Washington, D.C. — The US Department of the Interior (DoI), through the US Geological Survey (USGS), has published its draft 2025 List of Critical Minerals, laying out the framework for federal investment, tax incentives, and permitting reforms. The list, updated every three years under the Energy Act of 2020, is central to US supply chain security and national competitiveness as demand for minerals surges across energy, defence, and consumer sectors.
Federal Strategy Built on Critical Mineral Supply Chains
The draft 2025 list identifies 54 mineral commodities, with 50 selected via a new economic disruption model. The methodology, disclosed by USGS, simulated over 1,200 trade disruption scenarios affecting 84 commodities and 402 US industries, weighting outcomes by probability and severity.
Zirconium has been added due to single-point-of-failure risks in the domestic supply chain, while arsenic and tellurium were proposed for removal. Copper, lead, potash, rhenium, silicon and silver—all essential for infrastructure, batteries, and consumer goods—have been recommended for inclusion.
The DoI emphasises that the list is not symbolic: it directly guides federal tax credits, mine permitting acceleration, and recycling initiatives. Retail-facing industries, from packaging (aluminium, silicon) to fertiliser (potash) and consumer electronics (gallium, germanium), are among those likely to see ripple effects.
National Security and Industrial Competitiveness
First introduced by a 2017 Trump-era Executive Order, the list has evolved into a baseline tool for risk management. Current Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said the 2025 draft “provides a clear, science-based road map to reduce dependence on foreign adversaries, expand domestic production, and unleash American innovation.”
The top 10 commodities by probability-weighted supply risk include several rare earths—dysprosium, terbium, samarium, lutetium, gadolinium—alongside niobium, rhodium, gallium, germanium, and tungsten. These are indispensable for magnets, semiconductors, and automotive catalysts.
For supermarkets, FMCG, and retail supply chains, the policy may sound distant. Yet the reality is that cobalt, lithium, copper and nickel costs are embedded in refrigerated logistics fleets, shelf lighting, point-of-sale systems, and packaging infrastructure. Supply risk translates into higher capital expenditure for retailers and higher shelf prices for consumers.
Recycling, By-products and Mine Waste Recovery
The DoI has also broadened its focus to mine waste and by-product recovery. In July, the Department directed USGS to catalogue and assess federal mine waste sites for recovery potential. Early pilot studies suggest that tailings from uranium, phosphate, and base-metal mines could yield significant quantities of rare earths and strategic by-products, a development with cost implications across energy-intensive industries.
For FMCG manufacturers, this policy shift may stabilise input costs by expanding non-traditional supply sources. For investors, it signals potential new revenue streams in reprocessing waste, an area where European and Canadian peers have already launched incentives.
Skillings Analysis
- Retail and FMCG exposure: Critical minerals are not abstract; they underpin fertiliser supply (potash), beverage can pricing (aluminium, silicon), and the energy footprint of cold-chain logistics.
- Geopolitical implications: The removal of tellurium and arsenic from the draft list could leave solar PV and specialty glass exposed if Chinese export restrictions tighten.
- Forward view: Expect copper and silver to dominate investor interest—both straddle infrastructure and consumer electronics demand, making them bellwethers for commodity-driven inflation in grocery operations.
Looking Ahead
The draft list is open for consultation before a final version is published later this year. Secretary Burgum retains the authority to add further minerals—uranium and metallurgical coal are already under review. For retailers and suppliers, the timing is critical: commodity contracts for the Christmas 2025 cycle will be negotiated against this backdrop.
Whether the US can scale domestic production or accelerate recycling will determine if critical mineral costs ease—or continue to be passed along the value chain, from miners to manufacturers to supermarket shelves.
