
February 03, 2025
Interpretation of prospective rock types confirmed ahead of Exploration Target
Astute Metals NL (ASX: ASE) (“ASE”, “Astute” or “the Company”) is pleased to advise that recently completed geological mapping and rock chip sampling at the 100%-owned Red Mountain Lithium Project in Nevada, USA has identified a new zone of lithium bearing clay-rich rocks (shown as the Dark green ‘Unit J’ in Figures 1-3) with lithium grades of up to 2,100ppm lithium.
Key Highlights
- Detailed geological mapping completed by consulting expert Professor Phillip Gans of the University of California Santa Barbara.
- Mapping identifies two priority clay-rich and lithium- hosting rock units at Red Mountain.
- Additional rock-chip sampling within ‘Unit J’ identifies a broad zone of mineralisation grading up to 2,100ppm Li.
- Mapped as the most clay-rich rock type. ‘Unit J’ has only been tested by one drill hole, indicating excellent upside.
- Continuous ‘Unit O’ trending approximately north-south through project will underpin the upcoming Exploration Target.
Unit J is a claystone and siltstone dominated rock type located in the west of the Red Mountain Project area which was identified as part of detailed geological mapping undertaken by consultant geologist Professor Phillip Gans of the University of California Santa Barbara. Professor Gans identified Unit J as the most clay-rich rock unit at the Project and recommended a targeted sampling campaign to establish the presence of lithium mineralisation. Subsequently a total of 38 sub-crop and outcrop samples were taken over an area of 800 x 500m of Unit J (Figure 1), with excellent assay results returned from 13 samples grading 1,000ppm lithium or greater. The sampling revealed outstanding exploration potential in this previously unsampled part of the project.
The mapping also identified two priority rock units for future drill targeting – Unit O and the previously mentioned Unit J. Unit O (shown in pale green in Figures 1-3) is dominated by silt and sandstone with clay-rich horizons, is interpreted to be continuous over a 7.8km extent across the Project, and has been tested by 12 of the 13 holes drilled to date, each of which has intersected strong lithium mineralisation7.
The continuous nature of Unit O will underpin a maiden Exploration Target for the Project and inform the drill targeting strategy for the first half of 2025, as the Company advances toward a Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate in the second half.
Astute Chairman, Tony Leibowitz, said:
“With the advice of expert independent consultants, we are continuing to systematically progress the Red Mountain Project. The identification of a new high-grade lithium-bearing unit increases the project’s potential, while the enhanced geological understanding allows the calculation of an Exploration Target, as well as contributes to de-risking of the upcoming drilling campaign, paving the way for a maiden Mineral Resource Estimate in the second half of 2025”
Figure 1. Mapped geology and rock chip lithium geochemistry with red box indicating new lithium zone in Unit J.
Background
Located in central-eastern Nevada (Figure 4), adjacent to the Grand Army of the Republic Highway (Route 6), which links the regional mining towns of Ely and Tonopah. the Red Mountain Project was staked by Astute in August 2023.
The Project area has broad mapped tertiary lacustrine (lake) sedimentary rocks known locally as the Horse Camp Formation2. Elsewhere in the state of Nevada, equivalent rocks host large lithium deposits (see Figure 4) such as Lithium Americas’ (NYSE: LAC) 62.1Mt LCE Thacker Pass Project2 and American Lithium (TSX.V: LI) 9.79Mt LCE TLC Lithium Project3.
Astute has completed substantial surface sampling campaigns at Red Mountain, which indicate widespread lithium anomalism in soils and confirmed lithium mineralisation in bedrock with some exceptional grades of up to 4,150ppm Li1,6 (Figures 1 and 3).
A total of 13 RC and diamond drill holes have been drilled at the project for a combined 1,944.72m. Both campaigns were highly successful with strong lithium mineralisation intersected in every hole drilled7.
Scoping leachability testwork on mineralised material from Red Mountain indicates high leachability of lithium of up to 98%, varying with temperature, acid strength and leaching duration8.
Click here for the full ASX Release
This article includes content from Astute Metals NL, licensed for the purpose of publishing on Investing News Australia. This article does not constitute financial product advice. It is your responsibility to perform proper due diligence before acting upon any information provided here. Please refer to our full disclaimer here.
The Conversation (0)
8h
Buffett Hands Over Reins, What’s Next for Berkshire’s Capital Strategy?
Legendary investor Warren Buffett is stepping down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A,NYSE:BRK.B) after six decades at the helm — but he's not quite ready to retire.
In a media release on Monday (May 5), Berkshire said its board of directors has unanimously voted to appoint Greg Abel, vice chairman, non-insurance operations, as president and CEO come January 2026.
Buffett, who has been CEO of Berkshire since 1970, will remain chairman of the company's board of directors.
He confirmed Abel as his successor in 2021, and as market watchers reflect back on Buffett's long career there's also keen interest about where Abel will lead Berkshire in the future.
What is Buffett's strategy?
Buffett took control of Berkshire in 1965, back when the company was a struggling textile manufacturer.
In a 2010 letter to shareholders, he recounted his experience in those early days:
"Berkshire was then only in textiles, where it had in the previous decade lost significant money. The dumbest thing I could have done was to pursue 'opportunities' to improve and expand the existing textile operation – so for years that’s exactly what I did. And then, in a final burst of brilliance, I went out and bought another textile company. Aaaaaaargh! Eventually I came to my senses, heading first into insurance and then into other industries."
Many people have tried to explain Buffett's success in recent years. A Financial Times article titled “How Buffet Did It” notes that his strategy is “more than great stock picks and insurance premiums.”
An older paper called "Buffett’s Alpha" suggests that his exposure to low-risk, cheap and high-quality stocks is key.
“(He) has boosted his returns by using leverage, and that he has stuck to a good strategy for a very long time period, surviving rough periods where others might have been forced into a fire sale or a career shift,” authors Andrea Frazzini, David Kabiller and Lasse Heje Pedersen state in the paper.
"We estimate that Buffett applies a leverage of about 1.7-to-1, boosting both his risk and excess return in that proportion. Thus, his many accomplishments include having the conviction, wherewithal, and skill to operate with leverage and significant risk over a number of decades," they also note.
Who is Buffett's successor?
Abel has been with Berkshire since 2000, when the firm bought MidAmerican, an energy company he had been running. He joined the board as vice chairman, non-insurance operations, in 2018.
MidAmerican was renamed Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE), with Abel serving as its CEO from 2008 to 2018. He was still the company’s chair at the time of this writing. At both MidAmerican and Berkshire, Abel was mentored by David Sokol, who seemed a likely successor to Buffett until he resigned from Berkshire in 2011.
Abel was named vice chairman in 2018 along with Ajit Jain. In a 2014 letter to shareholders, Buffett’s longtime right-hand man, Charlie Munger, who passed away in 2023, wrote about the two as potential successors.
"Ajit Jain and Greg Abel are proven performers who would probably be under-described as 'world-class.' 'World-leading' would be the description I would choose," said Munger.
"In some important ways, each is a better business executive than Buffett."
Buffett has also spoken highly of Abel, saying in 2023, "Greg understands capital allocation as well as I do. That’s lucky for us. He will make those decisions, I think, very much in the same framework as I would make them. We have laid out that framework now for 30 years."
Berkshire's path forward under Abel
Buffett's words indicate that he sees Berkshire and Abel following the framework he has laid out.
Of course, there may be some evolution. Morningstar analyst Gregg Warren believes that the "groundwork for a successful transition" at Berkshire has been in place for decades.
He also notes that Buffett and Munger were skilled at acquiring businesses that were a good cultural fit.
“We expect this to continue, believing that Berkshire’s culture of management autonomy and entrepreneurship has become institutionalized," Warren explains in a recent article.
"However, the new managers will probably work with a slightly different opportunity set, and we believe they will evolve Berkshire from what has historically been a reinvestment machine into one that is more focused on returning capital to shareholders, which is what we would expect of a company of this size with limited investment opportunities.”
Berkshire currently doesn’t pay a dividend, a point Warren highlights. This principle is because of Buffett’s belief that retained earnings should yield greater value than cash payouts.
Warren said this may change after Abel takes over, underlining that issuing a dividend could help Berkshire retain shareholders who may consider selling once Buffett is no longer at the helm.
Berkshire's recent activities include diversification of its portfolio via strategic acquisitions and investments.
In January 2025, Forest River Bus & Van, a Berkshire subsidiary, announced its acquisition of L.A. West Coaches to enhance its product portfolio in the luxury transportation market.
“This partnership represents a shared commitment to excellence and innovation,” said Douglas Wright, group general nanager of Forest River Bus & Van. “L.A. West Coaches’ proven expertise and dedication to quality align with our values, and we look forward to collaborating to expand our product range.”
BHE is also currently exploring the production of lithium carbonate and other minerals from its geothermal power plants in California's Imperial Valley, aligning with the company's interest in renewable energy and sustainability.
BHE Renewables publicized a joint venture with Occidental Petroleum (NYSE:OXY) in June 2024, saying it would be useful for the demonstration and deployment of TerraLithium’s direct lithium extraction.
Occidental is the owner of TerraLithium, a company that provides a technology platform for extracting lithium from geothermal and other brines to produce ultra-pure battery-grade lithium hydroxide and lithium carbonate.
Once the demonstration is successful, BHE Renewables plans to build, own and operate commercial lithium production facilities in California’s Imperial Valley. The joint venture also plans to license the technology and develop commercial lithium production facilities outside the Imperial Valley.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
17h
Ada Ann 1m drilling results confirm high-grade gold, up to 26g/t Au
Forrestania Resources Limited (ASX:FRS) (“FRS” or “the Company) is pleased to confirm the 1m results from the second phase of drilling at the Ada Ann prospect at the Bonnie Vale Project, near Coolgardie, in Western Australia’s prolific Eastern Goldfields.
Highlights:
- 1m drilling results from Ada Ann confirm high grade, including:
- AARC0029 – 7m @ 4.3g/t Au (from 72m), including 1m @ 25.6g/t Au
- AARC0028 – 3m @ 7.8g/t Au (from 74m), including 1m @ 22.2g/t Au
- AARC0024 – 3m @ 5.9g/t Au (from 82m), including 1m @ 16g/t Au and 2m @ 3.6g/t Au (from 70m)
- Mineralisation footprint extended ~60m south & ~30m north of historic mineralisation.
- Mineralisation remains open at depth and along strike in both directions, with the strike of Au mineralisation increased to ~310m.
- Significant FRS results from phase 1 drilling1 at Ada Ann include:
- AARC0002 – 2m @ 10.7g/t Au (from 62m), including 1m @ 21g/t Au
- AARC0006 – 7m @ 2.1g/t Au (from 34m), including 1m @ 7.3g/t Au
- AARC0020 – 6m @ 1.6g/t Au (from 62m), including 1m @ 5.8g/t Au
- Historic drilling results (previously released1) from Ada Ann include:
- AA28 – 4m @ 12.8g/t Au (from 25m)
- BR19 – 16m @ 2.6g/t Au (from 24m)
- AA05 – 6m @ 6.5g/t Au (from 16m)
Having already defined strong, consistent, high-grade Au results from the maiden drilling programme at Ada Ann, the Company is pleased to report continued exploration success with further high-grade Au drilling results from the Company’s phase 2 drilling programme.
Forrestania Resources’ Chairman John Hannaford commented:
“These 1m results from Ada Ann are highly significant, with grades up to 26g/t Au, underlining the high-grade potential of the system. Pleasingly, we are seeing some thickening of the mineralised zones at depth. The drill programme extended the known mineralised zones to the north and south and the prospect continues to remain open in all directions. We look forward to coming back to drilling at the Bonnie Vale project later in the year.”
Figure 1. Forrestania Resource’s Bonnie Vale Project (E15/1632 & E15/1534) is in close proximity to major gold mines and deposits. Map includes simplified geological interpretation with WA Government magnetics. ASX: EVN Mungari lies ~5km to the east of the Bonnie Vale Project area. (ASX: EVN Mungari mine life taken from ASX: EVN Mungari mine life extended to 15 years - 5th June 2023; Mungari Mineral resource estimate figure of 5.9Moz & Rayjax Ore Reserve taken from ASX: EVN Mungari Mineral Resource & Ore Statement as at 31st December 2023 - 14th February 2024; ASX: FML Bonnie Vale mineral resource update, 26th September 2023.)
Ada Ann – Phase 2 drilling programme
The Company has recently received the 1m Au assay results from its phase 2 drilling programme (14 RC holes for 1017m) at the Ada Ann prospect. The drilling was designed to follow up on the results from phase 1 and to increase the mineralisation footprint to the north, south and at depth.
Click here for the full ASX Release
This article includes content from Forrestania Resources, licensed for the purpose of publishing on Investing News Australia. This article does not constitute financial product advice. It is your responsibility to perform proper due diligence before acting upon any information provided here. Please refer to our full disclaimer here.
Keep reading...Show less
08 May
Voting Verdict: What Labor’s Win Means for Markets, Mining and Australia’s Economic Future
Labor Party leader Anthony Albanese made headlines after being re-elected as Australian prime minister in a landslide vote, becoming the first in over two decades to hold a second consecutive term.
The Guardian's latest count shows results from 140 out of 150 parliamentary seats, with Albanese holding 90 seats and opposition leader Peter Dutton securing 40. At least 76 seats are needed to win.
Experts have attributed Albanese’s victory to various factors, including policy shifts, environmental reforms and potential global trade disruptions following US President Donald Trump’s tariffs.
"Today, the Australian people have voted for Australian values: for fairness, aspiration and opportunity for all; for the strength to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need," a BBC article quotes Albanese as saying.
Albanese's edge over Dutton and opposition
Despite his overwhelming win, some see Albanese's victory was a surprise following his performance in 2024, when the Australian economy was reported to have grown weak and the federal budget was seen to be in deficit.
The Brisbane Times published an “Albanese report card” early in 2025 to review the prime minister’s accomplishments, saying that while it had been a "grim year," it wasn't time to write him off just yet.
Among other initiatives, the article mentions a significant policy shift to modify previously legislated stage three tax cuts, which aimed to provide greater benefits to low- and middle-income earners.
It’s safe to say that these efforts enhanced Albanese's appeal to a broader voter base, as did other recent efforts, such as a AU$1.3 billion early education fund to support childcare services and the "Help to Buy" scheme, which allotted AU$5.6 billion in federal equity to assist first-time homebuyers.
During his campaign, he vowed to lead more initiatives for the people, including a housing accord to construct 1.2 million new homes by 2030. Labor also proposed to reduce the lowest marginal tax rate from 16 to 14 percent over two years starting in July 2026, providing annual savings of up to AU$536 for low- and middle-income earners.
In relation to mining and resources, the Albanese government said it would establish a critical minerals strategic reserve upon re-election, pledging an initial investment of A$1.2 billion.
Dutton’s defeat has generally been linked to one thing: he is seen by many as “Australia’s Trump.”
A separate story by the BBC tackles this viewpoint, saying that Dutton’s hard-line conservatism and support for controversial immigration policies led to the comparison. The opposition candidate lost in his own hometown of Moreton Bay, Queensland, where a voter said that they “know him and don’t want him.”
Proposed policies by Dutton include a nuclear push, where he advocated for the construction of nuclear reactors at sites of decommissioned coal-fired power stations in New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria.
The Australia Institute said this would cost renewable jobs, adding that Australia Institute polling has found that fewer than one in 20 Australians (4 percent) are prepared to pay a nuclear premium.
The BBC adds in its article that Dutton had promised to cut approximately 40,000 public sector jobs, a move that reminded voters of billionaire Elon Musk's DOGE, or Department of Government Efficiency.
Mining industry reacts to Albanese's election win
Mining industry participants have had mixed reactions to Albanese's win.
The Minerals Council of Australia has raised questions about the strategic critical minerals reserve from the start, with CEO Tania Constable publishing a piece indicating that it may not be the best approach.
She recommends that Australia focus on fundamentals that will give it back an edge over other mining nations.
“That means lower energy prices, a windback of draconian industrial relations laws, and faster environmental approval times," her statement reads. The council also cites concerns regarding Labor’s proposed environmental reforms, especially in terms of investment barriers and regulatory delays.
Mining finance expert Melissa Johnson has a more favourable view of the reserve, noting that it could bridge the gap between discovery and commercialisation, facilitating the development of critical minerals.
Mining billionaire Gina Rinehart, CEO of Hancock Prospecting, noted that Labor should “carefully consider” its policies and encouraged the Liberal Party to "learn from the loss and rebuild."
She mentioned a recent trip to the US, during which she heard from parents with young children who were financially struggling to cope. According to Rinehart, many were shifting toward the Republican Party.
“Why are Americans getting it, and we aren’t?” she said, but still ended her statement on a positive note: “Let’s use this time to build, to enlarge the foundations of common sense, rationale and truth.”
For his part, Fortescue (ASX:FMG,OTCQX:FSUMF) founder and Executive Chair Andrew Forrest seems happy with Albanese’s win, saying he looks forward to working with the prime minister on addressing the energy transition.
“The (federal) Government’s commitments — including the Future Made in Australia plan, the Capacity Investment Scheme, the Hydrogen Production Tax Incentive and the Green Iron Fund — provide a strong foundation for a green energy future,” Australian Mining quotes Forrest as saying after the election.
The news outlet also looks at the reaction from Warren Pearce, chief executive of the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, who commented on the critical minerals production tax incentive (CMPTI) and planned strategic critical minerals reserve. According to Pearce, the CMPTI will “help levelthe playing field with global competitors and provide the certainty investors need to commit to major downstream processing projects in Australia.”
He regards the AU$1.2 billion strategic critical minerals reserve as a “crucial national investment” in the security of future supply chains for domestic industries and international allies.
Dr. Sarah Mitchell of the Australian Resources Institute has also commented on the Future Made in Australia initiative, describing it as a comprehensive attempt to leverage Australia's resources for long-term economic benefits.
Australia's mining sector under Albanese
Looking at Labor's plans and promises and the current global mining landscape, resource industry experts have made various predictions as to what could come next for Australia.
A Bloomberg round-up of analysts' opinions suggests that policy consistency is “likely to bolster confidence in the mining sector, encouraging both domestic and foreign investments.”
Still, some remain skeptical, especially given recent global trade tensions.
Gilbert + Tobin wrote in a 2024 review of the mining space that “as China's supply chain strategies evolve, Australia's mineral exports may face fluctuations, impacting investment flows.”
In terms of green energy and renewables, economists like Mike Dockery from the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre have questioned Australia's ability to compete with countries like China in low-cost manufacturing.
Amid all of these questions, the fact is that uncertainty remains high, and Australians have yet to see which promises will be kept and which predictions will turn out to be true.
“The domestic economy turned a corner at the end of 2024, but now the outlook is much more uncertain,” Dr. Luke Hartigan of the University of Sydney's School of Economics said in a federal election analysis.
“The real questions will be how well the political parties can show they’re listening, and how well can they answer key questions about giving all Australians a future of opportunity and a good life where they have access to the things we value,” noted Dr. Kate Harrison Brennan, director of the Sydney Policy Lab at the University of Sydney.
“These include things such as community, care, a place to call home, meaningful work, reliable and free health care, quality education, and nature conservation.”
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Australia for real-time updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
05 May
Tariff Fallout: GM's Shift Cut in Oshawa Triggers Strong Canadian Union Response
General Motors’ (GM) (NYSE:GM) decision to cut a third shift at its Oshawa, Ontario, assembly plant this fall has ignited a political and labor firestorm in Canada, with hundreds of workers impacted.
Unifor, the country's largest private sector union, issued an urgent call for action this past Friday (May 2) after GM confirmed it will be transitioning the plant to a two-shift operation. The automaker attributed the decision to evolving market conditions, including the 25 percent tariff the US imposed on Canadian-made vehicles in March.
GM spokesperson Marie Binette acknowledged in an email cited by CBC that the restructuring will “impact approximately 700 workers,” though she stopped short of calling the job losses layoffs.
“We are committed to supporting employees through the transition,” she said.
Unifor sees the move as a betrayal of Canadian workers and taxpayers, who helped revive the Oshawa facility after it was shuttered in 2019. The plant, which builds light- and heavy-duty Chevrolet Silverado pickup trucks for North America, reopened in 2021 with the help of significant public investment and union-backed production deals.
“GM Oshawa was reopened thanks to the hard work of our members and significant investments by the federal and provincial governments based on a promise to maintain good jobs and production,” said Chris Waugh, Unifor’s plant chairperson in Oshawa, in Friday's release. “We will not sit idly by as that promise is eroded one shift at a time.”
Lana Payne, national president at Unifor, also weighed in, commenting, “We will not allow GM to barter Canadian jobs to gain Donald Trump’s favor. Cutting the third shift at Oshawa Assembly is a reckless decision that deals a direct blow to our members and threatens to ripple through the entire auto parts supplier network.”
The timing of GM’s announcement — just days before Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is set to meet Trump in Washington — has further fueled tensions between the company and Unifor.
“The Trump tariffs are designed to crush Canadian production,” Payne added.
“But GM doesn’t get a free pass to abandon its commitments, and the US doesn’t get to free ride in Canada. Canadians invested millions to revive this plant. Cutting jobs now has consequences. The company has six months to fix this.”
Mounting economic pressure
The layoffs in Oshawa are only the tip of the iceberg. Jeff Gray, president of Unifor Local 222, said another 1,500 jobs in the broader supply chain could be affected by the shift cut.
The union is urging the Canadian government to immediately review GM’s status under the country's tariff remission framework — a system that grants tariff relief to companies on a conditional basis.
“If GM wants to sell in Canada, they need to build in Canada,” said Payne. “That message must be loud and clear.”
A recent report by Ontario’s Financial Accountability Office (FAO) estimates that US tariffs and Canada’s retaliatory measures could cost Ontario 68,100 jobs this year — most of them in manufacturing and related supply chains.
The FAO warns that job losses could balloon to nearly 138,000 by 2029 if trade tensions persist.
The same report predicts a “modest recession” in Ontario in 2025, with the province’s GDP growth cut in half and unemployment rising by 1.1 percent. Primary metal and motor vehicle parts industries are expected to be hit hardest.
Today’s news from GM is extremely tough for the workers in Oshawa and their families. These are hardworking people who have helped build Ontario’s auto industry. GM has reaffirmed its commitment to the Oshawa plant, which will continue building Ontario-made trucks for years to…
— Doug Ford (@fordnation) May 2, 2025
Ontario Premier Doug Ford also weighed in, calling the GM layoffs “extremely tough” in an X statement.
“These are hardworking people who have helped build Ontario’s auto industry,” Ford said. “We will continue doing everything we can to support a strong future for the facility and its workers.”
Under its collective agreement with Unifor, GM is obligated to meet with the union in the coming weeks to explore options to prevent or mitigate job losses in Oshawa. The union also plans to seek clarification on potential downstream effects, particularly at the St. Catharines powertrain plant, which supplies engines to Oshawa.
GM, which was Canada’s top-selling automaker in 2024 and retained that lead in Q1 2025, plans to refocus Oshawa production on Canadian truck sales, reducing exports to the US amid the tariff headwinds.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
01 May
Gilbert + Tobin: Australia's Mining Industry Must Adapt as Global Shifts Shape Market
2025 is far from over, but Australia’s mining sector is already facing one of its most complex landscapes yet.
In a report, Australian law firm Gilbert + Tobin discusses economic, political and technological changes in the sector following recent events such as the US tariffs, declining nickel and copper prices and miners’ ESG goals.
In the overview, the firm says Australia’s miners are being forced to rethink their strategies, with the prevailing theme being that the Land Down Under needs to start upping its game.
Tariffs reshaping Australian minerals trade
The current uncertainty around trade policy is causing inconsistencies in investment confidence globally.
Major miners such as BHP (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP)are already flagging concerns, with CEO Mike Henry recently expressing worry about slower growth and the consequences of disrupted trade.
"Despite the limited direct impact of tariffs on BHP, the implication of slower economic growth and a fragmented trading environment could be more significant. China's ability to shift toward a consumption-led economy and for trade flows to adapt to the new environment will be key to sustaining the global outlook," he said.
Gilbert + Tobin states in its report that Australian lithium and rare earths companies are facing "significant" questions.
While the US Inflation Reduction Act had boosted demand prospects, the outlook is now less certain. At the same time, China is increasing its own output and may need to buy less from Australia.
The firm notes that companies may have to find new or additional trading partners for these reasons.
A potential bright spot for Australia is China's critical minerals export restrictions to the US. Australia has a chance to prove its capacity as a minerals supplier, especially for countries seeking alternatives to Chinese supply.
The report cites Lynas Rare Earths (ASX:LYC,OTC Pink:LYSCF) and Iluka Resources (ASX:ILU,OTC Pink:ILKAF) as “well-positioned” companies, with the former recognised as the world's largest non-Chinese producer of separated rare earth materials, and the latter currently developing Australia's first fully integrated rare earths refinery.
“Despite these headwinds, Australia is benefiting from new strategic alliances,” Gilbert + Tobin wrote.
“The Australian Government’s partnerships with the EU and Japan on critical minerals are opening doors for investment and export growth. However, miners must carefully navigate regulatory challenges and shifting trade policies to secure long-term stability.”
Miners facing low metals prices
While the gold price remains high, other metals have sloped downward in 2025.
Copper prices have faced weakness this year, as have nickel prices, prompting asset pauses and shutdowns.
WIN Metals (ASX:WIN) pivoted from nickel to gold this year, and in 2024 BHP shut down its Nickel West operations in Western Australia following increased capital costs and uncertain price recovery.
Gilbert + Tobin recommends that Australia use its strong regulatory framework to maintain its position as a country worth investing in, saying miners should focus on production costs, leverage and hedging strategies.
Is ESG still important to Australian mining?
Looking at ESG, Gilbert + Tobin notes that it shifted away from being just a buzzword in 2020, becoming key to business as the country pushed nationwide ESG goals in a bid to decarbonise by 2050.
Major diversified miner Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO), for example, is aiming for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and plans to invest US$5 billion to US$6 billion in decarbonisation projects.
For its part, BHP has reduced its Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 24.1 percent since December 2022, and is progressing towards a 30 percent reduction by 2030. Fortescue (ASX:FMG,OTCQX:FSUMF) is targeting net-zero emissions by 2040, with initiatives like the development of a zero-emissions Infinity Train.
Other miners, such as AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE:AU,JSE:ANG), have had a more complicated time with ESG.
In September 2024, Financial Times reported that the company was restructuring its portfolio to align with ESG goals, including plans to divest from coal assets, when a fire broke out at its Grosvenor mine in Queensland.
This event could reduce the valuation of its coal assets by up to $1 billion, highlighting the financial risks companies may encounter when ESG objectives intersect with operational challenges.
But what is the state of ESG in Australia's mining industry as global turmoil takes centre stage?
Gilbert + Tobin believes it still remains relevant, but could lose some traction.
“In our view, it is too early to call the end of ESG as a major driver of activity in the metals and mining sector. Carbon emissions remain a focal point, with mining companies under pressure to reduce their carbon footprints through renewable energy adoption and electrification of fleets," the report reads.
"However, we may begin to see a reduction in some initiatives on the edge of the ESG equation for miners, including Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, preservation and enhancement of biodiversity and responsible procurement, particularly if these become a focus of retaliatory trade action in the United States," it continues.
The firm believes if ESG progress stalls Australia could face major setbacks, and notes that the mining industry will likely need to boost spending and effort in order to maintain momentum.
Australia's next steps
For Gilbert + Tobin, Australia's mining companies will have to be more open than ever to change.
“One thing is clear: the mining companies that thrive will be those that balance profitability with sustainability, efficiency with responsibility and innovation with adaptability," it states in its report, adding that while the road ahead may be uncertain, opportunities remain vast, especially for those who are willing to evolve.
The Minerals Council of Australia makes its own recommendations in a recent statement on tariffs.
It breaks down its suggestions into three parts: strengthen global competitiveness, accelerate free trade deals and secure supply chain partnerships with like-minded economies.
“Australia has long been a reliable and trusted global supplier of minerals and critical materials, with our enduring trade and defence partnership with the United States forming the backbone of decades of economic and strategic collaboration,” the council notes. “These trade tariffs undermine this crucial alliance, destabilising supply chains and increasing costs to consumers. It is a race to the bottom.”
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
30 April
Can Trump Fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell? Inside the White House vs. Fed Showdown
US President Donald Trump has publicly assailed Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell in recent weeks, calling him “a major loser,” and declaring that his "termination cannot come fast enough."
Yet behind the fiery rhetoric lies a more complex question: Can the president fire the head of the Fed?
Trump-Powell feud heats up
Trump's frustration with Powell isn’t new.
Since appointing him in 2017 to replace Janet Yellen, the president has repeatedly criticized Powell for not lowering interest rates fast or far enough. The most recent barrage of attacks came after Powell signaled that the central bank will not rush into cutting rates despite easing inflation and rising political pressure.
“He’s keeping rates too high,” Trump complained during a White House event on April 23. “He historically has been late … he was recommended by a certain person I’m not particularly happy with.”
Trump’s comments followed a string of similar criticisms in prior weeks.
When the European Central Bank cut its key interest rate, Trump demanded that Powell follow suit, saying on social media that the Fed chair “is always TOO LATE AND WRONG.”
Powell, for his part, has maintained the Fed’s independence and downplayed the political noise, telling reporters this past January that he has had “no contact” with Trump. The Fed chair also reiterated that rate decisions will be made based on economic data — not politics.
Powell’s appointment and the Fed’s role
The Fed chair is selected by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Powell was first confirmed as Fed chair in February 2018 for a four year term, which ended in 2022; he was then reappointed to the position in May 2022. In addition to that, he is a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System until 2028 unless he resigns or is removed for cause.
The Fed plays a critical role in US economic stability. Its primary tools include setting interest rates, regulating banks and maintaining price stability and full employment.
Under Powell’s leadership, the Fed aggressively raised interest rates starting in 2022 to combat inflation, which had reached levels not seen in decades. Inflation began to subside by mid-2023 and stood at 2.4 percent as of March of this year. However, the Fed has kept rates at 4.25 to 4.5 percent, citing lingering risks.
Can Trump legally fire Powell?
The short answer: not easily, and possibly not at all.
Fed governors, including the chair of the central bank, are protected by statute.
According to the Federal Reserve Act, a board member can only be removed “for cause.” Courts have traditionally interpreted “cause” to mean serious misconduct or legal wrongdoing, not simply policy disagreements.
Trump and his advisers have reportedly explored whether they could dismiss Powell under this clause. However, the Wall Street Journal reported in an exclusive that senior White House officials, including Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, have warned the president that such a move would likely spark legal battles, spook markets and ultimately fail to deliver the interest rate cuts he desires.
Lutnick also reportedly told the president that efforts to fire the Fed chair likely would not lead to any practical change on interest rates due to board members aligning their policymaking approaches with Powell.
In an April 22 press conference, Trump appeared to walk back his earlier threats: “I have no intention of firing Powell. This is a perfect time to lower interest rates. If he doesn’t, is it the end? No. It’s not.”
The last major challenge to Fed independence occurred in the 1970s.
Oval Office recordings revealed at a later date that President Richard Nixon had pressured then-Fed Chair Arthur Burns to ease monetary policy ahead of the 1972 election. Burns acquiesced.
The result: short-term economic growth followed by years of painful inflation that ultimately required the draconian measures of Fed Chair Paul Volcker in the early 1980s to correct.
While the Fed’s independence isn’t ironclad in the Constitution, a broad bipartisan consensus has emerged over the past several decades to shield the institution from political interference.
Legal experts, including economist Tim Mahedy, argue that removing a Fed chair for policy decisions would set a dangerous precedent and invite a “systemic financial event.”
There’s also ongoing litigation that could influence the issue.
The Department of Justice is attempting to overturn a 90 year old legal precedent that protects independent agency officials like Powell from being dismissed without cause. While the effort isn't directly about the Fed, it has raised alarms among those who see it as a potential erosion of institutional safeguards.
What's at stake for the US economy?
Despite Trump’s desire for looser monetary policy, Powell has been backed by economists who argue that the Fed is right to proceed cautiously amid the current economic turmoil.
Interest rates remain well above the near-zero levels of the COVID-19 era, and while inflation has cooled, new risks — such as Trump’s escalating tariffs on Chinese imports — could stoke price pressures again.
Trump has imposed 145 percent tariffs on many Chinese goods, with exemptions for some electronics. He told reporters that tariffs will "come down substantially," but has not announced a timeline.
Meanwhile, major retailers like Walmart (NYSE:WMT) and Target (NYSE:TGT) warned during a White House meeting that tariffs could increase costs for consumers. Even Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) CEO Elon Musk, now a senior adviser in the Trump administration, said in a recent earnings call that he will push the president to roll back tariffs.
Powell stands firm — for now
Powell has consistently affirmed that the Fed will base its decisions on data, not presidential pressure.
“The arrangement of central bank independence is very widely understood and supported in Washington, in Congress, where it really matters,” he said during a mid-April speech in Chicago.
Still, the president’s attacks have rattled some on Wall Street, not least because Trump has shown more willingness in this term to test legal and institutional limits. In contrast to Trump's first term, when Powell faced pressure, but never a formal removal threat, today's atmosphere has some investors nervously watching for signs of a deeper standoff.
For now, however, Powell’s job appears safe. Trump’s advisers appear to have convinced him — at least temporarily — that firing Powell would hurt more than help. While the battle over interest rates may continue, Powell looks set to remain at the helm of the US central bank until 2026 — whether the president likes it or not.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Latest News
Latest Press Releases
Related News
TOP STOCKS
American Battery4.030.24
Aion Therapeutic0.10-0.01
Cybin Corp2.140.00
Investing News Network websites or approved third-party tools use cookies. Please refer to the cookie policy for collected data, privacy and GDPR compliance. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to our use of cookies.