[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Mith & Abe [@Mith_](/creator/twitter/Mith_) on x 1686 followers Created: 2025-07-25 16:11:44 UTC Let’s look at this statement: “likely lubricate the importing of cheaper EV batteries.” Even before President Trump’s second term, lithium-ion cells were already heavily tariffed. The Trump Administration enacted Section XXX tariffs on lithium-ion cells and components starting in 2018. These were not blanket tariffs. They were progressive and targeted. Trump’s tariffs initially hit fully assembled lithium-ion EV batteries from China with a XX% rate, later raised to 25%. Battery inputs like cathode active materials, anodes, separators, and electrolytes were added across multiple tranches. These directly increased the cost of importing battery materials. The Biden Administration did not unwind those tariffs. In 2024, after a four-year review, they expanded them. New Section XXX actions added or raised tariffs on key inputs, phased in through 2026: • Natural and synthetic graphite used in anodes will face a XX% tariff by 2026 • Battery-grade electrolytes and separators will be hit with a XX% tariff in 2025 • Cathode active material remains under a XX% tariff from earlier lists • Fully assembled lithium-ion EV batteries continue to face a XX% tariff The idea that any recent deal will “lubricate” battery imports ignores the tariffs already in place. People also make the false assumption that raw metals like lithium are the main factor. Currently, very little raw or processed lithium is imported from China, less than X% according to the USGS, even with metal precursors exempt from the retaliatory tariffs (reference Annex 1). The bulk of the raw lithium in the US is imported from countries with fair trade agreements such as Chile and Canada. While raw and processed materials are a major factor, the deciding factor will be the components. This is why we are seeing a push for onshoring cell components like separators and cathode and anode active materials. But let’s look at raw materials. Even without significant primary sources yet available in North America, companies are launching processing facilities to create the precursors needed using imported lithium. We are seeing spodumene concentrate from Canada and Australia and brines from South America. Each of these facilities plans to be online within a year or so, compared to the five to ten years required to develop a mine. Then there are secondary sources, which will be the real domestic supply until primary sources come online. The estimate is that with those two platforms, domestic cell manufacturing will be able to keep pace with demand. So while ABAT is a reasonable candidate for a short, as is the entire sector, it has been that way and will continue to be that way for years to come. His argument that a deal is the reason for the short just falls flat and is not based on anything but typical retail misunderstanding of the lithium market. XXX engagements  **Related Topics** [china](/topic/china) [$abat](/topic/$abat) [tariffs](/topic/tariffs) [trump administration](/topic/trump-administration) [donald trump](/topic/donald-trump) [trumps](/topic/trumps) [abe](/topic/abe) [Post Link](https://x.com/Mith_/status/1948778202161164749)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Mith & Abe @Mith_ on x 1686 followers
Created: 2025-07-25 16:11:44 UTC
Let’s look at this statement: “likely lubricate the importing of cheaper EV batteries.”
Even before President Trump’s second term, lithium-ion cells were already heavily tariffed. The Trump Administration enacted Section XXX tariffs on lithium-ion cells and components starting in 2018. These were not blanket tariffs. They were progressive and targeted.
Trump’s tariffs initially hit fully assembled lithium-ion EV batteries from China with a XX% rate, later raised to 25%. Battery inputs like cathode active materials, anodes, separators, and electrolytes were added across multiple tranches. These directly increased the cost of importing battery materials.
The Biden Administration did not unwind those tariffs. In 2024, after a four-year review, they expanded them. New Section XXX actions added or raised tariffs on key inputs, phased in through 2026:
• Natural and synthetic graphite used in anodes will face a XX% tariff by 2026 • Battery-grade electrolytes and separators will be hit with a XX% tariff in 2025 • Cathode active material remains under a XX% tariff from earlier lists • Fully assembled lithium-ion EV batteries continue to face a XX% tariff
The idea that any recent deal will “lubricate” battery imports ignores the tariffs already in place. People also make the false assumption that raw metals like lithium are the main factor. Currently, very little raw or processed lithium is imported from China, less than X% according to the USGS, even with metal precursors exempt from the retaliatory tariffs (reference Annex 1). The bulk of the raw lithium in the US is imported from countries with fair trade agreements such as Chile and Canada.
While raw and processed materials are a major factor, the deciding factor will be the components. This is why we are seeing a push for onshoring cell components like separators and cathode and anode active materials.
But let’s look at raw materials. Even without significant primary sources yet available in North America, companies are launching processing facilities to create the precursors needed using imported lithium. We are seeing spodumene concentrate from Canada and Australia and brines from South America. Each of these facilities plans to be online within a year or so, compared to the five to ten years required to develop a mine. Then there are secondary sources, which will be the real domestic supply until primary sources come online. The estimate is that with those two platforms, domestic cell manufacturing will be able to keep pace with demand.
So while ABAT is a reasonable candidate for a short, as is the entire sector, it has been that way and will continue to be that way for years to come. His argument that a deal is the reason for the short just falls flat and is not based on anything but typical retail misunderstanding of the lithium market.
XXX engagements
Related Topics china $abat tariffs trump administration donald trump trumps abe