From a supply-demand balance perspective, China's lithium carbonate market exhibited a tight balance in H1 2026, with sellers and buyers continuously seeking new equilibrium points amid bargaining.

This week, spot lithium carbonate prices fell steadily, with the center of gravity gradually shifting downward. The futures market was weak, with the most-traded September 2026 contract drifting lower from a range of 163,300-168,700 yuan/mt at the start of the week to 151,000-166,400 yuan/mt, hitting a weekly low of 151,000 yuan/mt mid-week—a weekly decline of about 6.8%. Open interest fell then rose, with bears taking the dominant position. Market transactions showed a stalemate between downstream dip-buying and upstream price-firming, with actual deal activity relatively brisk. Upstream, lithium chemical plants continued to hold back from selling, with some enterprises still anchoring to the psychological 170,000 yuan/mt level and unwilling to sell at low prices, only showing a stronger willingness to sell at relatively high price levels. Downstream material plants continued to buy the dip, with strong buying interest around 150,000 yuan/mt; some enterprises, considering the recent wide price fluctuations, lean toward adopting backward pricing models to hedge against short-term price rise risks. Overall, market inquiry and actual deal activity were relatively brisk, but a significant gap remained between upstream and downstream psychological price levels. On the supply side, production continued to fall, with notable divergence in inventory across the supply chain. Lithium carbonate production continued to decline this week, mainly due to some lithium chemical plants going into planned maintenance, leading to marked reductions in output at lines using spodumene and lepidolite as raw material; production from salt lake and recycling sources remained stable, maintaining a modest upward trajectory. In terms of inventory changes: upstream lithium chemical plants continued to hold prices firm on spot orders, but under output fluctuations, in-factory inventory kept destocking; downstream material plants matched warrants around delivery months, purchasing mostly on a just-in-time basis, with inventories also slightly drawing down; traders increased their warrant-taking, while downstream showed no strong willingness to sell in large volumes, causing a moderate buildup in trader inventories. Overall, inventory conditions diverged clearly across segments, with the tug-of-war between sellers and buyers continuing. Fund flows featured dominant bearish position-building. Futures open interest grew overall alongside price declines, with a particularly notable 5,434-lot increase on July 9, suggesting active shorts entering the market, with sentiment running bearish. Looking ahead, in the short term, lithium carbonate prices are expected to maintain a fluctuating subdued note. Supply side, ongoing maintenance at some lithium chemical plants and tightening raw material circulation offer some support to prices; however, the supply flexibility from Q3 shipment arrivals of Zimbabwean lithium ore and the effective supply of domestic lithium carbonate from Jiangxi mines remain key variables going forward. Demand side, downstream just-in-time procurement and willingness to restock near 150,000 yuan/mt provide price floors, but momentum to chase higher prices is lacking. Lithium prices are expected to consolidate within the 150,000-165,000 yuan/mt range in the near term.

Today, the SMM spot price of battery-grade lithium carbonate continued to fall from the previous trading day. In the futures market, the lithium carbonate 2609 contract opened lower at 159,600 yuan/mt. After the open, concentrated bearish positions drove prices quickly below the average price line, with a sustained decline. During the morning session, prices moved sideways in a narrow range below the average price line as bulls and bears engaged in a tug-of-war between 155,000 and 158,500 yuan/mt. Around noon, bears strengthened again, accelerating the price drop, which touched a low of 151,000 yuan/mt. In the final session, the price consolidated at lows before rebounding slightly to around 153,000 yuan/mt and closing with a 5.17% loss at 153,400 yuan/mt. Open interest added 5,434 lots. In the spot market, downstream material plants continued to buy the dip, resulting in relatively active market enquiries and actual transactions, while upstream lithium chemical plants maintained a sentiment of holding prices firm. Lithium carbonate production continued to decline this week, mainly because some lithium chemical plants entered planned maintenance, leading to notably reduced output from spodumene- and lepidolite-based production lines. In contrast, production at salt lake and recycling facilities remained stable and continued to edge up. From the perspectives of market transactions and inventory changes, upstream lithium chemical plants still held prices firm and held back from selling in spot orders, with their willingness to sell only increasing when prices were at relatively high levels. However, influenced by production fluctuations, their in-factory inventories continued to destock. Downstream material plants engaged in warrant matching for the delivery month, with purchases mainly based on rigid demand, so their inventories also saw slight destocking. Traders' receipt of warrants increased somewhat, but downstream players did not show significant willingness to sell, leading to a slight accumulation of inventory among traders. Overall, inventory divergence across these segments was evident, and the tug-of-war between sellers and buyers persisted.

Core View The main theme of lithium ore prices in H1 2026 was a sharp rally followed by a correction, rather than a one-way upward shift in the price center. The SMM spodumene concentrate index price (SC6, CIF China) started the year at around USD 2,000/t in January, briefly fell to USD 1,875/t in early February, then followed lithium carbonate prices higher and reached the year-to-date high of USD 2,780–2,840/t in mid-May, before retreating to the USD 2,385–2,480/t range in June. This trajectory almost fully mirrored lithium carbonate prices. Lithium carbonate spot prices started the year at around RMB 130,000/t, rose above RMB 200,000/t in May, and then pulled back to RMB 160,000–180,000/t in June. Lithium ore did not experience an independent rally throughout the period. It was pulled upward by lithium carbonate pricing via the futures market and then corrected as lithium carbonate prices peaked. Therefore, the starting point for understanding lithium ore prices in H1 is not resource-side supply and demand, but lithium carbonate pricing and market sentiment. One common misinterpretation needs to be corrected first: the strength in lithium ore prices in H1 was not the result of “tight effective supply pushing the price center higher.” The real drivers were the resonance of front-loaded demand, supply disruption expectations, and futures-driven sentiment. Front-loaded demand was triggered by export tax rebate adjustments; supply disruption expectations came from the repeated delays in Jianxiawo’s restart and Zimbabwe’s lithium concentrate export ban. When warehouse receipts accumulated and macro headwinds were released in May, and when Jianxiawo’s restart expectation materialized in June, prices corrected accordingly. After that, prices rebounded again as demand expectations improved. 1. Lithium Ore Followed Lithium Carbonate, While Spodumene-Based Conversion Margins Stayed Negative Throughout H1 The clearest evidence of the lithium ore pricing mechanism in H1 was not how much ore prices rose, but the fact that spot conversion margins for producing lithium carbonate from externally procured spodumene concentrate were negative for most of the period. The ore-salt margin inversion was structural and persistent in H1, rather than a short-lived squeeze on processing margins. The cause of this inversion directly points to the reversal of the pricing mechanism. Ore prices are no longer determined by a cost-plus model from the upstream side, which then determines lithium salt prices. Instead, lithium carbonate has become the pricing anchor, and ore prices are reverse-priced through the futures market. In early January, when lithium carbonate prices rallied on front-loaded demand and sentiment, ore prices were pushed higher at the same time. However, downstream lithium salt demand could not fully absorb the higher cost, and processing margins were squeezed into negative territory. In April, under the reality of ore-salt inversion and limited hedging opportunities, lithium salt producers relying on externally procured ore saw their ability to accept high-priced ore weaken significantly. For overseas miners, this means their realized selling prices are increasingly anchored by the profitability of China’s refining sector. This is not a narrative assumption, but a mechanism that can be verified month by month through spot margin data. The financialization of pricing was also visible in market transactions. When prices fell at the end of May, lithium salt producers became more active in pricing ore purchases. In June, the basis for new cargoes strengthened. Pricing based on futures quotation plus premium or discount has become the mainstream transaction model. Lithium salt producers tend to use pricing windows during price corrections to lock in ore supply. Whoever holds the pricing right controls the settlement timing, and in H1’s highly volatile two-way lithium carbonate market, this directly led to margin differentiation among different lithium salt producers. 2. The Three Drivers of the Rally and the Triggers of the Correction Front-loaded demand — export tax rebate adjustment. In January 2026, the Ministry of Finance and the State Taxation Administration clarified that the VAT export rebate rate for lithium battery products would be reduced from 9% to 6% from April 1, and fully removed from January 1, 2027. This policy directly stimulated downstream players to concentrate export shipments and inventory preparation before April, significantly front-loading demand into H1, especially supporting demand for energy storage and ternary-related materials. This was the most important demand-side catalyst in H1 and the one most easily overlooked by the “weak recovery” narrative. Supply disruption expectations — Jianxiawo and Zimbabwe. After Jianxiawo’s mining permit expired and production was halted in August 2025, its restart timeline was repeatedly pushed back in H1, continuously providing room for both bullish and bearish speculation in the market. Now that Jianxiawo’s restart has been confirmed, the largest bearish factor has been priced in, and the market’s focus has shifted back to whether demand can outperform expectations. In Zimbabwe, the lithium concentrate export ban at the beginning of the year disrupted shipment expectations. Positive progress was reported in late March, and by mid-May, Chinese-funded mining companies in Zimbabwe had completed export procedures and restarted shipments, easing the previous short-term tightness in African cargo arrivals. SMM expects the first batch of cargoes to arrive in China in mid-to-late July. Correction triggers — warehouse receipts, macro factors, and the materialization of restart expectations. After lithium carbonate prices rose above RMB 200,000/t in May, exchange warehouse receipts continued to accumulate and hit new highs, while concerns over off-balance-sheet inventory increased. Together with macro pressure from expectations of further Fed rate hikes, prices peaked and corrected in late May. On June 17, the approval of Jianxiawo’s land use application materialized, and clearer restart expectations further weighed on both ore and salt prices. By late June, according to SMM monthly production schedules, July demand showed resilience despite the seasonal lull, with both power and energy storage cell production schedules increasing month on month. Monthly lithium carbonate consumption remained at a high level, which restored some market confidence and pushed lithium prices higher again. 3. Supply-Side Reality: Imports Weakened Month on Month, but Cumulative Imports Still Increased; Australia Remained Dominant From January to May, spodumene imports showed a combination of weaker month-on-month momentum and continued year-on-year cumulative growth. On a monthly basis, imports reached 758,000 physical tonnes in April, down 9.5% month on month, and 680,800 tonnes in May, down 10.2% month on month. However, total spodumene imports in January–May reached around 3.66 million tonnes, up approximately 25% year on year. By origin, Australia remained the dominant source. China imported around 1.585 million tonnes from Australia in January–May, although May imports from Australia were around 330,000 tonnes, down approximately 15.2% year on year. The share of African supply continued to rise. On the shipment side, lithium concentrate shipments from Port Hedland to China showed clear quarter-end volume acceleration, with March shipments reaching around 122,000 tonnes, up 64.3% month on month. The marginal changes in overseas mines were concentrated in restarts and offtake agreements. Core Lithium restarted its Finniss project on May 20 and plans to ship the first batch of concentrate in Q4. Mineral Resources also restarted Bald Hill, with first spodumene output expected in July. These restart volumes are limited and will not change the short-term supply structure, but they reinforce the expectation of new supply materializing in H2 2026 and H1 2027. On the domestic side, SMM’s domestic sample mines produced 160,690 tonnes LCE in January–June. The restart of Jiangxi lepidolite mines was constrained by permitting procedures, environmental protection, profitability, and other factors, and did not fully ramp up in H1. 4. Migration of Long-Term Pricing Mechanisms: Floor Price Plus Pricing Optionality Has Become the Norm The long-term spodumene offtake agreements signed intensively in H1 provide direct contractual evidence of the financialization of ore pricing. In February, Pilbara Minerals signed a two-year offtake agreement with Tianhua New Energy, setting a floor price of USD 1,000/t, with no price ceiling, together with a USD 100 million interest-free prepayment. In the same period, Pilbara also signed a long-term agreement with Canmax. Yahua Group signed an offtake agreement with Brazil’s MGLIT, also with a minimum price of USD 1,000/t on a 6% basis. Liontown and Tianhua agreed on supply for 2027–2028, priced against a spodumene index. The common feature is a structure of USD 1,000/t floor price plus index or pricing optionality, with downside protection but no upside cap. The pricing benchmark is migrating from fixed website-based long-term pricing toward index-based and futures-linked pricing. This confirms that ore pricing is shifting from traditional long-term contracts to a more financialized structure of “floor price + pricing optionality + premium/discount.” This provides a contractual basis for assessing pricing transmission lags and distortions, and is also a key point for overseas investors to understand how China’s pricing system is penetrating upstream resources. 5. H2 Outlook H1 2026 provides a very clear methodological lesson for H2: lithium ore prices will not move independently from lithium carbonate. The core pricing variables for ore are not the nominal size of global lithium resources, but the dynamic matching among lithium carbonate futures, spot conversion margins for lithium salt producers using externally procured ore, domestic mine restart progress, African cargo arrival schedules, lithium salt producers’ feedstock inventories, and downstream material production schedules. In H1, lithium salt conversion margins remained negative for an extended period, yet ore prices did not fall quickly. Instead, they rose together with lithium carbonate prices under the influence of downstream restocking and supply disruption expectations. This shows that the H1 rally was not an independent strengthening of upstream fundamentals, but a synchronized industry-chain movement driven by front-loaded demand, delayed supply realization, and amplified futures sentiment. For H2 lithium ore analysis, the first step is to distinguish between “no shortage in total resources” and “short-term tightness in effective ore supply.” From a global resource perspective, Australia, Africa, Brazil, South American brines, and Chinese domestic mines all have incremental supply expectations, so there is no absolute shortage of resources. However, from the perspective of Chinese lithium salt production, what truly affects lithium carbonate supply is ore that can be purchased in time, arrive steadily, meet grade requirements, have controllable impurities, and match existing processing lines. If ore is locked in long-term contracts, still in transit, concentrated in trader inventories, or if high prices reduce lithium salt producers’ willingness to purchase, its contribution to short-term lithium salt supply will be weakened. Therefore, H2 analysis should not simply focus on mine output. It should track port inventories, traders’ saleable inventories, in-plant inventories at lithium salt producers using externally procured ore, vessel schedules, and long-term contract lock-up structures. On the domestic supply side, Jianxiawo is the core variable driving H2 market expectations, but its impact should not be simplified as “restart equals immediate supply.” After the mine was suspended, the market treated it as the key anchor for marginal domestic lepidolite supply. The real question in H2 is not the single event of whether it restarts, but whether the restarted volume becomes freely tradable ore. If the output is mainly consumed within CATL’s integrated system, the impact on the spot ore market and externally procured ore salt producers will be limited. Only if the output enters the spot market will it directly pressure ore prices and conversion margins. At the same time, the suspension and restart timeline of other Jiangxi lepidolite mines also needs to be incorporated into the framework. Previous public reports indicated that some mines in Yichun may first exhaust their annual mining quota during the license renewal process and then enter a production halt for license renewal. If these mines continue to be affected by permitting, environmental protection, safety, or profitability factors in H2, the supply elasticity of domestic lepidolite will be weaker than nominal capacity suggests. Conversely, if Jianxiawo and other Yichun mines move forward with restarts or license renewals in Q3–Q4, the marginal contribution of domestic ore to lithium carbonate supply will increase significantly and put pressure on high ore prices. In other words, domestic ore supply in H2 should not be treated as a single variable. It is jointly determined by Jianxiawo, other Yichun mines, and the operating rates of Jiangxi lepidolite-based lithium salt producers. For overseas ore, African supply remains one of the largest sources of H2 supply elasticity. In H1, the disruptions in Africa were more about policy, shipment, and arrival timing rather than the disappearance of resources. If shipments from Zimbabwe and other regions recover and previously delayed cargoes arrive in China in a concentrated manner, feedstock availability for lithium salt producers will improve and the bargaining power of ore sellers will weaken. However, if policy disruption, logistics cycles, grade volatility, or financing pressure cause arrivals to remain inconsistent, lithium salt producers using externally procured ore may still be unable to raise operating rates quickly even if margin repair expectations improve. Australian supply is relatively stable, but a large portion is locked under long-term contracts, limiting its marginal adjustment impact on the spot market. Brazilian and other emerging resources are more important for medium- and long-term expectations, while their short-term impact on Chinese lithium salt production depends on arrival timing and quality stability. Demand is the key factor determining downside support for ore prices. In H2, power batteries and energy storage will enter the traditional peak season, and the expansion and ramp-up of cell and material producers will continue to lift lithium salt consumption. In particular, lithium iron phosphate output, supported by energy storage and commercial vehicle demand, is expected to remain high and provide sustained demand for lithium carbonate. Although ternary materials are growing more slowly than LFP, they may still see periodic restocking driven by certain overseas and high-end power battery demand. If material producers’ expansion is realized smoothly, lithium salt producers will need to maintain high operating rates to meet long-term contract deliveries and spot orders, which will in turn support rigid ore procurement demand. Conversely, if terminal orders fail to absorb the expansion of materials, material producers may enter a destocking cycle, and lithium salt producers’ ore procurement will quickly weaken, causing ore prices to come under pressure earlier. Therefore, H2 lithium ore prices can be divided into four scenarios. Base case: margins gradually rebalance, and ore prices fluctuate at high levels before edging lower. Jianxiawo’s restart expectation materializes, but actual mining and beneficiation ramp-up is gradual. African cargo arrivals recover but do not form a concentrated shock. Power battery and energy storage production schedules remain high, while material producers’ expansion is gradually realized. In this scenario, lithium carbonate prices remain volatile at high levels, the margin inversion of externally procured ore salt producers slowly improves, and lithium ore prices follow lithium carbonate lower but do not collapse. The profits that were excessively concentrated in upstream resources and futures expectations in H1 begin to gradually flow back toward midstream refining. Correction scenario: supply materializes in a concentrated manner, and profits quickly flow back to midstream refining. If Jianxiawo ramps up faster than expected and part of its output enters the spot market; if other Yichun mines progress faster than expected in license renewals; if African ore arrives in China in a concentrated way; and if lithium carbonate warehouse receipts and futures market pressure intensify, ore prices will face stronger downside pressure. The transmission chain would be: lithium carbonate futures turn bearish → lithium salt producers become more cautious in procurement → rigid demand for externally procured ore slows → traders release saleable inventories → ore prices correct quickly. In this scenario, profits do not disappear; they shift quickly from upstream resources back to midstream refining, and overseas miners’ realized prices also come under pressure. The key is not the nominal restart volume of Jianxiawo, but whether the restarted ore is internally consumed or enters the spot market, and whether downstream material inventories can absorb the additional lithium salt supply. Support scenario: effective ore supply remains tight, and profits stay upstream. If Jianxiawo’s actual output is later than market expectations, if license renewals or environmental factors continue to suppress the supply elasticity of other Yichun mines, if African arrivals remain inconsistent, and if peak-season energy storage and power battery production schedules continue to exceed expectations, lithium salt producers using externally procured ore will still face the situation of “orders and capacity available, but feedstock either expensive or unstable.” In this case, negative conversion margins will force some marginal lithium salt producers to reduce operating rates. The contraction of effective lithium carbonate supply will support lithium salt prices; and once salt prices stabilize, ore prices will also gain support. The persistent margin inversion in H1 has already shown that losses are not simply bearish. They act as an automatic stabilizer for the industry chain: they force some marginal refining capacity to shut down, reduce lithium salt supply, and thereby support prices in reverse. Upside scenario: effective ore shortage transmits into lithium salt supply contraction, driving ore prices higher again. If H2 sees the combination of stronger-than-expected demand, weaker-than-expected domestic ore realization, and inconsistent overseas arrivals, lithium ore prices could still rise further. Specifically, if energy storage demand remains highly robust and power batteries enter the traditional peak season with further upward revisions to cell and material production schedules, especially as new LFP capacity continues to ramp up, monthly lithium carbonate consumption will continue to rise. At the same time, if Jianxiawo’s restart is slower than expected, or if output after the restart is mainly consumed within the integrated system with limited spot supply, and if other Jiangxi lepidolite mines are temporarily halted due to license renewal, environmental protection, safety, or profitability factors, domestic ore supply elasticity will fall short of nominal expectations. If African ore arrivals are also inconsistent due to shipment schedules, policy disruptions, grade volatility, or financing issues, lithium salt producers using externally procured ore will face difficulties replenishing feedstock. Under this scenario, ore is no longer merely a variable reverse-priced by lithium carbonate. It begins to constrain lithium salt supply in reverse. The transmission chain would be: downstream material and cell production schedules are revised upward → lithium carbonate spot destocking accelerates → lithium salt producers increase operating rates to fulfill orders → demand for processable ore rises → domestic ore and overseas arrivals fail to ramp up simultaneously → feedstock inventories at externally procured ore salt producers decline → some marginal producers cut output because they cannot secure suitable ore or because margins remain deeply negative → effective lithium carbonate supply contracts → lithium carbonate spot and futures prices strengthen again → lithium ore prices follow lithium carbonate upward. In this case, ore price increases are not driven by independent upstream strength. They are re-priced upward by lithium carbonate after insufficient effective ore supply starts to restrict lithium salt output. In this upside scenario, spot conversion margins for externally procured ore may remain negative or even widen further. On the surface, negative margins should pressure ore prices. But under the combination of strong demand, strong lithium salt prices, and tight ore supply, negative margins can instead become a price-supporting mechanism. On one hand, they force some high-cost externally procured ore producers to suspend operations, reducing lithium carbonate supply. On the other hand, producers with long-term delivery obligations, customer orders, or futures hedging needs still have to keep buying ore, further consuming saleable ore supply. The end result is that industry-chain profits remain concentrated upstream, lithium salt producers’ margin recovery is delayed, and the ore price center may move further upward. Overall, the core issue for the H2 lithium ore market is not whether there is too much or too little ore, but whether ore can be converted into lithium carbonate supply in time. The correct analytical framework should cover six variables: the strength of power battery and energy storage production schedules, inventory cycles at material and cell producers, lithium carbonate spot and futures pricing, the depth of margin inversion for lithium salt producers using externally procured ore, the actual restart and distribution path of Jianxiawo and other Yichun mines, and changes in African arrivals and traders’ saleable inventories. Lithium ore is not the starting point of the industry-chain cycle. It is the result of reverse pricing by lithium carbonate supply-demand fundamentals, refining margins, and the futures market. Only when ore starts to restrict lithium salt producers’ operating rates, or when new ore supply begins to materially increase lithium carbonate supply, will lithium ore shift from a price-following variable to a supply-demand-leading variable. SMM New Energy Analyst: Lesley Yang yangle@smm.cn +61 0451581533

[SMM Cobalt Lithium Morning Meeting Minutes: This week, overall sentiment in the industry chain recovered, as a rebound in upstream raw material prices drove some material prices higher. Lithium carbonate, LFP, and separator segments performed strongly. Downstream production schedules stayed high, with demand from energy storage, commercial vehicles, and power batteries still providing support. However, acceptance of high prices was limited, and actual transactions were mostly based on essential needs. Cobalt salts, nickel salts, and ternary cathode precursors remained in the doldrums, with a strong wait-and-see sentiment prevailing in the market. Overall, short-term prices may continue to drift higher, but attention still needs to be paid to raw material arrivals, the sustainability of restocking, and the realization of end-use demand going forward.]

This week, spot lithium carbonate prices bottomed out and consolidated higher. The futures market was strong, with the most-traded 2609 contract rebounding sharply from 145,300-154,700 yuan/mt at the start of the week to 162,200-167,800 yuan/mt. The mid-week high touched 167,800 yuan/mt, and the weekly gain was about 8.4%. Market sentiment diverged significantly between upstream and downstream players. Upstream lithium chemical plants continued to hold prices firm and hold back from selling, with low willingness to sell below 170,000 yuan/mt. Some enterprises, supported by costs, maintained the intention to keep prices high. Downstream material plants had largely completed their month-end stockpiling for the next month. As prices consolidated higher, purchases were mainly need-based, restocking was cautious, and acceptance of high-priced cargoes remained low. Overall, market inquiries and actual transactions were relatively stable and quiet, with the spot-futures price spread strengthening slightly. Supply-side output fell sharply, strengthening expectations of supply contraction. Lithium carbonate production fell sharply this week, mainly because the circulation of spodumene and lepidolite raw materials in the market was relatively tight, while some lithium chemical plants had maintenance plans, leading to a sharp drop in spodumene-based output. Salt lake-based and recycling-based output maintained steady gains. Multiple bullish factors on the supply side converged to drive the price rebound. First, raw material supply tightened, with spot circulation of spodumene concentrates tightening, coupled with maintenance plans at some lithium chemical plants, strengthening expectations of near-term supply contraction. Second, signs of a phased decline in imports emerged: Chile’s lithium carbonate exports to China fell 40.8% MoM in May, and domestic import arrivals are expected to decline subsequently. On the demand side, downstream production schedules in July showed significant growth and remained high. The domestic lithium carbonate supply-demand balance is expected to show a large destocking pattern in July. Looking ahead, near-term lithium carbonate prices may hold up well and consolidate, but upside room should be viewed with caution. Near-term lithium prices are expected to consolidate in the 160,000-170,000 yuan/mt range. It is recommended to focus on the progress of mine license renewal in Jiangxi, the pace of port arrivals of lithium ore from Zimbabwe, changes in downstream acceptance of high prices, and the extent of warrant retreat from high levels.

Today, SMM battery-grade lithium carbonate spot price continued to rise from the previous working day. In the futures market, the lithium carbonate 2609 contract opened lower at 163,500 yuan/mt. After the opening, bulls briefly entered, quickly pushing the price to an intraday high of 167,800 yuan/mt, before encountering selling pressure from bears, causing a consolidation and pullback. During the morning session, the price moved sideways around the average price line, with bulls and bears engaging in a tug-of-war within the 164,000–166,000 yuan/mt range. Around midday, bears concentrated their entry, pushing the price below the average price line, followed by a sustained decline. In the afternoon, the decline accelerated, reaching a low of 162,200 yuan/mt. In the final trading hours, the price rebounded slightly to around 164,000 yuan/mt and consolidated to close, ultimately edging up 0.17% to 164,000 yuan/mt. Open interest decreased by 4,233 lots. In the spot market, downstream spot orders for procurement were mainly need-based, while upstream spot shipments remained cautious, with a low willingness to sell at levels below 170,000 yuan/mt. Overall, market inquiries and actual transactions were relatively sluggish. This week, lithium carbonate production dropped significantly, mainly due to relatively tight circulation in the spodumene and lepidolite raw material markets, coupled with maintenance plans at some lithium chemical plants, which led to a sharp decline in spodumene-based production. Salt lake and recycling-based output maintained steady growth. From the perspective of actual market transactions and inventory levels, against the backdrop of a fluctuating and downward-shifting price center, lithium chemical plants continued to hold prices firm and hold back from selling spot orders, leaving upstream inventory basically stable. Downstream material plants continued their dip-buying strategy, with a notable increase in purchasing and stockpiling enthusiasm this week, driving up their own inventories. Traders, following the downstream purchasing pace, saw their inventories destock simultaneously. Overall, inventory adjustments diverged across segments, and market trading sentiment heated up.

On 25,June,Premier African Minerals Limited ("Premier" or the "Company") has provided an update on the optimisation progress of the upgraded flotation plant at the Zulu Lithium and Tantalum Project ("Zulu"), as well as on ongoing discussions regarding the extension of the Long Stop Date under the Company's prepayment and offtake arrangements. Managing Director Graham Hill commented that the initial results from the upgraded flotation circuit are very encouraging and represent the most positive operating performance seen from the plant to date. Although commissioning was cut short due to the exhaustion of available ore feed, the circuit demonstrated a significant improvement in concentrate quality and overall operating stability compared with the previous configuration. The immediate priority is to ensure sufficient ore is available on the ROM pad to support continuous operation, as flotation optimisation requires sustained operation over an extended period. Establishing an adequate stockpile before recommencing commissioning activities is considered the most efficient approach. The objective is to operate the plant continuously for approximately 30 days, which should provide the data and operating experience required to fully optimise the circuit and assess its long‑term performance. In parallel, the Company is engaging constructively with Canmax regarding a further extension of the Long Stop Date. Discussions are positive and Canmax is currently reviewing the latest operational data generated during commissioning. Operational Performance Initial commissioning of the upgraded flotation circuit has demonstrated encouraging performance improvements. Based on internal laboratory analyses conducted during commissioning, the upgraded circuit achieved rapid froth formation following start‑up and produced concentrate grades materially exceeding those previously achieved. Internal assay results recorded sample concentrate grades exceeding 5.0% Li₂O, with peak sample grades of up to 5.58% Li₂O. These results are preliminary in nature and should not be regarded as independently verified. The commissioning programme was curtailed by the exhaustion of available ore feed, preventing the plant from undergoing the extended period of continuous operation typically required to fully optimise and stabilise the flotation circuit. The limited ore availability reflects the Company's current financial position and the associated constraints on mining activities at Zulu, with operations continuing on a reduced scale due to insufficient resources to mobilise a large‑scale mining contractor. Nevertheless, the Board believes that the encouraging commissioning results achieved to date provide a strong platform for the next phase of optimisation work and anticipates that, subject to continued operational progress and stakeholder engagement, the Company will be better positioned to secure the resources necessary to support the mobilisation of a larger‑scale mining contractor capable of providing sufficient ore for sustained plant operations. The improved performance and throughput achieved during commissioning resulted in substantially all of the approximately 6,000 tonnes of ore made available for commissioning and optimisation activities being processed. As a result, additional ore will need to be mined and stockpiled before extended optimisation activities can recommence. Further optimisation, continuous operation and independent verification, where appropriate, will be required before the Company can fully assess the performance and operational capability of the upgraded flotation circuit. Regarding the handling of concentrate produced during commissioning and test work, the Company is currently evaluating options. Subject to obtaining any necessary approvals, including the consent of Canmax where required, and compliance with all applicable regulatory and contractual obligations, the Company may seek to market and sell certain quantities of concentrate produced during the commissioning process in country. No assurance can be given that any such sales will occur or as to the timing or terms of any such transactions. ROM Stockpile and Ongoing Optimisation Programme The improved performance of the upgraded flotation circuit resulted in the processing of substantially all of the approximately 6,000 tonnes of ore that had been made available for commissioning and optimisation activities. As flotation optimisation requires sustained and continuous operation over an extended period, the Company's immediate focus is on rebuilding ore inventories on the ROM pad to support a planned continuous operating campaign of approximately 30 days. Given the current reduced scale of mining activities, the Board believes that establishing an adequate ore stockpile prior to recommencing optimisation represents the most efficient use of available resources and will maximise the value of future optimisation activities. The Company is therefore prioritising the accumulation of sufficient ore feed to support an uninterrupted optimisation programme and enable a comprehensive assessment of plant performance under sustained operating conditions. Based on current mining and stockpiling activities, the Company expects to have sufficient ore available on the ROM pad to recommence plant operations during July 2026. This timetable remains subject to mining performance and other operational factors. Long Stop Date Discussions The Company has approached Canmax Technologies Co., Ltd. ("Canmax") regarding a further extension of the Long Stop Date (see announcement on 5 January 2026 for further information) under the existing prepayment and offtake arrangements. Discussions with Canmax are constructive and positive. As part of its review process, Canmax is currently assessing the latest operational and commissioning data generated by the upgraded flotation circuit, together with the broader technical progress achieved at Zulu. While discussions remain ongoing and no definitive agreement has yet been reached, the Board is encouraged by the engagement to date and believes that both parties remain committed to finding a mutually acceptable path forward. Under the existing prepayment and offtake arrangements, the Long Stop Date is the date by which Premier will have delivered either sufficient spodumene SC6, or provided cash settlement, to Canmax to settle the advance purchase amount provided by Canmax to Premier in full. As previously announced on 5 January 2026, Premier and Canmax agreed, subject to certain conditions, to extend the Long Stop Date to the earlier of 30 June 2026 or the date on which a reputable buyer acceptable to Canmax executed a binding agreement to settle and/or manage Canmax's Prepayment Amount plus interest on terms to be agreed by Canmax. Publication of Audited Accounts The Company's report and accounts for the year ended 31 December 2025 ("Accounts") are due for publication on or before 30 June 2026 ("Publication Date"). The Accounts are at an advanced stage of preparation and remain subject to final review and auditor signoff, including consideration of ongoing discussions regarding the proposed extension of the Long Stop Date. The Company continues to work towards publication by the Publication Date. Further updates will be provided as and when appropriate. Source: polaris.brighterir.com/public/premier_african_minerals/news/rns/story/rd623px

Around June 24, 2026, import and export data for products related to the cobalt and lithium battery industry chain for May were released. The data shows that spodumene imports in May continued to pull back from April, reaching 681,000 mt in physical content, down 10% MoM, equivalent to approximately 66,000 mt of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). On the lithium carbonate import side, China imported 37,555 mt of lithium carbonate in May, up 15% MoM and up 78% YoY. Cumulative imports of lithium carbonate from January to May reached 153,000 mt, up 53% YoY year-to-date... SMM has consolidated the import and export situation of battery materials, as follows: Upstream Lithium Concentrates Customs data indicates that spodumene imports in May continued to pull back from April, reaching 681,000 mt in physical content. By source country, port arrivals of Australian ore returned to relatively normal levels, with arrivals exceeding 330,000 mt this month, down 6% MoM; shipments from Zimbabwe that were loaded earlier arrived at 63,800 mt this month, down 41% MoM; exports from South Africa and Nigeria from April to May were relatively stable, with port arrivals ranging from 90,000 to 110,000 mt per month. Arrivals from Mali were low this month, at only 38,000 mt, which increased MoM but have not returned to relatively high levels. Additionally, after SMM screening, it can be seen that the incoming ore for the month was equivalent to 66,000 mt of LCE. Lithium concentrates accounted for 81% of the incoming ore, with the trend rising MoM compared to the previous month. Source: China Customs, compiled by SMM > [SMM Analysis] China's spodumene imports reached 681,000 mt in physical content in May 2026, down 10% MoM, equivalent to approximately 66,000 mt of LCE On the spot quotation for spodumene concentrates (CIF China), according to SMM spot quotes, the spot quotation for spodumene concentrates (CIF China) in May showed a trend of rising first and then falling. As of May 29, the spot quotation for spodumene concentrates (CIF China) was around $2,571/mt, up $31/mt from $2,540/mt at month-end April, an increase of 1.22%. > Click to view SMM's spot quotes for new energy products In May, enterprises that purchase spodumene externally for lithium extraction still hovered near the break-even line. At the beginning of the month, lithium carbonate prices rebounded, but spodumene concentrates followed suit and at one point rose more than salt prices, leading to continued losses. In the first half of May, lithium carbonate prices further rose, and non-integrated enterprises might briefly achieve slim profits on the spot; after mid-month, ore prices fluctuated at highs while lithium carbonate pulled back, causing enterprises to fall back into losses, which lasted until month-end. Enterprises that purchase lepidolite externally for lithium extraction continued to see stable profits in May. Although lepidolite concentrate prices fluctuated at highs due to tight supply, their increase was smaller than the rise in lithium carbonate, leaving profit margins for the smelting end. May 12: Yichun Mining auctioned 5,700 mt of 2% lepidolite concentrate at a transaction price of 5,760 yuan/mt, reflecting the tight balance at the ore end. As of June 24, spodumene concentrate (CIF China) spot prices remained at $2,291/mt. Lithium Carbonate According to customs data, China imported 37,555 mt of lithium carbonate in May, up 15% MoM and up 78% YoY. Of this, 24,522 mt came from Chile (65% of total imports), 11,422 mt from Argentina (30%), and 1,023 mt from Indonesia (3%). From January to May, China’s cumulative lithium carbonate imports reached 153,000 mt, up 53% YoY. In May, China exported 201 mt of lithium carbonate, down 46% MoM and down 30% YoY. Cumulative exports from January to May totaled 2,087 mt, up 1% YoY. China imported 12,107 mt of lithium sulfate in May, down 33% MoM but up 53% YoY. Cumulative imports from January to May reached 71,000 mt, up 105% YoY. According to SMM spot price data, spot lithium carbonate prices in May also showed a pattern of rising first and then falling. As of May 29, spot lithium carbonate prices stood at 177,500 yuan/mt, up 500 yuan/mt from 177,000 yuan/mt on April 30, an increase of 0.28%. 》Click to view SMM New Energy product spot prices Looking back at the May lithium carbonate market, according to SMM, spot lithium carbonate prices in China fluctuated upward with a notable rise in the price center, and the average monthly price rose 12% MoM. From the fundamental side, supply-side disruptions continued to fester, while on the demand side, production schedules for downstream cathode materials and battery cells remained at high levels. The June production schedule is expected to accelerate further, and the supply-demand time mismatch remains unresolved. Upstream lithium chemical plants maintained firm prices and held back from selling throughout the month. The downstream showed divergence: some enterprises restocked on dips, but most had limited acceptance of high prices and mainly made just-in-time procurement, leaving actual transactions relatively sluggish. In May, spot battery-grade lithium carbonate prices kept rising amid fluctuations, with a notable gain at month-end compared to the start of the month. The most-traded futures contract briefly broke through the 200,000 yuan/mt mark during the month. As of June 24, spot battery-grade lithium carbonate prices were quoted at 154,000-161,000 yuan/mt, averaging 157,500 yuan/mt. According to SMM, entering June, the lithium carbonate market saw a clear tug-of-war between longs and shorts, with the price center shifting significantly lower than in May. On the supply side, disruptions such as declining exports from Chile and license renewals for mines in Jiangxi provided bottom support for lithium carbonate prices. However, pressure from high warrant levels and expectations of Zimbabwean ore arrivals capped the upside for prices. Downstream material plants maintain a dip-buying strategy amid falling lithium carbonate prices, with stronger willingness to restock when prices hit psychological levels but lacking momentum to chase rallies. Upstream lithium chemical plants, on the other hand, still hold sentiment to hold prices firm. Currently, the tug-of-war between longs and shorts intensifies. In the future, close attention should be paid to the warrant inflection point, the arrival pace of Zimbabwe lithium ore, and the extent to which downstream production schedules materialize. Spot lithium carbonate quotes are expected to remain in the doldrums in the near term. Lithium Hydroxide According to customs data, in May 2026, China imported 3,932 mt of lithium hydroxide, down 41% MoM and up nearly fourfold YoY. Among them, imports from South Korea amounted to 2,029 mt, accounting for 51% of total imports; from Indonesia were 360 mt, marking a notable pullback; from Australia and Chile were 1,204 mt, making up 30%. In May, China exported 3,549 mt of lithium hydroxide, down 36% MoM and down 36% YoY, with 2,799 mt going to South Korea and 608 mt to Japan. Battery Materials LFP In May 2026, China's LFP exports reached 7,625.4 mt, up 29.3% MoM from April and up 710.0% YoY from May last year, setting a new monthly high for the year. On the pricing front, total export value in May was $62.6062 million, with an average unit price of roughly $8,210/mt, equivalent to about 55,951 yuan/mt, up around 6.9% from the April average. In terms of export destinations, there was a notable shift in May: exports to the US were the highest at 3,014.7 mt, leaping to first place; Thailand ranked second with 2,030.6 mt; exports to Malaysia totaled about 886 mt, ranking third; Japan and Vietnam recorded 620 mt and 420 mt, respectively. Compared with April, exports to Vietnam and Thailand increased significantly, while those to Poland and Canada declined. The overall export center shifted towards Southeast Asia and the US, which is closely related to the locations of battery cell manufacturers' clients. Overall, overseas demand remains robust. China's total LFP exports kept increasing, achieving multiple-fold growth YoY. In the future, as overseas battery capacity gradually comes onstream, China's LFP exports are expected to stay high. LiPF6 According to China customs data, in May 2026, China's cumulative exports of LiPF6 were approximately 1,500 mt, up about 72.8% MoM, while cumulative imports of LiPF6 were about 53.5 mt. On the export front, in May 2026, China's LiPF6 exports were about 1,500 mt, up about 72.8% MoM from April and up about 15.5% YoY. Specifically, this month, LiPF6 was mainly exported to South Korea, Poland, Malaysia, Japan, and other countries. Exports to Poland were 451.88 mt, up about 33.89% MoM; exports to South Korea were 591.006 mt, up about 622.47% MoM; exports to Japan were 109.8 mt, down about 42.62% MoM; and exports to the US were 77.4 mt, down about 24.05% MoM. Overall, overseas procurement volume for LiPF6 recovered somewhat in May. Artificial Graphite In May 2026, China's artificial graphite imports were 980 mt, up 29.5% MoM but down 21.8% YoY. In terms of the average import price, in May 2026, the average import price of China's artificial graphite stood at 60,148 yuan/mt, down 20.8% MoM but up 37.3% YoY. In May 2026, China's artificial graphite exports were 50,038 mt, up 9.03% MoM but down 4% YoY. In terms of the average export price, in May 2026, the average export price of China's artificial graphite stood at 7,729 yuan/mt, down 16.12% MoM and down 12.91% YoY. Looking at the overall export data, while total artificial graphite exports recorded MoM growth in May, the combined shipments of the top five exporting provinces in China registered a 19% MoM pullback. Performance by province diverged significantly, with two provinces seeing their exports down sharply 40% MoM, another province posting an MoM decline approaching 30%, and major production regions showing marked export weakness. Flake Graphite In May 2026, China's flake graphite imports were 5,944 mt, up 87% MoM and up 22% YoY. Data source: China Customs, SMM In May 2026, China's flake graphite exports were 7,641 mt, up 87% MoM but down 12% YoY. The significant 87% MoM rise in flake graphite exports in this period was mainly driven by the low base effect stemming from the delayed delivery of export orders in April. Affected by earlier logistics delays, production schedule postponements, and other factors, export shipments in April were at a relatively low level, and previously backlogged export orders were concentrated for customs declaration and shipment in May, driving a sharp MoM increase in export volumes this month. Phosphate Ore In May 2026, China's phosphate ore imports stood at 131,000 mt, down 36.4% MoM, with an average price of $93/mt, down slightly 2.6% MoM. Import sources were highly concentrated in Egypt (128 kt, accounting for 97.7%), while shipments from Peru and Jordan were interrupted. Exports stood at 32 kt, up 189.6% MoM, with Hubei resuming exports of 21 kt. The Egyptian government halted new export contracts in mid-May, intensifying supply uncertainty going forward, which may further pressure import costs. The provincial mix shifted dramatically as Hubei imports fell to zero and Guangxi reclaimed the top spot. Characteristics of China’s phosphate ore import market in May: First, total volume pulled back significantly, with imports down more than one-third MoM; second, sources were highly concentrated, with Egypt alone accounting for as much as 97.7%, while shipments from Peru and Jordan were interrupted; third, the provincial mix shifted dramatically, as Hubei imports fell to zero and Guangxi reclaimed the top spot. The Egyptian government announced in mid-May that it would stop signing new phosphate ore export contracts. The uncertainty surrounding Egyptian cargo supply will rise markedly in the coming months, potentially pushing import costs higher and exacerbating tight supply. At the same time, the recovery in exports from Hubei and Guizhou reflects a rebalancing of the regional supply-demand pattern for domestic phosphate ore. Cobalt Cobalt Hydrometallurgy Intermediate Products In May 2026, China’s imports of cobalt hydrometallurgy intermediate products were approximately 2,584 mt in physical content, up 107% MoM and down 95% YoY. Imports from the DRC were approximately 2,066 mt in physical content, up 119% MoM and down 96% YoY. The average import price of cobalt hydrometallurgy intermediate products in China in May 2026 was $16,607/mt in physical content, down 3.37% MoM. Reports indicate that some Chinese-invested miners have gradually increased chartered shipments since May, with several leading miners progressively resuming shipments from June onward. Port arrivals of intermediate products are expected to slowly pick up in the coming months and are likely to achieve bulk arrival volumes after August. Unwrought Cobalt In May 2026, China’s imports of unwrought cobalt were approximately 673 mt, down 50% MoM and up 3% YoY. In May, the top three sources by refined cobalt import volume were Indonesia (211 mt), Madagascar (93 mt), and Canada (85 mt). The sharp MoM decline in imports was mainly due to the depletion of low-priced cobalt raw materials previously accumulated outside China, while newly imported cobalt plates and cobalt briquettes were priced higher than other domestic cobalt raw materials, reducing smelters’ willingness to purchase for dissolution. The average import price of unwrought cobalt in China in May 2026 was $54,557/mt, up 3.48% MoM. Cumulative imports in January-May 2026 totaled 6,589 mt, up 120% YoY. Exports, in May 2026 China's unwrought cobalt exports were approximately 370 mt, up 70% MoM and down 88% YoY. By destination, exports to the Netherlands surged to 205 mt in May, up 791% MoM. Average export price, the average export price of China's unwrought cobalt in May 2026 was $53,403/mt, down 2.17% MoM. Cumulative exports in January-May 2026 totaled 2,161 mt, down 79% YoY.

Spot lithium carbonate prices extended their downward trajectory this week, with the price center shifting further lower. The futures market saw intensifying volatility, with the most-traded LC2609 contract fluctuating downward from 150,900-161,800 yuan/mt early in the week to 150,300-163,900 yuan/mt, hitting a mid-week high of 163,900 yuan/mt before pulling back sharply and dipping to a low of 150,300 yuan/mt, testing the 150,000 yuan/mt psychological level. Open interest increased overall amid a fierce tug-of-war between longs and shorts. Market transactions showed active dip-buying on the downstream side while upstream players held firm on prices and held back from selling. On the upstream lithium chemical plant side, spot order quotes remained high as they maintained a stance of holding prices firm and holding back from selling, with some enterprises showing limited willingness to sell below 170,000 yuan/mt. On the downstream material plant side sentiment around buying and stockpiling near the 150,000 yuan/mt level was active, continuing a dip-buying strategy, with some closing out their post-settlement price positions around 150,000 yuan/mt. Overall, market inquiries and actual transactions were relatively active, with downstream purchase willingness notably strengthening as prices fell. Supply-side production edged up, while industry chain inventory diverged significantly. Lithium carbonate production edged up this week, mainly driven by incremental release from new capacity ramp-up on the spodumene side, while production from other raw material sources remained relatively stable overall. Looking at inventory changes: upstream lithium chemical plants, against the backdrop of a downward shift in the price center, continued to hold firm on spot order quotes and hold back from selling, leaving inventory basically stable; downstream material plants maintained a dip-buying strategy, with enthusiasm for buying and stockpiling notably increasing this week, leading to some inventory accumulation; traders synchronized destocking in line with the downstream buying pace. Overall, inventory adjustments diverged across segments, and market trading sentiment warmed somewhat. Import and export data showed continued ample supply from outside China. According to customs data, China imported 37,555 mt of lithium carbonate in May, up 15% MoM and up 78% YoY. Cumulative imports for January-May reached 153,000 mt, up 53% YoY. Of this, 24,522 mt came from Chile (65%) and 11,422 mt from Argentina (30%). Lithium sulfate imports in May totaled 12,107 mt, down 33% MoM but up 53% YoY, with cumulative imports for January-May reaching 71,000 mt, up 105% YoY. Import data stayed high, supplementing domestic supply. Looking ahead, on the supply side, the arrival pace of ore from Zimbabwe and the progress of Jiangxi mining license renewals remain key variables; on the demand side, active downstream buying and stockpiling sentiment near the 150,000 yuan/mt level provides some price support. In the short term, lithium carbonate prices are expected to remain in the doldrums, but whether the support near 150,000 yuan/mt holds requires monitoring.