The United States has recently classified copper and silver as “critical minerals.” An updated list from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) now includes 60 entries – ten more than in 2022. In addition to copper and silver, uranium, metallurgical coal (coking coal), potash, rhenium, silicon, and lead have been added. The reason for the classification is the growing importance of these raw materials for the U.S. economy and national security, as well as the vulnerability of global supply chains.
Why Copper and Silver are Now on the List
Copper is considered a key metal for the energy transition: demand has been increasing for years, from power grids to electromobility to renewable energy systems. With the inclusion of copper on the U.S. list, the security of supply of this base raw material is becoming a greater focus of policy. Silver is also widely used for photovoltaics, electronics, and medical applications. The USGS had already presented a draft version for both metals; this classification has now been officially confirmed.
The U.S. authority justifies the new list with an expanded assessment model. This simulates possible disruptions to foreign trade and analyzes their consequences for industry. The approach covers 84 mineral raw materials, 402 industries, and more than 1,200 scenarios. The USGS aims to provide a more realistic basis on which political decisions can be made – for example, on stockpiling, recycling, or strengthening domestic processing capacities. For copper and silver, this means that risks along the value chain will be addressed more systematically in the future.
Possible Consequences: Tariffs, Funding, Approvals
The list of critical minerals is more than a statistical exercise. It serves as a reference for the U.S. government to examine trade policy instruments. This includes, in particular, an investigation under Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act, which may lead to tariffs or other restrictions. Such a procedure had already been initiated this year in the case of copper. The new classification could facilitate similar reviews for other raw materials.
At the same time, Washington is signaling a willingness to invest: The list is intended to set priorities for government support – from programs for raw material extraction and recovery from waste and dumps (resource recovery) to tax incentives for processing steps in the U.S. to more efficient approval procedures for mines. For projects with copper and silver involvement, this could mean faster processing, potential funding, or tax relief. Companies along the supply chain – exploration companies, producers, recyclers, and processors – are closely monitoring these course settings because they can influence location decisions and project financing.
Context: Rare Earths, China, and the Expansion to 60 Raw Materials
The timing of the U.S. announcement is noteworthy. Shortly before, the U.S. and China had agreed to defuse their dispute over rare earths. This group of raw materials accounts for 15 entries – and thus about a quarter – of the USGS list. With the expansion to 60 raw materials, Washington is signaling that raw material security is being considered comprehensively: In addition to high-tech elements, base metals such as copper and silver, as well as industrial minerals such as potash or silicon, are also coming into focus.
The new categorization could have several effects on the global market. First, it increases transparency as to which raw materials are critical from the U.S. perspective – this can influence trade flows, stockpiling, and long-term supply contracts. Second, new incentives could accelerate investment in North American projects, including the processing chain from copper concentrates to semi-finished products. Third, the circular economy is moving more into the foreground: U.S. policy explicitly refers to raw material recovery from waste and strategic stocks.
For silver, in addition to its role as an investment and industrial metal, the focus is particularly on the photovoltaic sector, whose growth has driven demand in recent years. Explicit inclusion in the U.S. list could stimulate research funding, substitution strategies, or efficiency programs in material use. For copper, in turn, the focus is on grid and storage infrastructure, such as cables, transformers, and charging infrastructure.
Significance for Projects and Investor Perspective
The classification of copper and silver can also be relevant for project owners and operators outside the USA. Depending on future trade policy decisions, new sales channels, sourcing requirements or certification requirements could arise. At the same time, US customers could increasingly look for resilient supply relationships that emphasize ESG requirements, traceability and security of supply. This affects not only mining companies, but also smelters, refineries and recyclers.
On the stock market side, it remains to be seen how strongly the new list will affect copper and silver prices in the short term. The decisive factor is which measures the policy derives from the classification – such as tax incentives, approval reforms or Section 232 reviews. However, one thing is clear: with the expansion to 60 raw materials and the explicit mention of copper and silver, US policy firmly anchors these metals in its raw material strategy. For the industry, this means planning security over political prioritization – and the task of making supply chains more resilient.
Conclusion: The U.S. elevates copper and silver to the level of “critical minerals” and significantly expands the USGS list. The classification serves as a lever for trade policy reviews, investments, tax incentives, and approval reforms. For projects and supply chains in North America and beyond, this sends a signal: Raw material security remains a central factor – with copper and silver at its center.
