In January 2026, something happened on the Tokyo Stock Exchange that had never happened before. Companies that make watches started filing rare earth risk disclosures. Not mining companies. Not defense contractors. Watch manufacturers. Citizen Watch told shareholders on June 23rd that prolonged export restrictions on rare earths could "materially affect the group's production activities and financial performance." By the end of June, more than 200 filings on the Tokyo exchange mentioned rare earths — double the number from May — and over two-thirds of them said the controls were either already hurting business or posed a credible near-term threat.

This is not a commodities story. This is the most consequential supply chain confrontation of the decade — and most investors still think it's about rocks.

Here's what happened. In October 2025, Beijing introduced the most sweeping rare earth export controls in history. Any foreign-made product containing as little as 0.1% Chinese-origin rare earth material — or manufactured using Chinese processing technology — now requires a license from China's commerce ministry. That single rule extends Chinese regulatory authority across virtually every defense, automotive, and electronics supply chain on the planet. The extraterritorial enforcement was suspended at the APEC summit in Busan until November 2026 as part of a mutual stand-down with Washington. But the underlying licensing architecture remained fully intact.

Then, in early 2026, Beijing escalated again — banning dual-use rare earth exports to Japanese military end-users, adding samarium, gadolinium, and lutetium compounds to the controlled list, and publishing State Council Order No. 834, China's first dedicated supply-chain security framework. The order integrates export controls, countermeasures, and data security into a single enforcement regime.

So why does this matter to you?

Because China is not weaponizing scarcity. It's weaponizing control. Beijing holds only about 35% of global rare earth reserves — the minerals exist elsewhere. But China controls roughly 90% of global rare earth processing, 80% of tungsten refining, 60% of antimony production, and a staggering 94% of sintered permanent magnet manufacturing. Those magnets go into F-35 fighter jets, Patriot missile guidance systems, electric vehicle motors, wind turbines, industrial robots, and the generators inside every data center powering the AI revolution.

Prices tell the story. Neodymium-praseodymium oxide — the critical input for permanent magnets — surged sixfold outside China in the first half of 2026. Tungsten concentrate tripled. Antimony doubled. Chinese indium exports to the United States collapsed by 77% in 14 months. Licensing approval rates for European firms fell below 25% in some sectors.

And here's the part most people are missing: the suspension expires in November. There has been no indication — none — that Beijing intends to renew it. The May 2026 Trump-Xi summit produced broad diplomatic language but zero regulatory concessions. A multi-institutional analysis warns that rebuilding independent alternatives would take 20 to 30 years. The International Energy Agency confirmed that for 19 out of 20 strategic minerals, China is the leading refiner, with an average market share of 70%. And that concentration has intensified in recent years, not diminished.

If you don't own exposure to the companies and countries building alternative supply chains, I urge you to start looking — now. This is not a trade. It's a generational reallocation of industrial capital. The West has a 12-to-18-month window to act. That window is closing.

As Buffett would say: someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree 20 years ago. We didn't plant the tree. Now we're scrambling to find shade.

Eni, Italy’s largest oil producer, just invested into EnergyX’s lithium project in Chile, a stake that could reach $225M. The project is expected to generate $1.3B in annual revenue at forecasted market prices.

It’s just one piece of EnergyX’s portfolio holding up to 15M+ tons of untapped lithium, and it’s the latest proof of EnergyX’s progress. Until July 16, you can invest as an early-stage shareholder and share in that growth.

Natural resources weren’t the only draw. EnergyX’s patented tech recovers up to 3X more lithium than traditional methods at 500X the speed, paving the way to commercial-scale production.

Lithium demand is projected to grow 5X by 2040, so the timing couldn’t be better. General Motors and POSCO are already EnergyX shareholders.

Now it’s your turn. Become an early-stage EnergyX shareholder before the July 16 deadline.

In February, Secretary of State Marco Rubio convened representatives from 54 nations in Washington for the inaugural Critical Minerals Ministerial. The outcome was FORGE — the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement — the most ambitious Western attempt to break China's grip on strategic minerals.

The numbers are real. The Export-Import Bank approved a $10 billion direct loan for Project Vault — a domestic strategic minerals stockpile and the largest financing in EXIM's history. Total U.S. government commitments now exceed $30 billion across EXIM, the Development Finance Corporation, and private sector partners. Twenty-one bilateral agreements have been signed in five months — with Argentina, Morocco, Peru, the Philippines, the UAE, the UK, India, and others. Vice President Vance announced "reference prices for critical minerals at each stage of production" backed by adjustable tariffs — in plain English, coordinated price floors to prevent Beijing from dumping cheap material to kill Western competitors.

And one more thing... the initiative includes Pax Silica, a complementary program focused on securing AI supply chains, with partners including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and Qatar. Boeing, GE Vernova, and Google have signed on as participants.

Keep in mind: framework agreements are not operating mines. A senior Western mining executive told S&P Global that building a rare earth separation facility takes "at least 12 to 18 months just for permitting and construction, and meaningful scale requires 5 to 7 years." Chinese refined rare earth compounds remain five to six times cheaper than those currently produced in the West. FORGE has diplomatic momentum and real capital behind it. What it doesn't have is time.

Japan is four to five months into targeted Chinese rare earth restrictions — and the damage is migrating from the factory floor to the boardroom. More than 200 companies have filed rare earth risk disclosures on the Tokyo Stock Exchange since May. Consumer goods companies and electronics firms — not just traditional materials businesses — are flagging supply chain exposure for the first time.

Yuriy Humber, CEO of Tokyo-based consultancy Yuri Group, warned that a full year of restrictions would generate "significant structural problems" for Japanese manufacturers. Japanese government messaging has tried to manage public perception, concerned that visible official alarm could trigger panic-driven market reactions.

Most investors still think of rare earths as a niche commodity. They're not. As Takeshi Higashifukasawa at Mizuho Research Institute observed, the development of AI means rare earths are now embedded across far more goods and supply chains than during earlier trade disputes. Electric vehicles have compounded the exposure. The result: corporate optimism about managing disruptions has become "increasingly difficult to justify."

If you own Japanese equities or European defense stocks, this is your supply chain risk — hiding in plain sight.

Every conversation about AI infrastructure eventually lands on semiconductors, electricity, or data center real estate. Almost nobody talks about permanent magnets — and that's a mistake.

The generators that produce electricity for data centers require rare earth magnets. The cooling systems require rare earth components. The electric motors in the robotic arms assembling server racks use permanent magnets. The hard drives, the sensors, the precision instruments — all of them contain neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, or terbium in some proportion. China manufactures 94% of the sintered permanent magnets that go into all of them.

In other words, the AI arms race runs on Chinese magnets. Every frontier model that gets larger requires more compute. More compute requires more data centers. More data centers require more generators, more cooling, more motors — and every one of those components contains materials that Beijing can restrict with a licensing decision.

The IEA's analysis is blunt: the inclusion of "parts, components, and assemblies" in China's October 2025 controls — beyond just raw materials — could have a "dramatic impact on global supply chains, as many strategic sectors rely on products and components containing the controlled Chinese rare earth elements." Sectors explicitly named: energy, automotive, defense, semiconductors, aerospace, industrial motors, and AI data centers.

If you think AI is just a software and chip story, you're looking at the engine without checking the fuel line.

In October 2025, at the Busan APEC summit, the United States and China negotiated a mutual stand-down. Washington suspended its Affiliates Rule. Beijing suspended the extraterritorial enforcement of its October rare earth controls. Both suspensions expire in November 2026. That's five months from today.

Here's the idea. The October 2025 controls are the most far-reaching trade weapon any nation has deployed since the oil embargo of 1973. They don't just restrict Chinese rare earth exports. They extend Beijing's regulatory jurisdiction to any product — made anywhere in the world — that contains Chinese-origin rare earth material or was manufactured using Chinese rare earth processing technology. At 0.1% content threshold, that covers virtually everything.

Think about what that means. If the suspension expires without renewal in November, every defense contractor in Europe, every EV manufacturer, every wind turbine producer, and every data center operator will need a license from Beijing to continue using components they've relied on for decades. The licensing approval rate for European firms is already below 25%. Supply shortfalls would become acute in defense and semiconductor sectors within weeks.

A European Commission official involved in the EU's Critical Raw Materials Act put it plainly: "We have a 12-to-18-month window to demonstrate that alternative supply chains are viable. If we miss this opportunity, Chinese dominance will become entrenched for another generation."

Let me put this in plain English. The November deadline is the single most important variable in global supply chain planning for the rest of 2026. If the suspension is renewed, markets exhale and the slow work of diversification continues. If it lapses — whether by design or by diplomatic failure — the disruption hits immediately. There is no gradual phase-in. The controls snap back.

So what should you do? First, assume the worst and hope for the best. Build positions in companies that mine, process, or manufacture rare earths outside China — MP Materials, Lynas Rare Earths, Energy Fuels, Ucore Rare Metals. Second, watch the Trump-Xi dynamic obsessively. Every bilateral meeting, every tariff adjustment, every diplomatic communiqué between now and November carries supply chain implications. Third, recognize that the defense spending boom in Europe and the AI infrastructure buildout in America converge at exactly the same bottleneck: Chinese magnets. The companies that solve that bottleneck will define the next industrial cycle.

Horse, meet water.

NATO has officially recognized rare earth elements as a critical defense security variable. Twelve allied nations launched a High Visibility Project for joint acquisition and management of defense-critical materials. The summit will review whether those commitments have produced actual procurement changes. Watch for language on supply chain resilience.

The single most consequential date on the global trade calendar. If the October 2025 extraterritorial controls snap back, every supply chain that touches Chinese rare earth processing is in scope. Five months is not a long time to find alternative suppliers for materials that took China 40 years to monopolize.

The largest IPO in history enters the benchmark index five days from now. Every passive fund tracking the Nasdaq-100 must rebalance. The gravitational pull on capital flows is enormous — and the stock has already fallen from its $225 post-IPO high to roughly $156. Volatility is the price of entry.

Trump privately weighed a return to full military operations against Iran this week before deciding to stick with diplomacy. The August 18th nuclear deal deadline is approaching. If talks collapse, oil and gold reprice overnight. The ceasefire is real. The peace is not.

After the best first half since 2020, expectations are elevated across every sector. Companies that mention rare earth supply risk in their earnings calls — as 200 Japanese firms already have — will tell you more about the next 12 months than any revenue beat or miss.

*Disclaimer: Energy Exploration Technologies, Inc. (“we”, “us”, “our”, and “EnergyX” is conducting an offering of securities pursuant to Regulation A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. An offering statement covering this offering has been qualified by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Neither this communication nor any of its content constitutes an offer to sell, solicitation of an offer to buy or a recommendation for any of our securities by our company or any third party. Offers and sales of the securities are being made solely by means of the qualified offering circular. Investing in our securities involves significant risks. Before investing, you should consult with your financial advisor, accountant, and/or attorney legal, and carefully review the qualified offering circular (including the “Risk Factors” section) and any offering circular supplements.

The most recent qualified offering circular is available at https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1830166/000149315226017123/form253g2.html. The most recent qualified offering circular and any supplements can also be found on the SEC’s EDGAR filing database, available at www.sec.gov/edgar/search/. Prospective investors should note that neither the SEC nor any federal or state securities commission or regulatory authority has approved or recommended our securities or determined that our offering circular is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is unlawful. We are not a broker-dealer or investment adviser registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. No communication made by us or any of our affiliates, through this communication or any other medium, should be construed as a recommendation to purchase, sell, or hold any securities, or as investment, tax, financial, accounting, legal, regulatory, or compliance advice. Neither this communication nor any of its content constitutes an offer to sell, solicitation of an offer to buy or a recommendation for any of our securities by our company or any third party. The content presented here is provided for general information purposes only and is not intended to solicit the purchase of securities or to be used as investment, legal or tax advice. Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements The information presented herein may include forward-looking statements, estimates, or projections regarding our anticipated future performance. If present, these statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. In some cases, you can identify these statements by forward-looking words such as “may”, “might”, “will”, “should”, “expect”, “plan”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “predict”, “potential”, “future” or “continue”, the negative of these terms, and other comparable terminology. Such forward-looking statements are based on current plans, estimates and expectations and are made pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements, estimates and projections, if any, are based upon various assumptions made concerning our anticipated results and industry trends, which may or may not occur. We are not making any representations as to the accuracy of any such forward-looking statements, estimates or projections. Our actual performance may be materially different from any such statements, estimates or projections. We are under no duty to update any of these forward-looking statements to conform them to actual results or revised expectations.