OMM Newsroom
Foreign ministers from the United States, Japan, Australia and India expressed concern about export restrictions and economic coercion at a Quad meeting in Atlanta, Georgia, on October 31. Although a joint statement by the ministers did not name China, the meeting followed Beijing’s restrictions on critical mineral exports, AnewZ reported.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) says China’s earlier control measures forced some manufacturers to cut production. The measures also coincided with sharp price differences between Chinese and European markets.
The IEA estimates that fully implementing China’s expanded controls on rare earth exports could put $6.5 trillion in annual industrial output outside China at risk. More than $3 trillion of that total is in the automotive sector. The estimate represents the value of production potentially exposed, not actual economic losses.
Export controls affect production and prices
According to the IEA’s Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2026, export controls China imposed in April 2025 on seven categories of materials associated with heavy rare earth elements forced some automakers outside China to reduce or temporarily suspend production.
The agency said prices for gallium, dysprosium and terbium in Europe were about five times higher than in China’s domestic market, while germanium was about three times as expensive. These differences show the cost of sourcing materials from different markets but do not establish how much of the gap resulted directly from export restrictions.
In a separate estimate, the IEA said a complete halt in trade in graphite suitable for battery production could put more than $300 billion in annual downstream production outside China at risk.
China’s restrictions and the November 10 deadline
In April 2025, Beijing introduced export licensing requirements for seven categories of products associated with medium and heavy rare earth elements. China announced additional controls on October 9, 2025. They included restrictions on certain products manufactured abroad using Chinese rare earth materials or technologies.
The additional measures were later suspended. China’s Ministry of Commerce confirmed in April 2026 that the suspension would remain in effect until November 10. The ministry said applications for civilian exports that comply with the rules could be approved. The earlier licensing controls were not automatically revoked by the suspension.
China holds a leading position in mineral processing
According to the IEA’s 2026 report, China dominates the processing of several strategic minerals and supplies more than 90% of global gallium and some rare earth materials.
The agency’s projections point to a gap between planned mining, processing and manufacturing capacity outside dominant suppliers. By 2035, existing and announced rare earth processing capacity in geographically diversified regions is expected to cover about two-thirds of projected production, the IEA says. Planned magnet manufacturing capacity would cover only one-third of projected production.
The figures indicate that expanding mining alone would not create enough processing and manufacturing capacity to replace existing supply chains.
Quad countries agree on supply-chain measures
At the October 31 meeting, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar agreed to establish a business forum bringing together companies and government officials from the four countries.
According to a joint statement, the ministers also agreed to identify vulnerabilities in semiconductor supply chains and said they would provide more than $85 million in technical and financial support for trusted, advanced artificial intelligence technologies in the Indo-Pacific region.
After the meeting, Rubio said the Quad was not a coalition against China. However, he acknowledged that the conduct drawing criticism had repeatedly been associated with one country, Reuters reported.
The meeting took place ahead of the November 10 deadline for the suspension of China’s export measures. While the IEA has recorded production disruptions and sharp price differences, it has not given a single figure for the damage the restrictions have caused to the global economy. Its $6.5 trillion estimate reflects the scale of industrial activity that could be exposed if the controls were fully implemented.
