1 月 6 日，一则重磅消息引发全球关注：鉴于日本近期的恶劣表现，中方正考虑针对性收紧 7 类中重稀土相关物项的出口许可审查。这 7 种被称为 "科技工 业维生素" 的关键资源 —— 钐、钆、铽、镝、镥、钪、钇，早已在 2025 年 4 月纳入出口管制，如今的审查升级，无疑击中了日本产业的 "命脉"。 中重稀土：不止是矿产，更是战略王牌 一旦出口审查收紧，日本汽车、电子零部件、风力发电、医疗设备及航空航天五大领域将首当其冲。野村综合研究所测算，若限制持续 3 个月，日本将损失 6600 亿日元，GDP 下降 0.11%；持续一年损失更是高达 2.6 万亿日元，相当于直接砍掉 0.43% 的年 GDP。对于以高端制造为核心竞争力的日本来说，这无 疑是 "釜底抽薪"。 很多人觉得稀土只是普通矿产，实则是现代科技的 "核心密码"。其独特的物理化学性质，让它在高端制造、国防科技等领域无可替代。 在永磁材料领域，铽、镝等重稀土是高端钕铁硼磁体的 "关键添加剂"，能让磁体在高温环境下保持稳定，这是新能源汽车驱动电机、风力发电机的核心部 件。而钐钴磁体更是航空航天发动机、石油钻井设备等极端环境的 "专属选择"，没有它，很多 ...

【DT新材料】 获悉，1月6日， 商务部 公告，根据《中华人民共和国出口管制法》等法律法规有关规定，为维护国家安全和利益、履行防扩散等国际义 务， 决定加强两用物项对 日本 出口管制。 现将有关事项公告如下： 禁止所有两用物项对日本军事用户、军事用途，以及一切有助于提升日本军事实力的其他最终用户用途出口 。任何国家和地区的 组织和个人，违反上述规定，将原产于中华人民共和国的相关两用物项转移或提供给日本的组织和个人，将依法追究法律责任。本公告自公布之日起正式 实施。 与此同时， 据中国日报，据可靠消息人士称， 中国政府正考虑针对性收紧2025年4月4日列管的 中重稀土相关物 项出口许可审查。包括 钐、钆、铽、 镝、镥、钪、钇 等7类中重稀土相关物项。 日本野村综合研究所的评估显示， 日本用于电动汽车驱动电机钕磁体的镝、铽等重稀土几乎100%依赖中国供应，一旦受限，日本经济将面临较大冲击。 假设中国对日稀土出口限制持续3个月，其结果是造成6600亿日元左右的损失，促使年名义和实际GDP下降0.11%。如果持续一年，损失额将达2.6万亿 日元左右，年名义和实际GDP将减少0.43%。 关于两用物项 据《 中华人民共 ...

据可靠消息人士称，鉴于日本近期恶劣表现，中国政府正考虑针对性收紧2025年4月4日列管的中重稀 土相关物项出口许可审查。 2025年4月4日，根据《中华人民共和国出口管制法》等有关法律法规，商务部会同海关总署发布关于 对钐、钆、铽、镝、镥、钪、钇等7类中重稀土相关物项实施出口管制措施的公告，并于发布之日起正 式实施。 商务部新闻发言人何亚东在去年12月4日的例行发布会上曾表示，日本首相高市早苗公然发表涉台错误 言论，严重破坏了中日关系的政治基础，日方对此负有不可推卸的责任。 何亚东强调，中方已多次阐明严正立场，敦促日方立即纠正错误言行，以实际行动体现对中方承诺，为 两国正常经贸合作创造条件。如果日方一意孤行，中方将采取必要措施，一切后果由日方承担。 日本野村综合研究所的评估显示，日本用于电动汽车驱动电机钕磁体的镝、铽等重稀土几乎100%依赖 中国供应，一旦受限，日本经济将面临较大冲击。 野村综合研究所估算，假设中国对日稀土出口限制持续3个月，其结果是造成6600亿日元左右的损 失，促使年名义和实际GDP下降0.11%。如果持续一年，损失额将达2.6万亿日元左右，年名义和实际 GDP将减少0.43%。 来源｜中 ...

Core Viewpoint - The statements made by U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent regarding China's rare earth export controls have sparked a debate about the reality of these measures, with China emphasizing its actions as a refinement of its export control system [1][3]. Group 1: China's Rare Earth Export Controls - China's export control measures for rare earth elements were officially announced, with significant restrictions on seven categories of medium and heavy rare earth items effective from April 5, 2025 [3]. - Recent announcements on October 9 included controls on foreign-manufactured magnets and materials containing 0.1% or more of Chinese rare earth elements, along with restrictions on rare earth mining and smelting technologies [3]. - As a result of these measures, China's rare earth exports fell to 4,000.3 tons in September 2025, a decrease of 30.9% month-over-month, marking the lowest level since February of the same year [3]. Group 2: U.S. Dependency on Chinese Rare Earths - The U.S. Geological Survey reported that 70% of U.S. rare earth material imports come from China, with nearly 100% of heavy rare earths essential for military applications sourced from China [5]. - The U.S. military relies on rare earths for 87% of its supply chains across 153 main battle equipment types, highlighting the critical nature of these materials [5][7]. - The complexity and pollution associated with rare earth purification processes have led to a significant reliance on China, which controls 85% of global refining capacity, making U.S. efforts to decouple from this dependency challenging and costly [7]. Group 3: Political Dynamics and Strategic Decisions - China's export controls aim to prevent rare earths from being used for military purposes, contrasting with the U.S. as the largest global arms exporter that frequently utilizes rare earths in military production [9]. - The U.S. has attempted to politicize the rare earth issue, but this strategy has revealed its limitations, as China controls 70% of rare earth production and 92% of refining capacity globally [9]. - Prior to implementing these measures, China communicated its policy objectives to the U.S., EU, and Japan to reduce misunderstandings, while also promising to streamline compliance processes for civilian exports [11].

Core Viewpoint - The G7 countries are attempting to address their dependency on Chinese rare earth elements through strategies that include setting price floors and imposing tariffs on Chinese exports, despite the inherent contradictions in their approach [5][7][14]. Group 1: G7 Strategies - The G7 is considering two main strategies to counter China's dominance in the rare earth market: establishing a price floor for rare earth transactions and increasing tariffs on Chinese rare earth exports [3][5]. - The rationale behind setting a price floor is to support domestic rare earth companies in G7 countries, as Chinese rare earths are significantly cheaper due to economies of scale [7][8]. - Imposing tariffs is intended to create leverage in negotiations with China, although this could backfire by increasing costs for Western consumers reliant on Chinese rare earths [8][14]. Group 2: China's Response - China has already implemented export controls on key rare earth elements, which are critical for various high-tech and defense applications, directly impacting Western industries [9][12]. - The country has established a stringent regulatory framework for rare earths, including electronic tracking of the supply chain and severe penalties for smuggling [9][11]. - China holds a dominant position in rare earth technology, possessing the majority of essential patents, which complicates efforts by G7 countries to develop alternative supply chains [11][12]. Group 3: Challenges for G7 - The G7 faces internal trust issues among member countries, complicating efforts to create a unified alternative supply chain [14][16]. - Environmental concerns and higher operational costs in G7 countries hinder the development of domestic rare earth production capabilities [16]. - Time is of the essence, as China is rapidly expanding its global rare earth resource footprint, making it increasingly difficult for G7 countries to catch up [16][19]. Group 4: The Need for Cooperation - The ongoing rare earth conflict reflects a Cold War mentality, with G7 countries attempting to isolate China while China maintains an open and cooperative stance [17][21]. - The ultimate battleground in the rare earth dispute is technological innovation, where China is making significant advancements, potentially widening the gap with G7 countries [19][21]. - A collaborative approach focusing on enhancing rare earth utilization efficiency could benefit all parties involved, rather than continuing a divisive political strategy [21].

Group 1 - Shandong Haiwang Chemical Co., Ltd. and Zhongxi Tianma New Materials Technology Co., Ltd. have terminated their counseling registration for listing [2] - Haiwang Chemical has been in the counseling period for nearly 5 years, with its main products including brominated flame retardants and bromine, and it has faced challenges in meeting the main board listing standard of a minimum net profit of 100 million yuan [4][5] - Zhongxi Tianma entered the counseling period in January 2024, focusing on rare earth resources and has a production capacity for processing 36,000 tons of rare earth waste annually [6] Group 2 - Haiwang Chemical's actual controller holds a 43.54% stake, while Zhongxi Tianma's actual controller holds 50.52% [4][6] - Haiwang Chemical's counseling was conducted by Everbright Securities, which provided 20 counseling sessions during the period [4] - Zhongxi Tianma's counseling was managed by Dongfang Securities, which is focusing on improving the company's internal controls and financial accounting [6]

Group 1 - The U.S. is focusing on Myanmar's rare earths to bypass China's dominance, but experts question the feasibility of this strategy [1][2] - The U.S. aims to cut off China's rare earth imports from Myanmar while seeking new mining sources, driven by China's upcoming export controls on heavy rare earths [2][5] - The U.S. faces three significant barriers: geographical and security risks, a lack of refining technology, and gaps in the entire supply chain from mining to manufacturing [3][4] Group 2 - China's rare earth industry has established a comprehensive technological and industrial system over two decades, making it difficult for the U.S. to replicate [4][8] - The U.S. previously outsourced its rare earth processing to China, leading to a loss of competitive advantage [4] - The U.S. strategy appears to be more about signaling to allies and reducing dependence on China rather than genuinely disrupting China's rare earth advantage [8]

Core Points - The ongoing economic and geopolitical rivalry between the US and China has created significant uncertainty in the global economy, affecting ordinary citizens with high prices and economic instability [1] - The trade conflict is rooted in long-standing tensions that escalated after the Trump administration adopted a comprehensive strategy to pressure China, starting from January 2025 [2] - The US has implemented a series of tariffs and trade restrictions on Chinese goods, significantly increasing the total tariff level and impacting Chinese exports [2] - In response to US actions, China has enacted strong countermeasures, including export bans on critical materials and increased tariffs on US goods, which have disrupted US supply chains [6][10] - The trade war has led to a rise in effective tariff rates in the US, reaching the highest level since 1934, and has resulted in market volatility and negative employment data [12] Trade Policies - The US imposed a 10% tariff on all Chinese imports in March 2025, which escalated to a total tariff level of 54% by April 2025, affecting various sectors from agriculture to electronics [2] - The US further increased tariffs on Chinese goods to 104% and initiated investigations into Chinese maritime logistics and shipbuilding, targeting key industries [2] - China's countermeasures included banning exports of gallium, germanium, and other critical materials to the US, which are essential for various advanced technologies [6] Geopolitical Dynamics - The US has sought to strengthen alliances in the Indo-Pacific region to counter China's influence, criticizing China's actions in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea [5] - Despite tensions, there remains potential for cooperation between the US and China in areas such as climate change and technology exchange, depending on the US's approach [14] Economic Impact - The trade war has resulted in an additional tax burden of approximately $1,300 per American household due to the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration [2] - The escalation of tariffs has led to increased costs for US consumers and businesses, contributing to economic instability and market downturns [12]

Group 1 - The core issue is the dependency of the U.S. automotive and military industries on Chinese rare earth elements, particularly high-power magnets, which has led to production halts in companies like Ford [1][3] - Rare earth elements, once considered cheap, are now critical for advanced technologies, with significant quantities required for products like Tesla vehicles and military aircraft [3][4] - China's recent export controls on key rare earth elements have exposed vulnerabilities in the U.S. supply chain, with military stockpiles only sufficient for 18 months and a projected $300 billion needed to rebuild the supply chain over a decade [4][6] Group 2 - The U.S. has rare earth mines but lacks the refining capacity for critical heavy rare earths, forcing reliance on China for processing [6][8] - The geopolitical struggle over rare earths has led to secret agreements between the U.S. and China, revealing the limitations of Western efforts to reduce dependence on Chinese supplies [6][10] - China controls 70% of global rare earth supply and 95% of refining technology, giving it significant leverage in the global market [8][10] Group 3 - The value chain of rare earths shows that raw materials are worth significantly less than processed products, highlighting the economic importance of refining and manufacturing capabilities [8][10] - The price of Chinese rare earth permanent magnets has surged by 40% in the past year, indicating a shift in market dynamics and the realization of their true value [8]

Group 1 - The core point of the news is the initiation of the "Quad Critical Minerals Initiative" by the US, Japan, India, and Australia to ensure the security and diversification of critical mineral supply chains, enhancing economic security and collective resilience [1][3][4] - The Quad foreign ministers reaffirmed their commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region, emphasizing the importance of maintaining sovereignty, enhancing maritime security, and building resilient supply chains [3][4] - The joint statement highlighted concerns over China's recent export controls on rare earth elements, which raised serious worries about supply chain reliability and national security due to over-reliance on a single country's resources [3][4] Group 2 - The Quad countries agreed on joint maritime security initiatives, including coordinated navigation and training, and sharing aerial transport capabilities for disaster response [4] - The discussions included enhancing maritime domain awareness (MDA) to monitor illegal fishing activities in the Indo-Pacific region [4] - The US Secretary of State emphasized that the Quad must evolve into an "action vehicle" rather than just a platform for expressing intentions, with commercial trade being a key element for the future influence of the mechanism [4][5]