中色协明确表态反对铜冶炼行业出现的零加工费或负加工费现象

Core Viewpoint - The China Nonferrous Metals Industry Association has expressed strong opposition to the phenomenon of zero or negative processing fees in the copper smelting industry, calling it an "unsustainable structural contradiction" that harms the interests of the global copper smelting sector, including China [1][2]. Industry Response - The association's vice president, Chen Xuesen, emphasized the dangers of negative processing fees, urging the global copper industry to confront this issue and promote cooperation among relevant countries and stakeholders [2]. Capacity Management - China is taking measures to manage copper smelting capacity by halting approximately 2 million tons of illegal capacity to curb excessive expansion, with these capacities either under construction or in planning stages [3]. Future Development - In the coming years, China will prioritize the development of new smelting capacity that utilizes scrap materials instead of importing copper concentrate, aiming to reduce reliance on imports and alleviate overcapacity pressures [4]. Market Dynamics - The decline in processing fees to historical lows is attributed to a structural imbalance between raw material shortages and excess smelting capacity, with spot processing fees dropping to extreme levels, raising concerns about industry sustainability [4]. - Global copper smelting companies are facing the impact of low processing fees, with companies like Japan's JX Advanced Metals announcing production cuts and Glencore's Mount Isa smelter receiving government support to maintain operations [4]. Long-term Negotiations - Analysts believe that the current pressure on processing fees is unlikely to change fundamentally in the short term, as the market awaits the upcoming 2026 long-term contract negotiations to establish a more sustainable pricing mechanism [7]. - The core issue of the negotiations will be whether the long-standing benchmark system can continue to be applicable, with expectations of further adjustments to the annual benchmark system and a shift towards more diverse and complex negotiation formats [7].