploration-and
Reference-class base rate
Bills at out of committee in US historically become law ~21% of the time (n=1,687, GovTrack — 117th Congress (2021–2023)) — a base rate for comparable bills, not a forecast for this one. source ↗
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (elevated likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇮🇳 India SASCI Mining Sector Reforms Component FY2026-27 — ₹5,000 crore incentive scheme to accelerate mine auction-to-production pipeline
announced→low likelihood·flagged 101d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Ministry of Mines issued operational guidelines for the Mining Sector Reforms component under Scheme for Special Assistance to States for Capital Investment (SASCI) FY2026-27, with total ₹5,000 crore (~USD 600M) incentive envelope to states; key components: (i) ₹250 crore one-time incentive to any state where ≥10% of pre-March-2026 auctioned major mineral blocks begin production+dispatch by end-2026; (ii) ₹100 crore baseline for systemic reforms (Unified Mining Portal integration, Pre-Auction Committees); (iii) ₹20 crore per block auctioned with pre-embedded forest and environmental clearances; scheme targets removing the "auction gap" — India has auctioned hundreds of mineral blocks since 2015 MMDR amendments but operationalisation lag remains a structural bottleneck; critical minerals relevance: India is running parallel programme of critical+strategic mineral auctions (7 tranches, 56 blocks auctioned by June 24, 2026) and this scheme incentivises states to bring those blocks into production faster; directly accelerates lithium (Rajasthan), REE (Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu), graphite (Odisha), and nickel (Odisha, Jharkhand) pipelines
Caveat — Source is secondary (PolicyEdge news aggregator). To migrate to filing. md, filer must verify the primary notification on mines. gov. in or pib. gov. in (search "SASCI Mining 2026-27" on PIB search). India BHAVYA industrial parks scheme (₹33,660 crore, March 18, 2026) is separately filed — SASCI is a distinct scheme targeting state-level mining-sector governance reform. Distinct from filed India Union Budget 2026-27 Customs notifications and Semiconductor Mission 2. 0. Severity 2 (supply-side demand-unlock rather than export control or FDI gate).
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (low likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
🇲🇳 Mongolia Minerals Law Comprehensive Amendment 2026 — ~40% of 2006 law revised; exploration-licence term cut, statutory critical-minerals definition, downstream-beneficiation licensing
draft-published→moderate likelihood·flagged 100d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt, Tungsten
If passed — Mongolia's cabinet approved and submitted to the State Great Khural a draft amending ~40% of the 2006 Minerals Law: (i) cuts the maximum exploration-licence duration from 12 to 6 years while raising holding fees (to curb speculative licence-trading/flipping); (ii) introduces a STATUTORY definition of "critical minerals" (aligned to Mongolia's 11-mineral list: molybdenum, manganese, nickel, copper, fluorspar, graphite, REEs, cobalt, lithium, PGMs, tungsten) and a SEPARATE licensing regime for downstream beneficiation plants; (iii) mandates mine-closure plans + financial bonding once a mine reaches 75% of its life; aims to accelerate licence issuance and expand the resource base. Mongolia is a structural China/Russia-flanked chokepoint pursuing Western REE/copper partnerships (US FORGE, JP, KR), so a domestic critical-minerals statutory regime + downstream-processing licensing reprices the entry terms for any foreign developer of Mongolian copper/REE/fluorspar (Oyu Tolgoi-adjacent, Erdenes critical-minerals SOE pipeline).
Caveat — As of 2026-06-27 the bill is cabinet-approved and submitted to Parliament — NOT yet passed, hence axis-2/upcoming. Likelihood moderate: ruling-party majority favours passage but Mongolian minerals-law amendments are politically contested and frequently amended in committee. Distinct from filed 2024-04-19-mongolia-sovereign-wealth-fund-law (SWF + 34% strategic-deposit state-stake amendments), filed 2025-01-15-mongolia-critical-minerals-support-law (the separate critical-minerals PROJECT-support draft law), and filed 2025-09-05-mongolia-mpe-royalty-calculation-shift (royalty base shift to the Mining Product Exchange). Severity 3 expected if enacted.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (moderate likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
Tungsten🇨🇳 today 88→91+3
🇪🇺 EU European Critical Raw Materials (CRM) Centre — establishing instrument
consultation-closed (pre-proposal; CFE + OPC both closed 2026-07-29)→elevated likelihood·flagged 67d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt, Tungsten
If passed — RESourceEU (COM(2025) 945, 3 Dec 2025) commits the Commission to establish a **European Critical Raw Materials Centre** in early 2026 with four functions: (a) generate **systemic market intelligence on CRM value chains**; (b) steer and de-risk finance into strategic projects with public and private partners; (c) support **strategic stockpiling**; and (d) run **joint purchasing** by pooling company orders and matchmaking demand with supply (a "raw materials platform" pooling orders and creating joint stocks, with an EU-coordinated stockpiling pilot to become operational in the following year). A **call for evidence + public consultation opened 19 May 2026**, and the Commission announced a **legislative proposal for Q2 2026**. Supply-relief on the material axis (EU-side aggregation, stockpiles and de-risking finance directly loosen chokepoint exposure for EU industrial buyers), but it also creates a new EU purchasing/allocation gatekeeper whose membership and priority rules will be contested. If it carries reporting or data-submission duties on participating companies, it becomes a second corporate-facing CRM information obligation alongside CRMA Art. 24.
Caveat — europa. eu/info/law/better-regulation/brpapi/groupInitiatives/14832) serves the registry entry directly. Verified: initiative **id 14832**, ref **Ares(2025)6918424**, planning ref **PLAN/2025/1815**, lead **DG GROW**, **isMajor: true**, foreseen act **PROP_REG**; the Commission's own dossier summary names the four pillars as **joint purchasing, stockpiling, investments, and raw materials intelligence**. (1) The **19 May 2026 launch IS confirmed** — both consultation publications carry publishedDate 2026/05/19; the call for evidence (CFE_IMPACT_ASSESS, titled "Legislative proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the EU Critical Raw Materials Centre") and the open public consultation (OPC_LAUNCHED) each ran a 10-week window that **CLOSED 2026-07-29 23:59:59**, drawing **138** and **72** submissions respectively. (2) The **Q2-2026 slip is confirmed, not a fetch artefact** — the PROP_REG publication still carries plannedPeriod "Q-2026-2" (2026-04-01 → 2026-06-30) with initiativeStatus **UPCOMING**, and a EUR-Lex check on 2026-07-31 finds no COM(2026) text establishing the Centre: ~31 days overdue by the Commission's own planning record, neither folded into another instrument nor silently adopted. **Legal form now known: a Regulation of the EP and Council** → full ordinary legislative procedure after the proposal lands, so an operational Centre is a 2027+ event. Cheapest future check: re-poll the same API endpoint and watch for the PROP_REG publication flipping to published. Distinct from filed 2025-12-03-eu-resourceeu-action-plan-com-2025-945 (the umbrella action plan announcing the intent — this item tracks the specific instrument establishing the Centre), from the CRMA base regulation (filed 2024-05-23), from the CRMA Art. 22 strategic-stock benchmarks item (line 103 above — that is a benchmark-setting implementing measure, this is an institution-creating instrument), and from the permanent-magnet scrap export restriction (line 141 above). ALSO a competitive-positioning item, not only a register item: a publicly-funded EU body with a statutory CRM market-intelligence remit is the most credible free substitute for our minerals intelligence layer — see the 2026-07-30 entry in docs/strategy/mandate_triggers_watch. md ("Demand-narrative signals").
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (elevated likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
Tungsten🇨🇳 today 88→91+3
🇲🇼 Malawi — Presidential Executive Order banning export of all raw/unprocessed minerals (effective 21 Oct 2025)
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 53d ago · not yet law·matches Niobium, Tantalum
If passed — President Peter Mutharika signed an executive order (dated 23 Oct 2025, effective 21 Oct 2025, announced at Sanjika Palace during a cabinet swearing-in) prohibiting the export of raw/unprocessed minerals extracted in Malawi — uranium, rare earth elements, niobium, graphite, tantalum, bauxite, coal, limestone, gemstones, heavy mineral sands, vermiculite, phosphate, rutile, gold, diamonds, copper and others — with an exemption for minerals processed/refined/value-added domestically per Malawian mining law. Announced alongside a suspension of new mining-licence issuance and a review of mining laws (2026/27 State of the Nation Address), plus a planned sovereign wealth fund. Stated rationale: local beneficiation, targeting up to USD 500m/yr once the Kasiya rutile/graphite deposit (Lilongwe) and Kangankunde rare-earth project (Balaka, Mkango Resources — Africa's prospective first new REE mine since 2017, targeting late-2026 production) are fully developed. Violators face fines/penalties under Malawian law. MW is currently the THINNEST country in the register (1 prior action) despite this breadth of minerals covered. Export-ban/beneficiation-mandate, same instrument class as Zimbabwe's SI 213/2022 raw-mineral bans and Guinea's 2026 gold-export ban already in the register.
Caveat — ENACTED (signed order, in force since 21 Oct 2025) but parked here rather than filing. gov. mw directly (TLS cert mismatch: cert is issued for agriculture. gov. mw, not statehouse. gov. mw) and the malawiace. com implementation-analysis piece cites no gov URL either. Same park-lot convention as the DRC ARECOMS / Sudan / Egypt / Morocco / Brazil / India lines above (real, already-enacted action; primary URL not independently locatable this wake). Dedup: action-index has only 1 Malawi action total, none overlapping (no prior MW export-ban or beneficiation-mandate action exists). Severity 3-4 expected given the breadth of minerals covered and MW's fast-growing REE/graphite production profile.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Niobium🇧🇷 today 61→71+10
Tantalum🇨🇳 today 53→60+7
🇲🇬 Madagascar — Council of Ministers lifts 16-year moratorium on new mining-permit issuance (except gold), effective ~29 Jan 2026
passed-vote→high likelihood·flagged 53d ago · not yet law·matches Cobalt
If passed — Madagascar's Council of Ministers approved resumption of mining-permit issuance on ~28-29 Jan 2026, ending a moratorium in place since 2010 (imposed during a political transition amid mining-title speculation). Roughly 1,650-3,000 pending permit applications accumulated during the freeze can now be processed — Mining Cadastre Bureau (BCMM) confirmed first-come-first-served processing with a maximum 3-month target for first issuances. Covers nickel, cobalt, graphite, rare earths, mineral sands/ilmenite, bauxite, sapphire, quartz and mica; GOLD remains explicitly excluded pending further review. Legal basis: implementation of the 2023 mining code (Loi n°2023-007, promulgated 27 Jul 2024) following mining-cadastre cleanup. SUPPLY-RELIEF — opens Madagascar's graphite (6 large projects, ~3% of global production / 8% of global reserves), nickel-cobalt (Ambatovy) and rare-earth potential to new entrants after a 16-year freeze; MG is currently one of the thinnest countries in the register (2 prior actions) despite this graphite/nickel relevance.
Caveat — ENACTED (Cabinet approved, permits already being processed per BCMM statements) but parked here rather than filing. primature. gov. mg returned a self-signed-certificate error on direct fetch, and app. primature. gov. mg's Conseil des Ministres listing did not surface a January 2026 session in the portion fetched. Same park-lot convention as the Malawi entry above and the DRC ARECOMS / Sudan / Egypt / Morocco / Brazil / India lines earlier in this file. Dedup: action-index has only 2 Madagascar actions total, neither about the permit moratorium. Severity 3 expected — moratorium lift affects licensing for nickel/cobalt/graphite/REE projects nationwide.
If passed & escalated to a full control regime — modelled impact (high likelihood)
Cobalt🇨🇳 today 75→81+6
Likelihood band is derived deterministically from the legislative stage (announced → low; draft-published / in-consultation → moderate; passed-committee → elevated; passed-vote / awaiting-signature → high) — a reproducible, source-traceable proxy, not a probability estimate. Where shown, the modelled impact-if-passed re-uses the same buyer-relative stress engine as the enacted scenarios above: it holds this company's production footprint fixed and escalates the proposed measure to a full export-licensing / control regime — the conservative upper bound for a measure that may pass only as a partial cap. The delta is the move from today's score to that stressed score; companies with no modelled production footprint show no delta.
Analyse the factors that might affect supply.
Supply-risk factor analysis (factor matrix) + The laws that threaten it
Art. 24(2)(c)
Assess vulnerabilities to supply disruptions.
Stress test + significant-vulnerability conclusion
Art. 24(3)
Where supplier data is unavailable, rely on Commission (Art. 20(4)) / public sources.
This report's basis — see Methodology & sources
Art. 24(4)
Where significant vulnerabilities are found, assess diversifying or substituting.
Report results, sources, significant risks and mitigations to the board.
This document — board-ready, PDF-exportable
This report pre-fills the Art. 24(3) public-source half of the assessment. The company-specific inputs — employee/turnover thresholds, bill-of-materials volumes, the tiered supplier map, and formal board adoption — remain the company's to complete; they are flagged as “company input” where they appear.
Why this dependence is structural, not transitional. The EU's own external auditor — the European Court of Auditors, Special Report “Critical raw materials for the energy transition — Not a rock-solid policy” (Feb 2026) — judges the bloc's 2030 extraction, processing and recycling targets to be out of reach (recycling runs 1–5% for 7 of 26 materials, and diversification shows no measurable effect). A separate industry-analyst assessment (Adamas Intelligence & Tradium, EU CRMA report, Apr 2024 — an interested-party commercial view, not an independent verdict) reaches a compatible conclusion that the 2030 rare-earth targets will be missed without an expedited push. The chokepoint this report maps is therefore a durable constraint the Act has not yet closed, not a gap that resolves on its own.