Author

admin

Browsing

During the Mining Share panel at the New Orleans Investment Conference, participants underscored that the gold bull market will continue — however, just where we are in that bull run was up for debate.

For conference host and Gold Newsletter editor Brien Lundin, there is still some way to go.

“The gold bull market is still in place. We don’t know how long it’s going to last. That’s the hard part. I think gold’s going to US$6,000 to US$8,000 (per ounce) in the cycle, maybe more. (The) mining share bull market, I would say we’re probably in the fourth inning, fifth inning, maybe. But you know, we could go to extra innings,” he said.

Strategic investor Jeff Phillips also believes the gold bull market is at an early stage.

‘I would say that we are in the third or fourth inning,” he said. “This is early on in the bull market, but I do think there’ll be a rain delay, since we’re talking about baseball terminology. I think this is an epic bull market that we’re in.”

Phillips went on to compare today’s setup to past cycles, noting the strong run gold saw between 2003 and 2007, before the financial crisis briefly derailed momentum. Although he anticipates another correction at some point, he remains confident in the broader bull market and said he is continuing to buy and stay patient.

For Jordan Roy-Byrne, understanding the difference between a secular and cyclical bull market is imperative.

“Secular — that’s the major long-term trend that usually lasts a decade or longer. Cyclically, it can be anywhere from two to five years or so,’ explained the editor and publisher of the Daily Gold.

“I think the cyclical bull has three or four more years left. The risk when that gets long in the tooth is then you have what happened at 1975 to 1976, and also 2008 — that’s when you have your 65 or 60 percent decline in the shares.”

Although Roy-Byrne believes that type of correction is “far off into the future,” he was adamant that something like that will happen before the current secular bull market comes to an end.

Jennifer Shaigec, principal at Sandpiper Trading, said central bank buying shows the bull market is in its infancy.

“I think we’re still actually in fairly early innings,” she said. “The underlying fundamentals for why central banks have been buying gold have not changed. In fact, I can see it accelerating.”

Shaigec went on to acknowledge that gold often experiences a seasonal dip at this time of year, and that some investors may be waiting for a pullback. But she emphasized that the broader fundamentals remain strong.

Drawing a parallel to 2008, when gold fell about 22 percent before rebounding above previous highs within six months, she urged investors to keep a long-term perspective and be mentally prepared for short-term volatility. Shaigec also pointed out that gold has historically been among the first assets to recover after market downturns.

Rounding out the panel, Nick Hodge, publisher at Digest Publishing, told attendees that the gold correction has found short-term support at the US$4000 level, but longer-term support is around US$3,600.

“All the fundamental drivers, ie. the debt, central bank buying, etc., are still in place and haven’t abated,” he said. “Silver hasn’t had its move yet, so that tells me we still have some time to go. And GDX, GDXJ just started outperforming the gold price in August, so it’s still early to the middle days in the precious metal bull market.”

What’s next for the gold price?

From there, panel moderator and well-known investor Rick Rule, proprietor at Rule Investment Media, emphasized that the recent pullback in gold is minor in the context of a much larger, long-running bull market.

Rule agreed with Roy-Byrne’s distinction between cyclical dips and broader secular trends, noting that many investors seem rattled by what is essentially a normal fluctuation.

He pointed out that gold is still up dramatically over the past year, and that past cycles have seen far sharper drops — including a 50 percent decline in 1975 — that ultimately didn’t break the long-term trend.

Noting that precious metals cycles tend to follow a familiar pattern, beginning with strength in gold and moving outward into other segments, Rule asked the panel participants which companies in the gold sector — explorers, developers or potential M&A targets — are now best positioned as the market progresses.

For Hodge, exploration and brownfields development are a strong choice as the precious metals cycle evolves.

He noted that the VanEck Gold Miners ETF (ARCA:GDX) outperformed gold over the summer, prompting some investors to take profits and rotate capital into earlier-stage opportunities — momentum he expects to continue.

Hodge added that market cycles now move faster due to the speed of information, accelerating the shift from producers to companies further down the value chain as miners look to replace reserves.

Additionally, he pointed to a growing influx of risk-tolerant investors who cut their teeth in crypto and are increasingly drawn to gold and mining equities as they learn about fiat currency and counterparty risk. Their appetite for speculation, he said, is likely to push more capital into smaller, higher-risk exploration names over the next year.

Shaigec echoed Hodge’s sentiment.

“I agree there’s a lot of speculative money that has yet to rotate over to precious metals,” she said.

“I’m seeing a lot of oversubscribed private placements. I just think that juniors are still the place to be. There’s some grassroots exploration, which actually hit an all-time low in 2023, and we’ve still had decades of lack of investment in exploration. We have a lot of room yet to run there,’ Shaigec added.

Roy-Byrne advised watching silver, underscoring the value that gold’s sister metal has yet to gain.

“Silver, after this correction, has a chance to make a historic move,” he told the audience. “We’re probably going to see a lot of money jump in next year when that happens.”

Referring to an analogy he once heard, Phillips compared a precious metals bull market to the crack of a whip: producers move first, followed by mid-tier and single-asset developers, with exploration companies snapping into action at the very end. In his view, the market is only just reaching that final stage, and explorers have yet to see real upside.

Phillips also echoed other panelists’ comments that younger crypto investors are becoming more aware of inflation, money printing and the value of hard assets.

That shift, he said, is already showing up in unconventional moves, from stablecoin companies buying gold royalties to major tech firms and even governments directing capital into mining-related assets.

All of that suggests the speculative end of the sector is only beginning to come alive, he said.

Expert stock picks — Gold, silver, copper, nickel and uranium

Toward the end of the discussion, Rule asked each panelist to provide stock picks for the attentive audience.

First was Lundin, who praised the list of more than 100 exhibitors at the 51st New Orleans Investment Conference.

He recommended Delta Resources (TSXV:DLTA,OTCQB:DTARF), highlighting its “large, still undefined, gold resource in the Thunder Bay region.” He also likes Getchell Gold (CSE:GTCH,OTCQB:GGLDF), a company focused on gold in Nevada, and Seabridge Gold (TSX:SEA,NYSE:SA), which he dubbed a “permanent optionality play.”

For Phillips, Empress Royalty’s (TSXV:EMPR,OTCQB:EMPYF) management team, cashflow-positive status and focus on gold and silver puts the company at the top of his list.

Almadex Minerals (TSXV:DEX,OTCQX:AAMMF), where management has a history of finding multimillion-ounce deposits, and prospect generator Headwater Gold (CSE:HWG,OTCQB:HWAUF), were also among his stock selections.

Shaigec veered away from precious metals in recommending SPC Nickel (TSXV:SPC,OTCQX:SPCNF), a company with good geology and a management team that owns 36 percent of the firm’s shares.

She also mentioned Pacifica Silver (CSE:PSIL,OTCQB:PAGFF) citing the company’s recent private placement, which included First Majestic Silver (TSX:AG,NYSE:AG). Her last stock pick and “absolute favorite” is Camino Minerals (TSXV:COR,OTCID:CAMZF), a Peru-focused copper company with good management.

Rounding out the list were Hodge’s selections, starting with Northshore Uranium (TSXV:NSU) due to its US deposit. He also chose Kincora Copper (TSXV:KCC,OTCQB:BZDLF), citing its small market cap, strong investor interest and robust portfolio, and Kingsmen Resources (TSXV:KNG,OTCQX:KNGRF), a company that has seen its share price grow from C$0.25 to C$0.75 in the last year.

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The gold price was back in action this week, breaking above the US$4,200 per ounce level after spending about two weeks trading at lower price points.

Silver was on the rise again as well, pushing briefly past US$54 per ounce.

Both precious metals saw their biggest gains midway through the week as the US government shutdown came to an end. At 43 days, it was the longest in history, and finished on Wednesday (November 12) as eight Democrats broke ranks to vote in line with Republicans on a funding package.

US economic data has been scarce during the shutdown, and government agencies are now beginning to play catch up as workers return to their posts. While some reports are scheduled to come out next week, others could take weeks or may never be released at all.

‘Based on past shutdowns, we anticipate data originally scheduled for release in the first half of October — primarily data covering September — will be released fairly quickly. However, the timetable will vary depending on the normal data collection process for each indicator’ — Nancy Vanden Houten, Oxford Economics

From a gold perspective, all eyes are on numbers that may impact the US Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision next month. While the Fed has now made two cuts in 2025, Chair Jerome Powell emphasized after the central bank’s last meeting that a December reduction is not guaranteed.

More recent commentary from other Fed officials points to continued dissent, and CME Group’s (NASDAQ:CME) FedWatch tool currently shows an almost even split between a cut or a pause.

That uncertainty weighed on gold and silver prices as the week drew to a close. Gold was at the US$4,080 level as of Friday (November 14) afternoon, while silver was around US$50.60.

Bullet briefing — New Orleans takeaways

For our bullet briefing this week, I want to share a few highlights from the New Orleans Investment Conference, which our team attended from November 2 to 5.

At the time, the gold price was around US$4,000 and the silver price was in the US$48 dollar range, and my main takeaway from the experts I heard from was that the pullback would be temporary.

Given this week’s price activity, it looks like that idea is already being proven right. That said, it’s worth noting that most of the people I heard from weren’t expecting such a quick turnaround — in general, the consensus was that prices could remain at lower levels for weeks or months, with some saying gold could fall as low as US$3,600.

Does that mean a deeper correction is coming? Time will tell…

On that note, another topic that came up at the event frequently was taking profits. Quite a few people discussed how they did some trimming in October, when gold and silver prices were really running, and then put the money to work in other parts of the market.

For example, Rick Rule of Rule Investment Media talked about how he sold 25 percent of his junior gold stocks at that time. Here’s how he explained his decision:

‘We were in a period five weeks ago where there were no asks, there were all bids. And I’ve learned in the market to do what’s easy. If there’s no bids, be a bid. If there’s no asks, be an ask. And the sector was white hot. There were so many junior financings, and when a company’s financing, they’re telling you that your cash is worth more than their stock. Well, they should know what their stock is worth. Since they were selling, I decided I would sell some too.

‘But what was most important to me was personal. I’ve been a heavy investor in the sector since 2020, and I was at a period of time where I could, by selling a quarter of my position, recoup all of my capital and pay the capital gains tax and have the rest for free. I can be very patient with that remaining 75 percent.’

He redeployed the cash he got from selling gold juniors into physical gold, Agnico Eagle Mines (TSX:AEM,NYSE:AEM), Franco-Nevada (TSX:FNV,NYSE:FNV), Wheaton Precious Metals (TSX:WPM,NYSE:WPM) and oil and gas stocks.

Finally, while I’m always keen to understand what’s happening now, I also wanted to use this conference to start talking about what sectors will do well in 2026.

I asked almost all of my interviewees what they think next year’s top-performing asset will be, and I was surprised to get a fairly wide variety of responses.

Precious metals were definitely mentioned, with multiple people saying that while silver has made impressive moves this year, it hasn’t truly had a chance to shine.

But copper was also brought up numerous times, as was uranium. And I got a couple of outlier responses, including emerging markets, which Peter Schiff of Euro Pacific Asset Management discussed, and oil and gas, which Rule said would be his pick for top-performing asset in terms of risk to reward.

Rule also highlighted small-scale community banks in the US.

You can view the full New Orleans Investment Conference playlist here.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Mike Maloney, founder of GoldSilver.com, explains why this time really is different for gold and silver, pointing to factors including growing mainstream adoption.

‘This to me signals the beginning of the third and final phase of the bull market — and that is where you have the greatest amount of gains in the shortest period of time,’ he said.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Dana Samuelson, president of American Gold Exchange, discusses this year’s unusual market dynamics for gold and silver, saying there have been three big moves of physical metal.

‘To me, this is literally a run on the bank of gold globally — it’s global, it’s widespread and it’s deep, and I don’t see it changing anytime soon,’ he explained.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

President Donald Trump said on Friday that he directed the Deoartment of Justice to investigate disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to several high-profile Democrats and certain banks.

‘Now that the Democrats are using the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats, not Republicans, to try and deflect from their disastrous SHUTDOWN, and all of their other failures, I will be asking AG Pam Bondi, and the Department of Justice, together with our great patriots at the FBI, to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, JPMorgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him,’ Trump said on Truth Social.

‘This is another Russia, Russia, Russia scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats,’ he added. ‘Records show that these men, and many others, spent large portions of their life with Epstein, and on his ‘island.’ Stay tuned!!!’

Head of Policy & Advocacy Communications at JPMorgan Chase & Co. Trish Wexler told Fox News Digital that ‘The government had damning information about [Epstein’s] crimes and failed to share it with us and other banks.’

‘We regret any association we had with the man, but did not help him commit his heinous acts,’ she added. ‘We ended our relationship with him years before his arrest on sex trafficking charges.’

In an earlier post on Friday, Trump said that ‘Epstein was a Democrat,’ and therefore is the ‘Democrat’s [sic] problem,’ not the Republicans’ problem. He also accused the Democrats of ‘doing everything in their withering power to push the Epstein Hoax again, despite the DOJ releasing 50,000 pages of documents.’

Trump then said lawmakers should not ‘waste’ time looking into him and instead should focus on the Democrats he later named in the post announcing the probe.

On Wednesday, Oversight Committee Democrats released never-before-seen emails related to the Epstein case. The first email is between Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein writes, ‘I want you to realize that the only dog that hasn’t barked is Trump,’ adding that the now-president ‘spent hours at my house’ with a victim.

In the second email, the disgraced financier told Michael Wolff that Trump ‘knew about the girls as he asked Ghislaine to stop.’

Oversight Committee Ranking Member Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., called on the DOJ to release all the Epstein files ‘immediately.’

‘The more Donald Trump tries to cover up the Epstein files, the more we uncover,’ Garcia said in a statement. ‘These latest emails and correspondence raise glaring questions about what else the White House is hiding and the nature of the relationship between Epstein and the president.’

The emails were released the same day that Trump signed a bill ending the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. The timing led Trump to accuse Democrats of using Epstein to distract the public from the shutdown fiasco.

Following the Democrats’ email drop, the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital that the lawmakers ‘selectively leaked emails to the liberal media to create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.’

In response to the release of the emails, Oversight Committee Republicans said Democrats ‘whine about ‘releasing the files,’ but only cherry-pick when they have them to generate clickbait. You deserve the full truth.’ Included in the tweet was a link with what the Republicans said was an additional 20,000 pages of documents from the Epstein estate.

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., a member of the Oversight Committee, slammed Democrats and accused them of ignoring the stories of Epstein’s victims in order to focus on Trump.

‘How pathetic that Democrats are using Epstein’s victims to bury headlines on their vote against reopening the government,’ Mace wrote on X.

Fox News Digital reached out to representatives for Clinton, Summers and Hoffman for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Leo Briceno contributed to this report.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

In 2020, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer unleashed a threat against the Supreme Court’s conservative justices in the wake of their decision to overturn Roe vs Wade’s national protection for abortion. ‘You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,’ he bellowed. ‘You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.’

Although Schumer’s bellicose words may have contributed to an attempt on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s life back then, five years later it is not the men and women in robes suffering a whirlwind, but rather Schumer himself, and it is one of his own making.

This week, Schumer is facing calls to step down from his leadership position from multiple House Democrats including Squad member Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and neo-centrist Rep. Ro Khana, D-Calif., after his shambolic performance during the government shutdown.

It is likely only a matter of time before such calls for Schumer’s ouster echo in the upper chamber as well.

In the end, Christ had an easier 40 days in the desert than Schumer had during this shutdown, where he went from swearing not just that Democrats would never back down, but that they were winning the fight politically, to watching Democrats capitulate with nothing in return.

As former Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy pointed out, this was the ‘Seinfeld shutdown,’ a shutdown about nothing, and Schumer was decidedly George.

Tellingly, Chuck himself did not sign on to the deal to open the government, start paying out SNAP benefits and unchoke our airports, which only makes him appear weaker, because he can’t control his caucus.

Schumer is now facing the first true crisis of his five decades in politics, and it doesn’t seem like he knows what hit him.

The scuttlebut in Washington, D.C., and the Empire State is that, by hook or by crook, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will take Schumer’s Senate seat in 2028, just like she took Rep. Joe Crowley’s House seat seven years ago.

AOC is not being particularly shy about it, saying this week, ‘We have several Senate primaries this cycle. I know I’m being asked about New York, [but] that is years from now. I have to remind my own constituents because they think that this election is this year.’

This is a long way from, ‘Chuck is doing a great job and I have no plans to run against him.’

In the recent mayor’s race in New York City, in which AOC was democrat socialist Zohran Mamdani’s most important surrogate, Schumer bravely declined, even on Election Day itself, to disclose whether he had cast a ballot for Zany Zohran.

It was actually quite amazing: Schumer is the highest-ranking elected Democrat in the United States of America and he decided not to weigh in on whether his party should embrace communism.

Schumer couldn’t reject Mamdani because he and his ilk are obviously the future of the party, but he couldn’t embrace him because his pro-capitalism and pro-Israel donors won’t have it.

Schumer wasn’t sitting on the fence in the mayor’s race, he was impaled on it.

Right now, whether fairly or not, Schumer is the avatar for the old establishment Democrat Party that shuffled off the stage with former President Joe Biden. He is the political version of the Washington Generals, being dunked on over and over by the more talented socialist Globetrotters.

In fact, this whirlwind that Schumer has reaped is entirely his own fault. At any point, he could have shown courage, acted like an adult and tried to work in good faith with Republicans and the Trump administration. Instead, he decided to curse on TikTok like the radical kids who want his job.

It was Schumer who helped to oust former Democrat senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin for opposing the party’s push to nuke the filibuster in 2021. Where did he think his support was going to come from once he tossed out the moderates?

In the end, Schumer’s career will be a cautionary tale, lacking the courage to rein in the radical elements in his caucus and party. He instead opened the door for them and hastened his own exile from power.

Chuck Schumer has well and truly reaped the whirlwind, and in very short order he will most likely be paying the price.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Several weeks into the government shutdown, the notion of reopening seemed impossible. 

Both Senate Republicans and Democrats were deeply entrenched in their positions for 41 days and 40 nights, and neither side wanted to appear to be caving to the other. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus wanted a guaranteed deal on expiring Obamacare subsidies, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., argued that the government needed to reopen first. 

But an explosion of bipartisan talks, pushed by external pressures of federal workers going unpaid, federal food benefits in jeopardy, and air travel grinding to a standstill, invigorated a working group of senators to build an off-ramp out of the historic closure.

The result was a bipartisan deal that included a trio of spending bills meant to jump-start the government funding process, an extension of the original House-passed continuing resolution (CR) to Jan. 30, 2026, to provide time to fund the government the old-fashioned way, and a renewed guarantee that Senate Democrats would get their vote on expiring Obamacare subsidies. 

In the end, the shutdown dragged on for 43 days, with the climactic vote to end it and send the package to the White House unfolding in the House on Wednesday. 

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., who was part of crafting the final spending deal, said discussions on those three bills had begun ‘long before’ the shutdown. 

‘We certainly had some knotty issues, a hemp issue, disagreements on funding levels and all that. But for the most part, we worked those through. And I would tell you from our side and I would assume from the other, the three big players were the Cardinals themselves,’ Cole said, referring to the three House Republican subcommittee chairs who led discussions on the three individual bills.

‘Our Democratic colleagues that voted against the bills had plenty of input in the bills. The real question will be in the next package — can you guys bring any votes? If you’re not going to bring any votes, our negotiation will be a waste of time, and we’ll be required to construct a coalition that’s all Republican.’ 

Nevertheless, most of the eight Senate Democrats that crossed the aisle viewed the guarantee of a vote on Obamacare as the turning point, though it lacked the guaranteed outcome that Schumer and the majority of the caucus sought. 

‘There was no vote that we were going to get on the Affordable Care Act premium tax credits,’ Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said on Sunday, referring to Obamacare. ‘We have a guaranteed vote by a guaranteed date on a bill that we will write, not that the Republicans will write.’

For Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who proved the decisive Democratic vote that sealed the deal on the proposal in the Senate, it was provisions that would rehire and protect workers fired by the Trump administration. 

Kaine recalled that it was just hours before the Senate was set to take a key test vote on the CR that he changed his mind. Up to that point, the White House had not wanted to include language that would have reversed the reductions in force (RIFs) that had been ordered at the start of the shutdown. 

But it was through Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., who was a key negotiator in the Senate, that Kaine got the White House on board. 

‘I said, I’m a no if you don’t do that, I’m a no, and you know that it was 4:45 p.m. in the afternoon on Sunday when they told me they would do that,’ he said.

Kaine noted that with 320,000 federal workers in Virginia and 2 million nationally, he recognized it was a big ask. 

‘And I told her, and when I explained it to her, she said, that’s a reasonable ask, but that the White House didn’t want to do it,’ he said. ‘And she was a little bit of a go-between and helping me.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

China’s gold industry is entering a period of rapid adjustment after Beijing implemented a major overhaul of value-added tax (VAT) rules on physical gold.

The reform, which took effect on the first of November run through December 31, 2027, ending the long-standing practice of allowing full tax deductions on most gold withdrawn from the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) and the Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE).

The Ministry of Finance and the State Taxation Administration announced the shift on the same day broader tax changes for platinum and diamonds came into force. But unlike those adjustments, the new gold rules directly target the structure of VAT throughout the supply chain.

Under the old system, when members withdrew gold from SGE or SHFE vaults to turn it into jewelry or branded bars, the tax authority issued a full 13 percent Special VAT Invoice that could be fully offset against output VAT, keeping the tax burden minimal.

VAT was effectively charged only on the value added beyond the underlying gold price, a feature that helped keep jewelry costs lower even as gold prices climbed.

That framework has now been split into two tracks, depending on whether gold is withdrawn for investment or non-investment purposes. SGE and SHFE members who buy and sell on the exchange continue to enjoy VAT exemption.

Investment products, such as bars produced by commercial banks or gold ETFs trading on the exchanges, remain largely unaffected. But once gold exits the vaults, the treatment diverges sharply.

For investment products, the taxation formula still applies only to value added, preserving the low-cost structure for banks and major investment channels. But the new system bars SGE members from issuing special VAT invoices to the clients they supply, meaning downstream buyers cannot claim tax credits on their own sales.

That dynamic will likely push more investors to buy directly from SGE members, whose products can be sold at lower effective prices because they retain the credit advantage at the first tier.

Jewelry sector faces brunt of policy changes

However, the impact on non-investment gold—primarily jewelry—is far more pronounced.

Members withdrawing gold for fabrication can now deduct output VAT by only 6 percent of their costs, rather than 13 percent previously. The SGE will also issue ordinary invoices instead of special ones, removing another layer of tax offset.

Metallurgical and retail analysts calculate that this adjustment will raise jewelr manufacturers’ tax burden enough to lift final consumer prices by roughly 4 percent in typical scenarios, with some retailers already reporting price hikes since early November.

The policy also wipes away the differential treatment between SGE members and non-members. Independent jewelers, small banks, and franchises of major jewelry brands, who open accounts through SGE members, are now treated the same as entities withdrawing gold for non-investment use.

With their inability to claim the full 13 percent tax credit, non-member participants have already raised bar prices by around 13 percent, according to industry feedback as noted by the World Gold Council (WGC)

Amid the reform, Chinese consumer behavior is already shifting. According to data compiled by Metals Focus, retail buyers have moved decisively toward gold bars as they become more sensitive to jewelry mark-ups and increasingly aware of the narrower buy–sell spreads available on investment products.

The research firm estimates that retail investment jumped 20 percent to 336 tonnes in 2024, the highest level since 2013, while jewelry consumption dropped 24 percent, falling to its weakest level since the first year of the pandemic.

That divergence has only widened this year: in the first nine months of 2025, jewelry consumption declined 25 percent year-on-year, even as retail investment climbed 24 percent over the same period.

The country’s core jewelry manufacturing and wholesale hub has remained weak since the National Day Holiday. November is normally an off-season for jewelry buying, but wholesalers say the new VAT regime has already cooled restocking activity.

Instead, manufacturers and retailers have begun shifting product development toward high-value “by piece” items that are less sensitive to gold price swings, while promotional campaigns encouraging consumers to trade in old jewelry for new pieces—transactions exempt from the new tax—are expected to grow.

Financial sector adjusts

The rule change has also spilled into banking products. Reuters reported that China Construction Bank stopped accepting new applications for one of its gold purchasing accounts on the first business day after the tax shift, offering no explanation. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China briefly introduced similar restrictions before reversing them hours later.

While the tax rules do not directly target banks’ paper gold programs, the reform revealed uncertainty among financial institutions as they evaluate how the revised incentives may alter client behavior.

Despite the disruptive effects on jewelry, investment demand is positioned to strengthen heading into 2026. The WGC noted that bar and coin buyers face no additional tax burden so long as they purchase directly from SGE members.

Expectations of further price appreciation, China’s continued economic uncertainty, and the People’s Bank of China’s steady gold acquisitions all reinforce investment interest. Recently, gold also regained the US$4,200 level on expectations of a US rate cut in December and rising concerns about US debt levels.

While analysts call it the most significant gold-market tax change since 2019, most predict that its full effects will only become clear next year as the peak buying season tests whether shifting consumer preferences deepen.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Homeownership has long been part of the American dream, but that dream has been deferred.

Households in their 30s have an ownership rate of just 42% — more than 20 points lower than the national average.

The median age of all home buyers is a record-breaking 59, and the age of a first-time buyer is 40 — up from 29 in 1981.

As a solution, the Trump administration is floating a 50-year mortgage.

Though I disagree with that specific idea, I am heartened that they are brainstorming ways to tackle the problem.

We need a Marshall Plan for housing, a collection of broad initiatives to make homes more affordable and put the dream back on track.

The federal government can use its bully pulpit to get changes to red tape and regulations that are holding back building, and encourage policies that would increase housing and decrease costs.

To start, the White House and Fannie Mae should instead promote shorter, 20-year mortgages.

Affordability at the forefront of political issues as shutdown ends

As Ed Pinto of the American Enterprise Institute has argued, a 20-year loan can be paid off ‘when the 30-year-term loan leaves most homeowners saddled with another decade or more of mortgage payments, the cash flow freed up from a paid-off shorter-term loan is available to fund a child’s post-secondary-education needs and later turbocharge one’s own retirement.’

The 20-year loan could be incentivized with a first-time buyer tax credit.

The decline in homeownership is a problem that must be addressed federally and locally.

This would be especially important today when the vast majority of taxpayers no longer itemize their tax returns — which means they cannot avail themselves of the deduction for mortgage interest.

That deduction always favored wealthy buyers of high-end homes anyway — so a targeted tax credit would help those who actually need it far more.

It’s time, as well, for the Trump White House to roll back one of the key initiatives of Elizabeth Warren’s pet project, the Consumer Protection Financial Agency.

The CPFC has pressured banks to limit mortgages to ‘plain vanilla’ mortgages, premised on its rules or what consumers can afford.

Adjustable rate loans and other ‘mortgage products’ can be right for some buyers — who should have a choice of how much risk they want to take in exchange for getting into the home market.

Even a low down payment might be hard to come up with, however, for those who can’t take advantage of generous in-laws.

Those without rich parents might turn to a ‘housing saving account’ — akin to the popular health savings accounts initiated by George W. Bush and which hold some $59 billion and are sheltered from taxation.

The new housing accounts should be tailored only for down payments, however — not long-term maintenance and other homeowner needs.

What Trump can do to help bring housing costs down

Buyers also are allowed today to take out $10,000 from their 401(k) penalty-free to go to a downpayment on a home.

Perhaps it’s time to raise that ceiling.

Of course, it goes almost without saying that even the most creative financing and incentives will fall short of addressing our housing needs without the most important problem: Supply.

There are many reasons why there aren’t enough starter homes.

Trump eyes 50-year mortgage in

Regulation in many cities makes construction difficult.

More retiring Boomers own second homes.

Banks have increasingly bought real estate as an investment and drive up prices.

Low turnover is another reason Gen X buyers have so much trouble breaking into the market.

During COVID, mortgage rates hit record lows and many refinanced.

These owners have a strong incentive not to trade a 3% mortgage for a new home and a much-higher rate.

Another key reason: more and more of us are living in small households or even alone.

The Census Bureau reports that, between 2019 and 2021, the number of households increased by more than 2 million a year.

That means we not only need more housing but more types of housing — many smaller units especially, rather than the two-acre, one house lots common in so many suburbs.

Here is where the limits of Washington’s hard power is reached.

Much of US housing policy is set at the hyper-local level, by planning boards and zoning boards.

That’s why outgoing New York City Mayor Eric Adams deserves so much credit for his ‘City of Yes’ rezoning in New York, which will permit safe basement apartments and ‘accessory dwelling units’ in parts of the city.

Accessory units — or ‘granny flats’ — can also be the means for older couples to sell the homes to younger households and downsize.

As part of a federal push, though, the Marshall Plan for Housing could encourage these same changes nationwide: Changing zoning to allow more housing; or taking undeveloped state land and providing tax incentives to build on them.

It’s the 18,000 municipalities across the country that are often standing in the way of what might be called naturally occurring affordable housing — small homes on small lots, like those of the original Levittown, where houses were just 750 square feet of living space.

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner should urge localities to permit private, unsubsidized, small homes and apartment buildings, or what AEI’s Pinto terms ‘light-touch density.’

It’s far more likely to gain local approval than the subsidized, low-income housing Democrats have long favored, starting with the public housing the socialist Zohran Mamdani wants to revive.

Private building is also less costly; new housing units in California subsidized through the low income housing tax credit can cost upwards of $800,000 per units, a bonanza for developers but not many tenants.

Building costs for any housing, however, will inevitably go up as a result of another Trump policy: his 10% tariff on plentiful Canadian lumber and timber products and a 25% tariff on kitchen cabinets and furniture.

The de facto taxes are causing what the National Association of Home Builders calls ‘headwinds’ holding back new construction.

As a builder himself, he should rethink these tariffs.

Homeownership is a virtuous conspiracy making the nation better.

Owners are more likely to maintain neighborhoods than renters, more likely to improve schools and services by getting involved in local government — the essence of American federalism.

The decline in homeownership is a problem that must be addressed federally and locally.

But the Trump administration can take the lead, with tax breaks and the encouragement of construction.

The president can bring the dream alive again.


 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

India has approved a sweeping overhaul of royalty rates for several critical minerals, continuing its campaign to expand domestic mining and reduce reliance on Chinese imports.

Under the revised framework, graphite with at least 80 percent fixed carbon will be charged a 2 percent royalty based on the average sale price (ASP) determined by the Indian Bureau of Mines, while graphite with lower purity will carry a 4 percent rate.

Caesium and rubidium will each be levied a 2 percent royalty on the ASP of metal contained in the ore, and zirconium will be charged 1 percent.

The government said the changes would encourage more rational bidding in auctions and attract greater private participation in mineral exploration. “The above decision of the Union Cabinet will promote auction of mineral blocks containing caesium, rubidium and zirconium, thereby not only unlocking these minerals but also associated critical minerals found with them, such as lithium, tungsten, REEs, and niobium,” the statement read.

New Delhi has recently pushed to build a self-reliant critical mineral ecosystem amid mounting global supply chain pressures.

China, which produces more than 80 percent of the world’s rare earth elements and controls much of the refining capacity for battery metals, has tightened export restrictions in recent years.

At least nine mineral blocks were offered in the sixth tranche of auctions launched in September, including five graphite blocks, two rubidium blocks, and one each for caesium and zirconium.

These minerals are integral to India’s green industrial transition: graphite is used in electric vehicle (EV) batteries, zirconium in nuclear reactors, caesium in precision timing systems such as GPS, and rubidium in fiber optics and night vision equipment.

The royalty revision also complements broader measures under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration to secure strategic minerals and reduce import dependency.

Earlier this year, India approved a US$1.9 billion plan to source critical materials used in batteries, electronics, and agriculture.

In addition, the government weeks ago was reported to be nearly tripling its production-linked incentive (PLI) program for rare earth magnet manufacturing to over 70 billion rupees (US$788 million), a major step up from the initial US$290 million proposal.

Pending cabinet approval, the expanded plan seeks to develop a full rare earth magnet supply chain for EVs, renewable energy systems, and defense applications.

In parallel, the government is also investing heavily in human capital to sustain this growth. The Ministry of Mines, in coordination with the Skill Council for Mining Sector (SCMS), has launched an initiative to train 5.7 million workers in mining-related occupations by 2030.

The skills gap study for 2025–2030 will map future workforce requirements and identify pathways to develop a “future-ready” labor pool capable of supporting new mineral projects.

“The report will come up with a detailed action plan for the sector on ways to impart skills training to millions of workers to cater to the increasing demand from the sector in the near future,” a senior government official told The Economic Times.

India currently imports about 60 percent of its graphite needs and remains a minor producer of most other critical minerals. The Modi administration aims to more than double mining’s share of GDP to 5 percent by 2030 from 2.2 percent today.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com