In a striking development since China imposed a ban on the export of critical minerals to the United States last December, U.S. imports of antimony—vital for batteries, semiconductors, and flame retardants—have surged through alternative routes, notably via Thailand and Mexico. Despite the official Chinese restrictions, trade and shipping data reveal that at least one Chinese-owned company is actively engaged in these redirected shipments, raising questions over the effectiveness of Beijing’s enforcement.
Customs records reviewed between December 2024 and April 2025 show that the U.S. received 3,834 metric tons of antimony oxides from Thailand and Mexico—more than the combined total imported in the previous three years. Chinese export data up to May corroborate this, with Thailand and Mexico suddenly becoming top destinations for China’s antimony exports. Neither country featured among the top ten in 2023, before the export controls were enacted.
China, the global leader in the supply of antimony, gallium, and germanium—minerals crucial for high-tech and military applications—enacted the ban following U.S. actions targeting its semiconductor sector. In response, Chinese companies appear to have restructured trade routes, often disguising or rerouting shipments through third-party countries, according to trade analysts and industry insiders.
The redirection has proven lucrative, if risky. Levi Parker, CEO of U.S.-based Gallant Metals, told Reuters he continues to import gallium from China through intermediaries who repackage materials under misleading labels such as “iron” or “art supplies.” He acknowledged the workaround’s complexity and expense but emphasized that direct shipments would likely attract regulatory scrutiny.
Among the key players in the redirection strategy is Thai Unipet Industries, a subsidiary of China’s Youngsun Chemicals. Shipping records indicate Unipet sent at least 3,366 tons of antimony products to the U.S. in just five months—nearly 27 times more than the same period the year before. Most of these shipments were received by Texas-based Youngsun & Essen, which had previously relied directly on Youngsun Chemicals in China for its supplies.
However, there is little clarity over the true origin of the minerals. While shipping documents detail the exporters, cargo, and destinations, they don’t confirm whether the raw materials were smelted locally or merely transshipped through these countries.
Despite Beijing’s recent clampdown on transshipment and smuggling of critical minerals—under which violators could face hefty fines or even prison—experts say enforcement remains a challenge. James Hsiao, a legal expert at White & Case, notes that Chinese law applies to its companies even if transactions occur overseas. Yet unless due diligence reveals misuse, enforcement is difficult.
In May, China’s Commerce Ministry acknowledged that foreign entities were collaborating with domestic actors to circumvent export rules. While reiterating that such activities threaten national security, the Ministry has yet to publicly address the dramatic rise in exports via Thailand and Mexico.
The U.S., meanwhile, has not prohibited the import of these minerals if routed through third countries, allowing American companies to continue sourcing critical inputs for industrial and defense applications—though often at elevated costs.
As both nations continue their economic and technological rivalry, the backdoor mineral trade highlights the growing complexity of global supply chains and the difficulties nations face in enforcing strategic trade restrictions.
Read More: Import Restrictions Tightened on Precious Metal Alloys Containing Gold: CBIC
