Comment Period Open for US Critical Mineral Negotiations

The US Trade Representative (USTR) recently announced the opening of a short public comment period on goals and potential commitments for ongoing critical minerals negotiations – including for a proposed plurilateral critical minerals agreement to ensure "secure and fairly-priced markets" among agreement parties. Comments are due March 19.

The request builds on a wide range of earlier Trump administration efforts to address critical minerals import dependencies and other concerns. This includes a Section 232 investigation on the national security implications of critical minerals imports – launched in April 2025 – and a related January 14, 2026 presidential proclamation that called on the Department of Commerce and USTR to enter into negotiations with trading partners to adjust imports of processed critical minerals and their derivative products.

USTR seeks comments "to inform the development of trade policy that supports and enhances the resilience of critical mineral supply chains and downstream industries that depend on them." USTR intends to achieve this goal through "the generation of demand for market-based production and the acceleration of the buildout of market-based supply."

USTR particularly seeks comments on:  

• Trade policies necessary to increase the domestic availability of mined, refined, and processed critical minerals; incentivize reshoring of the mining, processing, refining and production of critical minerals and their derivatives; and diversify the sources of mined, refined, and processed critical minerals and their derivatives among like-minded trading partners.
• The commitments necessary to establish a resilient and non-distorted marketplace among aligned trading partners, including in the context of a legally binding plurilateral agreement.
• Appropriate price mechanisms that would enable investment and appropriate financial returns in the mining, processing, and refining of critical minerals.
• Efforts to accelerate the buildout of market-based supply, such as efforts to ensure that scrap metal flows into additional domestic production and that policies and practices abroad do not undermine investment at home.

In the notice, USTR additionally lists more than 30 specific questions it seeks answers to. Highlights include:

1. Which trading partners should be considered for participation in a plurilateral agreement, and why?
2. How should the United States evaluate the appropriate phase-in time for price-related and other measures for each critical mineral, or group of critical minerals?
3. What factors should be considered in prioritizing certain critical minerals, as defined by the US Geological Survey, to be included within the scope of a plurilateral agreement? In particular, how should each critical mineral be evaluated for the US government's prioritization and scoping decisions?
4. How should a plurilateral agreement take into consideration downstream products of those critical minerals subject to a price mechanism?
5. What are legal procedures, tools, or authorities by which other jurisdictions could implement a price mechanism, or other relevant measure under a plurilateral agreement on trade in critical minerals?

Outcomes in the critical minerals negotiations could have significant business and supply chain implications for businesses in the US and in potential agreement partner countries. Anyone interested in commenting should reach out to the Steptoe Trade Policy team as soon as possible.