The Trump administration is stepping back from plans to guarantee a minimum price for U.S. critical minerals projects, multiple sources told Reuters, in a move that reflects both congressional funding constraints and the challenges of setting market prices. The shift, which comes as a U.S. Senate committee reviews a price floor extended last year to MP Materials, marks a reversal from previous commitments made to industry and distinguishes Washington from some G7 partners exploring joint measures to support critical mineral production.
At a closed-door meeting earlier this month hosted by a Washington think tank, two senior Trump administration officials told U.S. minerals executives that their projects would now need to demonstrate financial independence without government-backed price support, three attendees told Reuters. Audrey Robertson, assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Energy and head of the Office of Critical Minerals and Energy Innovation, reportedly told executives, “We’re not here to prop you guys up. Don’t come to us expecting that.”
Robertson was joined by Joshua Kroon, deputy assistant secretary for textiles, consumer goods, materials, critical minerals, and metals at the Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration. Both officials reportedly made clear that Washington is no longer in a position to offer price floors. Requests for comment from Robertson and Kroon were not immediately answered. The administration stressed that this stance applies to future deals and does not affect MP Materials’ existing price floor, established as part of a government investment package last July.
The administration’s current position contrasts with statements made at a closed-door meeting in July, when officials told minerals executives that the floor price extended to MP Materials was “not a one-off” and that additional price supports were under consideration. Since then, the government has taken equity positions in companies including Lithium Americas, Trilogy Metals, and USA Rare Earth, none of which received guaranteed price floors, prompting questions about Washington’s commitment to this financial tool.
U.S. mining and processing companies have long lobbied for price floors and other backstops to compete with China, whose state-backed producers can dramatically cut prices to challenge rivals, potentially undermining U.S. projects and deterring private investment. Critics of price floors, however, argue that guaranteeing minimum prices exposes taxpayers to significant financial risk and could create long-term liabilities if market prices remain low. Legal experts also caution that such programs might conflict with U.S. procurement, trade, or budget law without explicit congressional authorization.
Moving away from price floors does not rule out alternative measures by Washington to support the sector, including stockpiling critical minerals, taking equity stakes, or imposing local content requirements. Other nations, including Australia, have considered similar price-support mechanisms for their critical mineral industries.
The MP Materials deal remains under scrutiny. The government’s guaranteed purchase agreement, which included a price floor of at least $110 per kilogram for two rare earths, raised concerns among some administration officials and members of Congress about the lack of explicit congressional authorization. The economics of the market have shifted since that investment, with USA Rare Earth reportedly offering to purchase the same minerals at $125 per kilogram on the open market. Sources told Reuters that the Trump administration recognized it lacked the authority to fund additional price floors after considering further equity investments following MP Materials. This realization was influenced by inquiries from the Senate Armed Services Committee regarding the administration’s strategy on minerals sector investment.
