The question box and click submit. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Darryl Cuzzubbo, Managing Director and CEO. Please go ahead.
Harmony, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for making the time to join us today for our quarterly update. For those that are new to these calls, my name is Darryl Cuzzubbo, the Managing Director of Arafura Rare Earths, and again today with me is Peter Sherrington, our CFO. A lot has happened since our last quarterly update, both from an external market perspective and in terms of activities to secure the best possible pathway to FID that rewards existing shareholders and opens up the best long-term growth options for our company. Between Peter and I, we will make some comments on the external market, how we are progressing towards securing the equity ahead of FID, and the Traxys offtake agreement recently announced before opening to your questions. Let me start by summarizing how we see the external market.
We've seen escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and the rest of the globe, but in particular, China. On April the 9th, the U.S. imposed China-specific tariffs of 36% on the imports of rare earth magnets. China subsequently announced plans to restrict exports of high-performance magnets and rare earth products on national security grounds, with no specific country being targeted. This has created significant supply uncertainty for nearly 90% of the world's high-performance permanent magnets required for everything from everyday electronics to electric vehicles, wind turbines, robotics, and military equipment. We are already hearing of supply disruptions for ex-China manufacturers such as Tesla, noting that their robot manufacturing is being affected.
In response to this, the U.S. President signed an order directing the Commerce Secretary to begin a national security review, noting that the U.S. dependency on mineral imports raises the potential for risks to national security, defense readiness, price stability, and economic prosperity and resilience. Within 180 days, the Commerce Secretary is required to report his findings back to the President, including whether to impose further tariffs. It should be noted that the European Union has already stated some time ago that they will introduce trade restrictions through their Critical Raw Materials Act, where no more than 65% of their needs can come from a single country. In conjunction with these developments, our FIDeral government has announced plans to secure strategic reserves of critical minerals, including rare earths, which presents a potential mechanism that can be used to break China's monopoly over pricing.
It was in anticipation of circumstances like this that Arafura has held tightly to our ore-to-oxide rare earth strategy so that we can offer a meaningful alternative to China's rare earth supply chain. If you look across the globe, we are uniquely positioned as a truly construction-ready project that can bypass China's supply chain. Given that we have secured the debt required, our only remaining step ahead of moving into construction is raising the required equity. I believe that our timing could not be better. With these developments, we should expect that there will be a bifurcation of rare earth pricing, creating the market opportunity for a seaborne-based pricing system. The domestic rare earth prices in China should no longer be a functional representative price for a non-China magnet value chain.
Importantly, Argus, a well-regarded independent forecaster, believes that a long-term incentive pricing of $163 a kilogram is necessary to create a rest of world NdPr supply chain that isn't dependent on China. Now, let me make a couple of comments on securing the required equity before handing over to Peter to talk through our recent Traxys offtake agreement, and then we'll open up to questions. As stated previously, we have been targeting 50%-60% of our equity to come from cornerstone investors before raising the remainder from institutions and the broader market, including current shareholders. This target of 50%-60% is dependent on market conditions, which have been volatile, particularly given the recent uncertainty of the impact to the global economy of a potential trade war. Consequently, we have been pursuing the upper end of this target range.
Earlier this quarter, we announced securing AUD 200 million from the National Reconstruction Fund as part of our cornerstone investor funding. Following significant engagement and progress over the last quarter, we are confident in achieving our cornerstone investor equity target, and we are now in a position to be able to progress with multiple investor pathways to a fully funded solution. This is important. Having multiple pathways not only firms up securing the required funding, but also so that we can attain the best outcome for our shareholders and the long-term objectives of the company. Specifically, Arafura is assessing a potential joint venture structure which could significantly reduce the equity required to fund Arafura's remaining project interests.
Given the need to evaluate the merits of multiple pathways, as well as some potential cornerstone investors requiring additional time to progress through their internal processes and due diligence, FID financements will extend beyond the previously advised window of the first half of this calendar year. We will update the market as material equity funding milestones are achieved in advance of announcing FID late this calendar year. We expect that as we progress the different funding solutions during this quarter, we will be able to provide more definitive guidance on FID timing. I do want to point out that we will only progress a funding solution that requires more time if it presents a better outcome for our shareholders and the long-term objectives of the company. Given this and the advanced status of our engineering, we have conducted an operational review.
This has led to a reduction of project and engineering effort that will see our financial runway pushed out to the first quarter of next calendar year, 2026. This decision does, however, mean that we will need to ramp back up the project and engineering capability post-FID, pacing up to an additional four months to the project schedule. We will use this four-month ramp-up period as an opportunity to retest market prices and re-tender where appropriate to ensure that the best possible capital outcomes for the project are being achieved. I will now hand over to Peter to talk through the strategic importance of the Traxys offtake. Thank you, Peter.
Thanks, Darryl. During the quarter, we announced and concluded a binding offtake agreement with Traxys, with Traxys Europe for a base amount of 100 tonnes per annum of NdPr. The offtake agreement has a five-year period, and at Arafura's option, we can nominate up to a further 200 tonnes per annum of NdPr to be placed into the market with Traxys. For those who don't know, Traxys is a global physical commodities trader, and it trades battery materials, industrial minerals, and has existing business in the rare earths sector and with other metals as well. We know that Arafura has been prioritizing offtake partners who bring strategic support to FID, and this is, in most instances, a link to equity investment. We know that the Traxys offtake doesn't bring equity, but it does provide us with some volume flexibility, which we felt was quite strategic.
We, in effect, have a 100 tonnes per annum amount, but an optional amount of 200 tonnes per annum. The key here is that can assist us with managing variability in production volumes and delivery schedules that arise over the life of the initial offtake agreements. We also saw some significant value in building a strategic relationship with a trading company who has a deep understanding of the rare earths market, and from that perspective, Traxys was a good fit. Whilst the volume was small, it does not have a link to equity. It is fairly strategic from a long-term perspective in building that relationship, and it is also critical to us in that it provides us some optionality around a volume from 100-300 tonnes to be placed with that offtaker.
We were sort of very keen to get this arrangement locked in, and just Frank Richards, our Sales and Marketing Manager, did a good job in structuring this offtake and worked well with Traxys in order to complete the arrangement.
Harmony, we might hand over to you for any questions coming through.
Thank you. If you do wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two, and if you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We'll pause a moment for any phone questions to register. If you would like to ask a question via the webcast, please enter it into the ask a question box and click submit. It seems there are no phone questions at this time. I'll hand back to your speakers to address your webcast questions.
Thanks, Hailey. The first question comes from Brett Smith of B&L Smith Super Fund and reads, "What level of assurance or confidence can you give shareholders that FID will happen before the end of the calendar year?
Yeah, let me take that one, Brett. That's probably the million-dollar question, right? Let me share with you what we're doing around that, right? You can see this in the introductory comments. There are a few parts to it. Firstly, we've engaged with multiple cornerstone investors, more than what we need to secure the equity that's required. That gives us optionality. That gives us multiple pathways to get there. With that, that gives us confidence to secure FID. Also, by having different options, it gives us options to choose what is in the best interest of our shareholders in a long-term company. We're confident of achieving FID for that very reason. If you look at some of the geopolitical events, that has raised awareness around the importance of rare earths to the manufacture of permanent magnets and why you need permanent magnets.
I know everyone on this call has been aware of that, but I think that awareness across the globe hasn't been there. That awareness is increasing rapidly, and that is very helpful for us. The other thing that we've got to take into account, though, is that many investors are, I'm going to say, somewhat sitting on their hands, waiting to see what happens with this potential trade war. The way we're playing this is we're engaging with our cornerstone investors more than what we need. We're using the opportunity of this increased awareness of the importance of rare earths to engage with other parties so they're ready to come in so that as the market settles down, we're ready to move. Long story short, we're confident of achieving FID because of that engagement.
As we achieve milestones, we will share that with the market so that you can see the progress that we're making.
Thanks, Darryl. The second question also comes from Brett and reads, "If the current government is returned this weekend, does their promise of a strategic critical mineral stockpile present an opportunity for Arafura and additional offtake?
Yeah, it does. It does, Brett. I would make a couple of observations. Firstly, the strategic reserve is helpful in getting up a rare earths sector in Australia, including Nolan. I think Nolan as a first cab off the rank has a significant role to play in that. If you look at the number one reason we do not have a non-China supply of rare earths, it is because of China's control over the pricing. Within the last 12 months, they have either been making marginal profits or have been losing money. Establishing a strategic reserve and offtakes, I think, presents the opportunity to create a different pricing mechanism, which would obviously benefit us. I think the other reason for a strategic reserve, though, is it gives the Australian government additional clout at a time where trade patterns are being rewritten.
I also note that the Australian government has said that they would go through an extensive consultation process to make sure that this strategic reserve is used in, if you like, in the best long-term interests of the Australian rare earths sector. There is a lot to still be worked through there, but I think it is a very positive development and is very timely for us.
The next question comes from James Lowry and reads, "How does AAU propose to mitigate construction costs with transport infrastructure to get Nolan's product to Darwin Port?
Yeah, good question. Firstly, our engineering is quite extensive. Why that's important is because it locks down scope. If you lock down scope, you have less surprises as you progress the project. That is a key driver of CapEx. The other driver of CapEx, of course, is the cost of that scope. We have developed commercial strategies and are developing commercial strategies to make sure that we get the best competitive pricing. You'll have noted that earlier I mentioned that we will need four months to ramp back up our project team post-FID before moving into construction proper. We're going to use that time to retest some of our pricing where we know that there is more capacity in the market and hence a bit more competition than there was earlier.
Just to answer your question, I mean, there's a couple of key drivers to manage your CapEx. One is locking down the scope through advanced engineering, which we've done. Then secondly, having sourcing strategies that get the best potential pricing for that scope, which is what we're doing.
The next question comes from Ronald Lomax and reads, "Lynas has been in production for many years, but has never been able to pay a dividend. How long does Arafura expect to be until they be profitable and pay a dividend?
We cannot talk to exactly what is going to happen in the future. What we can talk to is what we expect to happen and how we can help that happen. The number one issue that the rare earths sector, including Lynas, has been having to deal with is China's control of pricing. That control will come to an end or be minimized when a number of things can happen. One, when a structural supply deficit happens, the pricing will naturally increase. We have seen that in the past. When there have been short-term supply disruptions, we have seen the pricing double to triple. If that had occurred on a long term, Lynas would have been paying dividends, I am sure.
If you look at the forecast of demand doubling over the next 10 years and China's ability to meet that demand, we believe, and other forecasts believe, there will be a structural supply deficit, and that will create a very different pricing mechanism. That is one trigger that will create a different pricing mechanism. The second thing that will create a different pricing mechanism is, and we're seeing this playing out today, when trade restrictions are being applied, whether that's through restrictions or tariffs, and that creates a non-China pricing index. This is where the Australian strategic reserve could play a very important role in creating a seaborne traded-only NdPr index. What that means is China's domestic production and consumption of rare earths magnets is taken out of the equation, and therefore you have a truly functioning NdPr index that reflects true supply and demand.
I just believe that in that sort of scenario, we would see pricing close to triple, a long-term pricing close to triple of what we're seeing today. The third trigger of a different pricing environment is, and I'm going to use EV buyers as an example here. Most electric vehicle buyers want to be a responsible part of the energy transition. A lot of the rare earth permanent magnets that come out of China, it has been getting their feedstock from places like Myanmar, which have poor environmental standards, but poor human rights standards as well. As that becomes, as awareness of that grows, I'd like to think that EV buyers will be more selective and demand that the supply of the materials that go into making electric vehicles is coming from responsible sources.
I've just talked through three triggers that will create a very different pricing environment that will then enable us to grow, pay dividends in the future, etc., etc. It only takes one of those three to trigger this sort of pricing environment. We're already seeing the second trigger, which is trade restrictions related, taking place. That's why we're confident that we will be a very profitable organisation that's able to grow and ultimately pay dividends.
The next question comes from Lee Burch of Burch Corp and reads, "Could you please confirm whether the potential joint venture involves a single party or multiple parties? Furthermore, would such a partnership reduce the risk of further dilution for existing shareholders?
We will be able to share more when we are at a position to share more. One of the benefits, obviously, with a joint venture is that it significantly reduces dilution. This quarter, we will be assessing our different options as they progressed. They do need to be progressed before we get to a point where we can assess what is in the best interest of our shareholders. One of the pluses of the joint venture structure is that it reduces dilution.
The next question comes from Bernard Ho and reads, "How is ARU going with securing remaining binding offtake agreements? Is GE still in the pipeline?
Yeah, would you like to talk to that one, Peter?
Yeah, no problems. In terms of securing the remaining offtake, the issue is not so much around the requirement for the offtake. I think some of the events that we've seen over the last couple of months since the U.S. tariff announcements have probably reinforced that view that there is a need for a non-China or a supply diversification. I think that the challenge for us is that we are trying to link the remaining offtake to strategic equity. We're going to hold pretty hard on that because we believe that the NdPr offtake is strategic, and we're going to link the equity to that, and we'll stick to that. That's probably the challenge that presents to us around securing offtake.
The second part of the question, we are confident we will get that, but we are probably making our work around getting the offtake more challenging by linking that equity to it. It is critical to the funding strategy, which we have set out. In terms of GE, we have an ongoing relationship with GE. We have seen that, for example, GE has probably been not gaining market share in the offshore wind turbine business. That is making it difficult for them to make a commitment now to offtake. We remain engaged with them on looking at ways that they may be able to commit to offtake as we start to close out the final offtake group. Whilst we do not see them as one of the groups that we will be engaging with on the equity opportunities, we still engage with them on offtake.
There are a number of questions coming through regarding the alternative funding solutions or potential alternative funding solutions. I'm just going to lump them into one question. Is there any more information you can share about the potential joint venture? Is a structure likely to be a 50-50 joint venture?
Yeah, it's hard case sharing more at this point, right? I'm very mindful that there's a need for additional information. As soon as we can share it, we will share it. The reason for flagging it, though, is because in the past, we've been talking about our equity strategy, and we haven't specifically flagged the [JV] structure. That is a real alternative. It's too early for us to comment any more at this stage. We're mindful that there is a strong desire to know more. As soon as we can, we will share it.
The next question comes from Paul Stevens and reads, "Is Arafura seriously considering dysprosium and terbium geochemical processing capability?
Good question. Our current CapEx does not include that. We've got processing capability locked in through third party to take the heavies to an oxide. That is an option that we'll always be open to and always be looking at. Peter, do you want to make any additional comments to that?
Yeah. In the short term, as Darryl mentioned, we see some third-party processors and they are in the right jurisdictions who have the ability to process that material. We have had engagement with those groups around separating the Dy and Tb because we do get inquiries around those particular products. We see them as strategic. Whilst they are not significant in terms of revenue, we probably see them as being important in terms of locking in those final offtakers and equity providers. As Darryl mentioned, at present, our CapEx does not include the scope of separating those products. I think ultimately it is something we would look to try and work through ourselves. I think we would be up for our first challenge of producing NdPr on spec and rely on those tollers as an interim measure.
The next question comes from Roberto Versace of Versace Capital. Are there any concerns in the change of government and whether the current government funding may be withdrawn?
Good question, Roberto. We are not concerned about a potential change in government. I mean, both parties are supportive. The opposition have said that they would support the funding that we have already received. I would note that the current government has very welcomed the support for the production tax incentive. That is helpful. The current government has also raised the strategic reserve. That still has to be worked through on the assumption that they get re-elected. If you take a step back, the Nolan project creates significant employment, significant downstream manufacturing across Australia. Consequently, we enjoy the support of both parties at both the Northern Territory and the federal level. We are not concerned.
The next question comes from Stephen Darrington and reads, "Is the proposed strategic stockpile likely to be associated with further government equity joint venture opportunities?
It's too early to say. The Australian government has really just outlined at a very high level what they intend to do with the strategic reserve and that they will enter into a consultation process. We look forward to participating in that.
The next question comes from Steven Allen and reads, "You mentioned re-tendering where appropriate. Can you advise what the potential criteria for doing that would be?
Yeah, good question. Steven, the environment is a little bit different today than it was when we got the original tenders and we went through a process and selected our preferred tenders. We've seen our projects pull back, some operations, nickel, sea's all going to sea's. That has created some additional capacity in the market. We've had some tenders come back to us and said that if there's an opportunity, they would like to re-tender. We will be selective in re-tendering where we think there is a benefit, mindful that we also do not want to delay our project schedule as well.
The next question comes from Andrew Ballard and reads, "The Australian government supports stated interest-free loans of up to AUD 1 billion. Is management engaging with the government on this opportunity?
Peter, do you have any comments on that?
No, I'm not aware of the facility that the shareholders are referring to. Sorry, Darryl. Yeah. I mean, obviously, we're engaged with the government on debt financing. There are some concessional interest rates on the facilities that we've secured. Some of them are referenced to commercial rates as well. They're all on interest payable on amortization basis. Yeah, I can't provide any comment. We can look into it further and provide some further comment if there's something that we've missed.
It'd be great if you didn't mind sending through some details on that. If there's something we're not aware of, which would surprise me, but we would be very interested in pursuing that.
The next question comes from Nick Stott and reads, "Is phase two a part of any offtake JV and/or equity negotiations?
Good question. Phase two is obviously a draw card because it presents a significant growth opportunity for any party. However, given that we're not talking about a decision for phase two, it's excluded from any binding agreements. It is obviously a draw card for investors and potential JV partners.
The next question comes from Bernard Ho and reads, "With the Trump presidency, do you see the U.S. government potentially being part of any equity funding and/or grant funding given their national security concerns?
Bernard, good question, right? I probably can't share too much. What I can say is that as we look for a fully funded solution, and if you like, the U.S. is growing attention to securing where it is supplied, we're certainly exploring avenues around that. There is nothing that's at a point that we can be definitive about at this point.
That's all the written questions for now. Darryl, I'll pass back to you for closing comments.
Okay. Thank you, everyone, again for your time and for your questions. Any follow-up questions, please send them through. Let me just make a couple of concluding comments. Particularly in the last few months, the importance of developing a diversified rare earths and permanent magnet supply chain has been thrown into sharp focus by recent geopolitical events. Arafura's Nolan's project remains the only significant construction-ready ore-to-oxide rare earths project in the world, offering the potential to bypass the dominant Chinese supply chain. We continue to make significant progress executing our equity funding strategy, which is the final piece to put in place before making a final investment decision. Following the initial cornerstone investment from the National Reconstruction Fund, we are confident in securing our cornerstone investment target with multiple pathways to get there. Our timing is fortuitous where we have the right project at the right time.
I'd like to thank you for your time for dialing in, and we look forward to providing you updates in the near future. Thank you.