Skip to main content

Supply Chains Under Pressure: Can the West Secure Critical Metals? | May 14, 2026

Investor TV May 21, 2026

Summary

China's expanded export restrictions on tungsten and antimony — over 80% of global supply — expose Western defense and technology supply chains.

Panelists argue processing, not mining, is the bottleneck — APT refining turns concentrate into the intermediate material manufacturers use and costs hundreds of millions.

Stefan Müller doubts the January 2027 Pentagon tungsten mandate is reachable and calls Europe's Critical Raw Materials Act a toothless paper tiger on funding.

American Tungsten and NevGold plan tailings-first restarts, using low-capex early cash flow to fund main-mine builds while limiting dilution.

Tungsten demand could double by 2030 with no US production since 2015; speakers urge backing projects profitable far below today's prices.

Key points on NevGold Corp

  • CEO Brandon Bonifacio says NevGold's antimony is oxide rather than sulfide, so it can go from ore to final product at the project site without third-party downstream refining.
  • The antimony sits in at-surface leach pads left by the 1990s gold operation; drilling reported as of the May 2026 panel shows high-grade oxide mineralization that is pervasive and consistent across the pads.
  • A formal mineral resource estimate for the leach-pad antimony is expected about a month after the panel, followed by an engineering study in H2 2026 and then permitting on already-disturbed land.
  • Bonifacio targets a vertically integrated antimony supply chain at the project during calendar 2027 — probably not by the January 1 mandate date, but within that year.
  • NevGold closed over $42 million in financing and sits north of $50 million, and Bonifacio says the company should not need further equity financing.

Stefan Müller's takeaways

  • Top takeaway Doubts the January 1, 2027 Pentagon mandate is reachable: mining is the smaller challenge, while the processing know-how and patents the West handed China over two decades cannot be rebuilt quickly, even with money.
  • Calls the EU Critical Raw Materials Act a 'toothless paper tiger' — its 2030 targets (10% extraction, 25% recycling, 40% processing, no more than 60% from a single country) are unachievable and unattached to investment.
  • Says the German government fund has had €1 billion available for two years but deployed only about $200 million into two projects, while the only financing offers for Tungsten West came from the US and Japan.
  • Has lost confidence that Europe can deliver raw-material independence and argues Europe must also reduce dependence on the US, pointing to Japan's JOGMEC model as the approach its politicians avoid.
  • Warns that most junior critical-minerals names lack a clear path to production, so institutional money only comes for credible teams — and sees German family offices as a possible bridge for the $20-50 million funding gap.

Jon Franklin's takeaways

  • Top takeaway Moderates the panel, framing the thesis around China's control of over 80% of global tungsten and antimony supply and the January 1, 2027 Pentagon deadline for Chinese-origin tungsten.
  • Relays live-audience questions and cites the prior panel with EQ Resources' Craig Bradshaw on processors preferring higher-grade tungsten feed.

Mounir Barazi's takeaways

  • Top takeaway Argues the biggest gap in the tungsten supply chain is APT refining — hundreds of millions of dollars to build and a long time to commission — which the Pentagon mandate is meant to force into existence.
  • Breaks the tungsten chain into three stages (concentrate, APT refining, powder and heavy alloys) and argues the panel's mining projects matter because building a refinery is not commercially viable without feedstock.
  • Notes China also controls two downstream antimony compounds — trioxide for electronics and flame retardants, and sodium antimony for solar applications — with no commercially mature substitutes.
  • On risks, sees dilution as the biggest danger in very early-stage projects and flags policy risk from Europe moving too slowly; advises assessing risk project by project.
  • Sees encouraging macro factors and supportive policy with many names still valued as juniors, but a limited rerating window as information moves fast.