But then there is another fear. If these colossal resource extraction specialists hold hands, there would be a historic concentration of market authority over minerals and metals (resources indispensable to modern civilisation) in the hands of a few, who could indirectly have an indispensable opinion in the global economy. And China, being the factory of the world, and because it requires these resources for its industrial engine, would erect the most impenetrable regulatory fortresses to maintain autonomy and global competitiveness.

“China’s antitrust regulator is likely to be concerned ⁠about a ‌combined entity’s concentration in copper production and marketing, as well as iron ore marketing. Beijing may also see an opportunity to force asset sales to friendly entities,” several analysts and lawyers told Reuters.

In fact, well before the Glencore talks were made public, Rio Tinto was exploring an asset-for-equity swap aimed at trimming the ⁠11% holding of its biggest shareholder, state-run Aluminium Corporation of China, known as Chinalco. Rio Tinto’s Simandou iron ore mine in Guinea and Oyu Tolgoi copper mine in Mongolia were reportedly among the assets of interest to Chinalco.

“To get the Glencore deal over the line, assets in Africa are especially likely sales candidates, as Latin America has become less accepting of Chinese investment. China will see this as an opportunity to squeeze out assets,” said Glyn Lawcock, an analyst at Barrenjoey in Sydney.

The Copper Market

This proposed megacorporation would own an overwhelming share of worldwide production across multiple strategic commodities.

Let’s take the copper market. The combined behemoth would control roughly 10% of global mine output, establishing dominance over a metal indispensable to electrical grids and decarbonisation efforts. Iron ore concentration would prove even more striking as the merged group would govern approximately 18% of seaborne iron ore commerce, the essential feedstock for steel manufacturing.

China consumes more copper and iron ore than any nation on Earth. Its regulators scrutinise with profound suspicion any supply consolidation that might grant producers excessive leverage over domestic purchasers. Beijing’s competition authorities have consistently demonstrated scepticism toward mining megamergers that concentrate bargaining power against Chinese industrial interests.

Investors and analysts also see the will to control future copper supply as the prime motivator behind the Glencore-Rio Tinto merger talks.

A premium of 15% to 30% to Glencore’s early January 2026 share price could get the deal done and avoid spurring Australian rival BHP bidding for the company, RBC mining analyst Ben Davis said, citing recent conversations with investors. The move will end up valuing Glencore at up to USD 87 billion.

“Securing copper – not creating near-term value – is the key rationale for the transaction,” Davis stressed.

Glencore’s market capitalisation is about USD 76 billion, while Rio is worth about USD 145 billion. A combined “GlenTinto” would leapfrog BHP as the world’s largest mining company by market value, while significantly boosting Rio Tinto’s long-term copper exposure at a time when electrification-driven demand growth is colliding with a thin project development pipeline across the globe. The deal, if pulled off in January 2026, will be a well-timed one, given the way copper prices set multiple records amid supply disruptions and US trade uncertainties, which are fuelling a sharp rally for base metals.

Rio, which expanded into lithium in 2025 with the USD 6.7 billion acquisition of Arcadium Lithium, expects commodities output to rise about 3% a year by 2030 as new assets such as Guinea’s Simandou iron ore mine and Mongolia’s Oyu Tolgoi copper complex start producing. At this juncture, Glencore’s copper assets will be the real prize for the British-Australian multinational mining company. The assets which Rio may end up acquiring include a 44% share in the Collahuasi copper mine in Chile.

“While Rio has got a lot right in recent years in developing Oyu Tolgoi and Simandou, the growth beyond this current phase is far less exciting with projects (including copper assets like Resolution in the US and Nuevo Cobre in Chile) either too small to make a difference or still in the development phase or stuck in courts,” Davis noted.

Historical Precedents Illuminate The Path

Previous consolidation attempts illuminate Chinese regulatory philosophy with instructive clarity. When BHP mounted its audacious bid for Rio Tinto in 2008, Chinese resistance figured prominently in the deal’s ultimate disintegration. More recently, in 2020, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation torpedoed Glencore’s proposed acquisition of coal assets from Rio Tinto. Officials cited grave concerns about excessive concentration in seaborne coking coal supply chains.

In fact, Glencore has landed in similar situations before. In 2013, Beijing forced the Swiss-based company to sell its stake in the Las Bambas copper mine in Peru, one of the world’s largest, to Chinese investors ‍for nearly USD 6 billion in exchange for the Xstrata takeover. As of January 2026, Glencore has also agreed to sell Chinese customers minimum quantities of copper concentrate at certain prices for just over seven years amid the Xi Jinping government’s growing discomfort over the fact that the Rio Tinto-Glencore joint venture will have too much power over the copper market.

These interventions telegraph that Chinese authorities will dissect the combination with microscopic intensity, particularly given this deal’s potentially seismic ramifications across multiple commodity ecosystems. In fact, as per Reuters, the regulators will also be examining a planned USD 53 billion copper-focused merger between Anglo American and Teck Resources, given the fact that copper assets are in even higher demand today, given the metal’s role in the global economy’s green transition and shift towards artificial intelligence (AI).

Divestment Calculus

To mollify regulatory anxieties, the merged corporation would likely sacrifice substantial holdings, especially in markets where the combined entity would wield disproportionate influence. Industry observers identify iron ore operations in Australia’s Pilbara region as prime divestment candidates. Both companies operate extensive facilities there that feed Chinese steel mills directly.

Copper assets might also face the chopping block, though this scenario presents greater complexity. The metal’s pivotal role in global energy transformation and the copper supply’s relatively dispersed character complicate matters. The merged entity might contend that maintaining integrated copper operations advances broader environmental objectives and energy security imperatives.

Additional divestment possibilities encompass coal holdings, where Glencore maintains considerable operations, plus various base metals or industrial minerals where the companies’ portfolios intersect substantially.

Notwithstanding regulatory obstacles, the merger’s strategic architecture remains intellectually compelling for both enterprises. The combination would unlock operational synergies, compress costs through enhanced scale economies, and position the unified entity to capitalise on surging demand for energy transition metals. The deal would simultaneously furnish the combined company with augmented financial resources to bankroll new mine development and processing infrastructure.

Glencore’s trading division, among the planet’s most sophisticated commodity trading operations, would infuse another critical dimension into Rio Tinto’s predominantly extraction-focused business paradigm. Integrating mining and trading capabilities could generate exceptional value through superior market intelligence and optimised production-sales coordination.

Geopolitical Reverberations

And it’s not just a Chinese thing. There will be even more exhaustive scrutiny in the European Union (EU), the United States and Australia as these countries have formidable watchdogs and antitrust enquiries. But the Chinese verdict remains the most important, as China is ultimately the major destination for mined minerals.

Regulatory outcomes could establish momentous precedents for subsequent mining industry consolidation. A successful transaction, even requiring significant asset sales, might embolden other miners to pursue ambitious combinations. Conversely, regulatory rejection could freeze M&A activity across the sector for years, perhaps decades.

Timing any merger attempt demands exquisite judgment. Current commodity market conditions, with numerous metal prices languishing amid economic uncertainties, might incline regulators toward efficiency-enhancing combinations. Alternatively, mounting concerns about supply security amid escalating geopolitical tensions could prompt authorities toward greater caution regarding strategic commodity supply chain concentration.

As Rio Tinto and Glencore navigate continuing discussions, both must traverse a labyrinthine regulatory landscape with surgical precision. Success demands more than identifying palatable asset divestitures. The companies must construct persuasive arguments demonstrating how their merger serves expansive interests in guaranteeing stable, sustainable commodity provision. This is not going to be an easy battle for these companies.

The post IF Insights: China braces for GlenTinto copper dominance appeared first on International Finance.

The trilateral conference between Egypt, Greece, and Cyprus in Cairo coincided with the release of this data. Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis met with President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi at the Egyptian-Greek-Cypriot Economic Forum on the fringes of the summit.

In particular, Egyptian exports to Greece decreased from USD 1.3 billion in the same time in 2023 to USD 1 billion in the first 11 months of 2024. On the other hand, Greek imports to Egypt were USD 530 million, a modest increase from USD 523 million in the first 11 months of 2023.

During this time, Egypt’s USD 610 million worth of exports to Greece included fuels, mineral oils, and distillation products. Fertilisers brought in USD 92 million, fruits and vegetables brought in USD 84 million, plastics and associated goods brought in USD 46 million, and iron and steel brought in USD 33 million.

At USD 274 million, fuels, mineral oils, and distillation products were Egypt’s main imports from Greece. Cotton brought in USD 120 million, fruits and nuts USD 44 million, tobacco USD 15 million, and electrical appliances and machinery USD 15 million.

In fiscal year 2023/2024, remittances from Egyptians employed in Greece totalled USD 15 million, up from USD 14.3 million in the prior fiscal year. In fiscal year 2023/2024, Greek employees in Egypt sent USD 3.4 million home, an increase from USD 2.7 million in fiscal year 2022/2023.

Greek investments in Egypt increased from USD 6.7 million in the previous fiscal year to USD 13.9 million in the 2023–2024 fiscal year. In the meantime, Egyptian investments in Greece increased from USD 700,000 in fiscal year 2022/2023 to USD 1 million in fiscal year 2023/2024.

In 2024, the population of Egypt was 107.2 million, whilst that of Greece was 10 million. By the end of 2023, there were estimated to be about 40,000 Egyptians living in Greece.

Relatedly, during the first 11 months of 2024, trade between Egypt and Cyprus totalled USD 217 million. During this time, Egyptian exports to Cyprus totalled USD 181 million, a substantial rise above the USD 96 million reported during the same period in 2023. In contrast, Egyptian imports from Cyprus increased from USD 12 million to USD 36 million during the same time in 2023.

Egypt’s top exports to Cyprus were plastics (USD 6 million), paper (USD 8 million), fertilisers (USD 43 million), and iron and steel (USD 92 million). Fuels and mineral oils accounted for USD 28 million of Egypt’s total imports from Cyprus, followed by machinery and electrical appliances at USD 4 million and pharmaceuticals at USD 1 million.

In fiscal year 2023/2024, remittances from Egyptians employed in Cyprus came to USD 14.4 million, up from USD 13.5 million in the year before. On the other hand, in fiscal year 2023/2024, Cypriot employees in Egypt sent USD 950,000, a minor decrease from USD 970,000 in the previous year.

In fiscal year 2023/2024, Cypriot investments in Egypt reached USD 114.6 million, a significant rise from USD 35.2 million in the year before. In fiscal year 2023/2024, Egyptian investments in Cyprus totalled USD 40 million, up from USD 17.3 million in fiscal year 2022/2023.

In 2024, the population of Egypt was 107.2 million, but that of Cyprus was 1.4 million. By the end of 2023, there were an estimated 4,000 Egyptians residing in Cyprus.

The post Egypt’s trade reaches USD 1.5 Billion with Greece, USD 217 million with Cyprus appeared first on International Finance.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has pushed for the usage of lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, produced mainly by Chinese vendors. He claimed in March 2023 that “the vast bulk of the heavy lifting for electrification will be iron-based cells.”

However, due to the political tensions between Washington and Beijing, having Chinese suppliers develop battery manufacturing in the United States is challenging.

The largest electric vehicle manufacturer in the world stated that LFP batteries would be used for “short-range” heavy electric trucks it refers to as “Semi Light” in its paper on “Master Plan Part 3”. However, it did not provide additional information, such as a launch date.

In 2022 December, Tesla began shipping its semi-electric trucks with nickel-based batteries and a more extended 500-mile range between charges. Tesla has already declared that it will also release a model with a 300-mile range.

The company also said that compared to the 75 kWh of the Model Y and Model 3 batteries, the projected small electric vehicles would have LFP batteries with a capacity of 53 kilowatt-hours (kWh).

In March 2023, Tesla announced that it would slash assembly costs in half for the following models of vehicles that would be produced at its factories in Mexico and other countries.

Tesla stated that LFP batteries would also be used in its mid-sized Model 3 and Model Y vehicles without a timeframe.

Most of Tesla’s Model 3 and Model Y vehicles sold in the US currently have nickel-based batteries.

Elon Musk and other LFP proponents pointed to the plentiful supply and lower cost of iron as a crucial factor, thus outweighing the disadvantages preventing the widespread deployment of LFP cells. In addition, they have a lesser range than nickel-based cells since they are larger, heavier, and typically carry less energy.

Compared to nickel-based cells, LFP cells typically have a lower fire risk.

Tesla presently purchases LFP batteries from Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. in China, a company without a facility in the US. LG Energy Solution, a South Korean supplier to Tesla, announced that the envisioned Arizona factory would produce LFP batteries.

The company will be building a new battery factory in Shanghai, thus increasing its investment in China.

The construction of the facility will start in the third quarter of 2023 and plans are to have it completed by the second quarter of 2024 when production is slated to begin, suggested news reports.

The Shanghai facility will produce some 10,000 Megapacks annually, with a total capacity equivalent to 40 GWh, Tesla said.

China accounts for about a quarter of Tesla’s revenues and Shanghai is already home to the EV maker’s car factory. In February 2023, the factory rolled out close to 90,000 cars.

China reportedly has a much better-developed EV battery supply chain than the other countries, which, as per analysts, might have to do with Tesla’s decision to choose a new factory location in the world’s second-largest economy, as the country also sports lower production costs than alternatives.

Image Credits: Tesla

The post Tesla to switch to iron-based batteries for electric trucks as it beefs up China investments appeared first on International Finance.

Prof. Keyvan Jafari Tehrani

September 12, 2013: The Iran Customs Administration released statistics in connection with the foreign trade during the first four months of the Iranian year 1395 (from March 21^st through July 21^st, 2016). The statistics show that Iran steel industry has performed above expectations and has exported more than two million tonnes (MT), which is more than a 77 % increase in comparison with the same period of the preceding year. By taking into account of different types of steel products, we exported 2.52 MT of steel amounting to $124,276,000. The export of steel products in between June 21^st to July 21^st, 2016 has been 521,400 tonnes, which shows an 86 % growth in comparison to the same month in the past year and is above the average of the first four months of the year.

Mobarakeh Steel Company gained the first rank, followed by Hormozgan Steel Company. The planned export for the current Iranian year 1395 (March 21^st, 2016 – March 20^th, 2017) is 6 million tonnes. We can say that the target will be fully achievable based on statistics announced by Iran Customs Administration.

The production statistics show copper concentrate, iron ore concentrate and molybdenum production have taken the upper ranks. In the other words, Iran is taken steps forward for production and export of concentrate of base metals because they will result in more profit and added value.

According to the statistics, the production of copper concentrate has been more than 371,000 tonnes during the first four months of the current Iranian year, which shows a 22.84 % increase in comparison with the same period of the preceding year.

The iron ore concentrate production amounts to 9.6 MT with a 15.84 % increase in comparison with the same period of the preceding year. The production of iron ore fines & lump during the same period was 2.14 MT with a 16.55 % decrement.

These statistics also shows that we have had a 3.9 % increase in sponge iron production and produced 5.5 MT but the pellets and billet productions have been 7.9 MT and 4.75 MT with 0.37% and 3.33% decrease, respectively in comparison with the same statistics of the preceding year. Since new pelletising plants will be commissioned this year, it will result in an increase in pellets production in the current year.

26 pelletising plants with total production capacity of 54 MT are under construction. This will result in increase of pellets production capacity to more than 70 MT, which is enough for production of 50 MT of steel. As the planned target by the end of the 6^th Development Plan is not more than 40.3 MT, there will be some extra quantities, which can be exported as pellets or used to produce DRI for export. Considering the increase in the price of pellets in comparison to iron ore (pellets price increment was 69% while for iron ore it was only 39%), it’s evident that exporting pellets is more profitable. By opening of Gol-e-Gohar new pelletising plant with 5 MT annual production, Iran can start exporting pellets between October 2016 and March 2017.

Going by the statistics released by World Steel Association, there has been no change in the position of Iran among steel producers so far. The country has retained its 14^th rank behind China, Japan, India, USA, Russia, South Korea, Germany, Turkey, Brazil, Ukraine, Italy, Taiwan and Mexico. During this period, the production of crude steel by Iranian producers has been 10,120,000 tonnes.

Based on statistics released by the association, production of crude steel in Iran has had a 4.9% increment in comparison with the same period of the preceding year and it has reached 9,645,000 tonnes. The steel production of Iran in July was 1,370,000 tonnes, which is a 7.6% increment in comparison to July 2015 but the production in June has been less than the same month in 2015, which had been 1,534,000 tonnes.

Foreign trade

The statistics of foreign trade of Iran from March 21^st through July 21^st, 2016 indicates a 40% increase in export of iron ore with less than 40% iron content. The total figure for export of both iron ore Fines & Lump with Fe content above 40% along with concentrate during this period has touched 5,790,000 tonnes, valued at $227,161,000.

In other commodities, such as cement products, exports were at 4.3 million tonnes, valued at $165,913,000. The total amount of lead exported was 49,000 tonnes, amounting to $65.6mn and 44,600 tonnes of zinc amounting to $53 mn. The value of export of aluminum products has been 39,500 tonnes amounting to $50.2mn.

Statistics released by the Iran Customs Administration show that except for a drop in export of both cement and aluminum, which for cement had been the result of limitations imposed on import to Iraq, we have had an increase in export of all other mining and base metal products, like iron ore, copper, steel, lead and zinc.

FDI in mines and steel

Dr. Mehdi Karbasian, Chairman & Managing Director of IMIDRO, stated that according to the 6^th Development Plan, there are great opportunities for foreign direct investment (FDI) in mine and mining industry development projects, especially in steel, aluminum, copper and zinc sectors. In the mining sector, by taking into account the importance of exploration, Iran mainly desires to attract foreign investment in exploration and completion of the mine chain and value-add projects up to production of the end products, such as copper or steel.

Dr. Karbasian pointed out, “I believe that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has created the most important opportunity for development of investment in mine and mine industries sector.  Other parameters are decrease of inflation rate and fixed exchange rate, which in turn indicate the economic stability that is prerequisite for investment in any country, including in Iran. The decrease of inflation rate below 10, which had been among the targets of the 11^th government and has been seriously followed up, has drawn much more attention this year and this will help the promotion of the situation as well. On the other hand, the Iranian market is a good marketplace for steel products. In addition to local markets, there are good opportunities for export to the neighboring countries. Also, the abundant iron ore reserves, availability of low cost energy and less expensive raw materials and reasonable labour cost are among other privileges of the Iranian market. The privatisation of public complexes will result in higher productivity as well.”

He continued, “According to several investigations, the total decisive and probable iron ore reserves is 5.1 billion tonnes, including 54% (equal to 2,793,295,000 ton) as decisive reserve and 46% (equal to 2,359,012,000 Ton) as probable reserve. Among this figure, 34% are located in the Gol-e-Gohar (Central South Iran) region, 31% in Central Iran region and 22% in Sangan (North East Iran) region.”

According to the Iranian Vision Plan 2025, the steel production by the end of 2025 will be 55 MT out of which 40 MT will be consumed locally. For the purpose of realisation of this plan and building infrastructures, almost $30 billion of foreign investment is required. In addition, by the end of 2025, copper production will be increased to 450,000 tonnes and aluminum production is expected to touch 1.5 MT.

Iran also has plans for production of metals and commodities with higher value addition, like titanium, petroleum coke, coal, and rare earth elements (REE).

The most important challenge associated with the investment in Iran is the lack of adequate support for the industries and mining sectors by the local banking system due to not availability of enough cash flow. By absorbing as much foreign direct investment as possible, we may achieve our goal.

Prof. Keyvan Jafari Tehrani is head of international affairs at Iron Ore Association of Iran (IROPEX). He will be making a presentation on Iran’s mining sector at the inaugural Focus Iran Summit 2016 on 27^th September

 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely that of the author

The post Iran needs FDI to crank up mining sector appeared first on International Finance.