The White House Thinks Taking Partial Ownership of a Canadian Mining Company Will Reduce the National Debt
Trump's deal with a lithium mine in Nevada follows similar "creative deals" with Intel and U.S. Steel.

Since being reelected, President Donald Trump has falsely claimed his tariffs will reduce the national debt. Trump is now taking this marketing pitch to sell another one of his economic policies: government ownership in private companies.
On Wednesday, the Energy Department announced that the government will be taking a 5 percent stake in Canadian mining firm Lithium Americas and a 5 percent stake in Thacker Pass, the company's lithium mining project in Nevada. This equity stake builds on a $2.26 billion loan from the Biden administration Energy Department to the company last year to "help finance the construction of facilities for manufacturing lithium carbonate" at Thacker Pass, which has the largest confirmed lithium reserves in North America. The deal, according to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, will ensure "better stewardship of American taxpayer dollars."
The White House has taken this messaging further. "This is a creative solution by the president of the United States to tackle our nation's crippling debt crisis," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Wednesday. "The president is focused on how can the United States government make more money, how can we make our country wealthy and rich again? Cutting some of these unique, creative deals with companies around the world and here at home is just one way that the president is seeking to do that."
These types of "creative deals" have become a hallmark of the second Trump administration. Since Trump's return to the White House, the federal government has taken a "golden share" of U.S. Steel, granted export licenses to American chipmakers in exchange for a cut of the revenue generated from their sales, and, more recently, became the largest shareholder of Intel by taking a 10 percent stake in the company (worth about $9 billion at the time of acquisition and $17 billion today).
The deals have been justified as a way to protect America's economic and national security interests, and the Lithium Americas announcement is no different. "It's in America's best interest to get that mine built," Wright told Bloomberg. "Lithium Americas needs to raise some more capital so the mine is financially sound….We're leaning in with a large amount of debt capital, so it's just a more commercial transaction."
Like the other government stakes before it, the economic justification for this deal is flimsy. At the time of the initial Energy Department loan in 2024, global lithium demand was experiencing unprecedented growth, which has continued and is expected to continue as the use of semiconductors, electric vehicles, and renewable energy sources becomes ubiquitous. With the mine expected to produce 400,000 metric tons of battery-grade lithium carbonate each year and generate over $2 billion in revenue (according to a January estimate), there is no reason why taxpayers need to finance a project that the market seems to think will be profitable.
The White House's argument that this will tackle the "crippling debt crisis" could be even flimsier. Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, tells Reason that taking a 5 percent stake in a $2 billion project is a "rounding error for our debt problem." The national debt currently stands at over $30 trillion held by the public. Lincicome points out that "the only way to get money back is by selling the stake, which [the Energy Department] doesn't plan on doing." At the end of the day, he adds, this deal has less to do with addressing the national debt and "everything to do with exercising more control over private businesses."
The White House has made several questionable claims to justify Trump's takeover of the economy. Arguing that a government stake in an already federally backed project will shrink the national debt could be its weakest argument yet.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
…worth about $9 billion at the time of acquisition and $17 billion today…
That isn’t a bad ROI; worth more than 10% of the guy that subsidizes this periodical in just a few weeks.
To be fair, a more calm, rational "He's kinda being a bit Bush-Obama-Biden TARP-y" is better than "OrangeHitler, Rider of the Dark Horse of Russian Disinfo, Lord Of The Federal Agents in Unmarked Vans, Bringer Of The Tarrifpocalypse, is now... spending government money!!!"
Unfortunately, TDS being what it is, I expect less than a day before we're back to "Under his wrath hundreds of citizens are being bathed in 20 min. of questioning before release like the uncountable souls drowned in the lakes of fire in Hell."
Made me laugh. But inconvenience is prohibited by the 14th so I have faith the right judge will save us from Armageddon.
Socialism is good now?
International socialism is, according to the Trump Cult. They graduated from National Socialism.
https://psychcentral.com/disorders/treating-pedophilia#aversion-therapy
What’s up, Chumface?
https://psychcentral.com/disorders/treating-pedophilia#aversion-therapy
5% at a time, 10%, 15%, yes. Just gotta work up to it. I'm sure Bernie and Lizzie will give us a heads up as it gets closer. Mandami, well, who knows, he might just go for 100% in his little fiefdom sooner, but he hasn't got the leverage Trump does.
Your first instinct should have been realizing you were agreeing with shrike.
Please look up what socialism entails.
I'm sure you rage against pensions being invested into stocks too instead of sitting in government bonds.
I'd prefer none of the spending, but calling it socialism is proving ignorance. But investments are better than gold bars off the titanic.
Ownership of the means of production?
Perhaps you think 5,10,15% is not true ownership.
Perhaps you just refuse to admit Trump does anything wrong.
Or maybe you're just an idiot.
I vote for D, all of the above.
Right and wrong are determined by who not what. So yes socialism is great again, but only because of who is doing it.
I know you believe that, but it simply isn't true. The magic (D) doesn't wash away sins.
It's truly bizarro world when the right is openly enthusiastic about government involvement in the means of production, but it's totally not socialism.
Sarcles, stop samefagging.
So you dont understand what socialism means either. A 5% stake is not a controlling stake. The regulations and the other maddow watchers support control far more of industry than a 5% stake ever could.
Youre also one of those who demands hundreds of billions a year in taxpayer money to favored entities with zero strings. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Pinko commie bitch
OK, now do US Steel, where the President himself has a veto over everything the company does.
Sounds pretty controlling to me.
And maybe you are unfamiliar with the phrase about the camel's nose.
Or perhaps you wouldn't mind personally giving Trump 5,10,15% of your home equity and your savings. It's not a controlling share.
Gads. What a maroon. You've taken bootlicking to a new low.
Does Donnie not know that the gas guzzlers he loves don’t need lithium batteries?
https://psychcentral.com/disorders/treating-pedophilia#aversion-therapy
First, where was this concern over the national debt during the last administration? Just visiting along to trillions more in debt and rarely a word.
Second, what are these acquisitions for? Starting a wealth fund or just direct investment to subsidize shrinking SS funds for the general budget? Or is this just 10% for the big guy that you all seemed fine with when it's Democrats.
Finally, the only way to actually solve our fiscal crisis is an aggressive MAID like program because too many didn't save enough and I don't see you out demanding we murder everyone taking SS benefits and Medicare.
Free money no strings attached usaid good. Investments bad.
All bad
Get a lode of sarcles’ sarcpuppet.
Make communism great again
Playing on Broadway in NYC soon.
China’s government has a stake in any corporation they wish, and that’s why they are beating us economically. That means we need to do it too!
/an argument I’ve seen Trump defenders make
TRUMP!!!!
Ccp has a member of the cop on every board you fucking retard. They require government approval for bank loans you fucking retard.
You haven't seen people make that argument because you literally dont know the facts fucking retard.
Like you not knowing that the President has a veto over everything US Steel does. That's just... I dunno, an investment or something.
there is no reason why taxpayers need to finance a project that the market seems to think will be profitable.
Aaah. More BS from Reason. The reason the US lost our supply chain for virtually everything - is because of this Reason argument.
Turns out - it is very easy for a company to invest a shit ton of money into a mine - and then on opening day find that the price of that commodity drops to the point where it will never be profitable to mine it at all - ever. It's not China (mostly) that manipulates the prices of those commodities and obliterates capital investment in that sector. Mostly it's Wall St - and they make a ton of money manipulating commodity prices, manipulating debt and asset ownership, and ensuring that their industry (creating dollars out of thin air and finding a market for those dollars) is protected via our reserve currency status so that other industries - like mining - are sacrificed.
Reason will never remotely comprehend - or care - why the US can no longer even supply our own military with raw materials. Why no part of the workforce now understands the difference between manufacturing semiconductor chips v potato chips. Why the US economy is now mostly based on selling stocks, loans, and houses to each other.
Trump may be a complete dick - and a moron when it comes to figuring out how to fix this problem. His cult is worse. But nothing is as much of a joke when it comes to econ as this Reason shitrag.
Comparative advantage, and disadvantage, is a bitch.
Trick is, when finding you lost your CA in industry x, is finding the y where you have it.
Unless you suck at everything and Trump is right. America sucks and can only be made great again with taxes, subsidies, and government ownership in private companies.
TRUMP!!!!
You don't even know what comparative advantage is - or how it works.
It is NOT a system where the US runs trade deficits with everyone forever - where they supply us stuff and we pay for that stuff with money that we accept forever. That is in fact part of a reserve currency system - not 'comparative advantage' or 'free trade'. Reason will NEVER EVER attempt to explain this because economic concepts as religion is all they can fathom.
Nor for that matter is much of what we conduct even 'trade'. Globalized supply chains within a multinational are not trade. They do not even involve real prices - much less so arms length transactions. Try getting your head around that.
“It is NOT a system where the US runs trade deficits with everyone forever - where they supply us stuff and we pay for that stuff with money that we accept forever”
I’m not sure what you mean. We get stuff and they get currency. They can use that currency to buy stuff from us or invest. What’s the problem?
Comparative advantage is about trade in goods between countries. Ricardo's example was where England would trade wool to Portugal and Portugal would trade wine to England. Even if Portugal could produce both wine and wool more cheaply than England. He is emphatically not saying that one entire country has an advantage in making stuff and the other has an advantage in going shopping via debt (currency=debt)
But that's precisely the US situation now. It originated in a decision at Bretton Woods to use the US$ as reserve currency rather than the Bancor. The long-term cost of that is that the US guts its ability to make stuff and instead falls apart with debt (and ultimately loses reserve status via war). That dilemma was explained by Triffin (before Nixon closed the gold window -the dilemma changes a bit with floating currency). It has nothing to do with comparative advantage.
You still dont understand what comparative advantage means.
The federal government can't just take stakes in companies. That is very illegal.
Democrats did illegal things first so it’s ok.
I know you believe that, but it simply isn't true. The magic (D) doesn't absolve sins.
Pension funds dont exist?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-could-get-stake-in-airlines-in-exchange-for-virus-grants/2020/03/26/98bf5b94-6f9d-11ea-a156-0048b62cdb51_story.html
https://www.npr.org/2009/06/18/105565087/government-stake-in-gm-creates-complications
"Since being reelected, President Donald Trump has falsely claimed his tariffs will reduce the national debt.
Say Jeff, that's a pretty bold claim against someone who is just 9 months into his administration. If Trump is somehow miraculously right, are you going to apologize?
See Jeff, writers like you don't seem to really understand. The culture has changed. You guys don't get to presumptuously assert the unknown anymore without being called out for it.
Here's how you could of stated it without sounding like you're making predictions ex cathedra: “Since being reelected, President Donald Trump has claimed his tariffs will reduce the national debt, though analyses suggest they are unlikely to do so.”
Everyone knows there is no one thing to fix it all method. It took many directions of spending and many decades yet people scoff at any action to try and curb and remove it?
This plus That and this plus that and that plus this all makes a dent.
What part of ensuring the US has materials when necessary which is the main reason for the government buy ins to certain industries is not being understood? This is for security and on top to help bring a balanced budget and then chip away at the debt.
Instead of sitting on your hands with your thumbs up your asses whistling your favorite Obama love song out of one side of your face and bitching and moaning out of the other, come up with ideas yourselves for how to fix the spending, revenue and debt problem, then present it.
Reason has no leg to stand on. They railed outside of w authors against DOGE. Kmw and Boehm railed against 1T in less spending for BBB. They railed against federal workers being RIFd
There must be a reason every other developed country in the world owns companies and/or substantial shares in companies as more than passive investors. I get it that Reason as a libertarian magazine will never accept government ownership or management of anything, but it should at least acknowledge that where rare earths minerals are concerned if it increases their domestic production the US benefits in ways the market alone can't give.
Reason prefers China control the minerals for political advantages.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/robert-morris-guilty-child-sexual-abuse-texas-megachurch-pastor-rcna234748
Another MAGA child molester sentenced today. Maybe Donnie will pardon him somehow. A “pastor” POS from Texas of course.
This equity stake builds on a $2.26 billion loan from the Biden administration Energy Department to the company last year
We paid them, why the fuck shouldn't we hold them accountable?
Again, this is the fault of people who accept federal dollars.
Solyndra 2.0, Orange is the new Black.