For years, Guatemala’s mining conversation focused primarily on gold and silver. In 2026, however, two minerals have gained renewed strategic relevance for the United States: nickel and antimony.
This shift is driven not only by geology, but also by national security, the energy transition and the need to diversify critical supply chains. Both minerals are used in strategic industries such as defense, semiconductors, batteries and advanced manufacturing.
Guatemala occupies a distinctive position in this context. The country has commercial production of both minerals and also offers an important advantage for U.S. buyers through its connection to CAFTA-DR, particularly in transactions where origin, traceability and supply-chain compliance are key factors.
A new structure for mining investment
Critical minerals transactions are no longer structured only as traditional mine acquisitions.
Today, buyers and financiers increasingly require stronger traceability, due diligence, ESG compliance and mechanisms capable of documenting the origin and movement of minerals throughout the supply chain.
This means that companies must be structured from the outset with the appropriate documentation and controls regarding chain of custody, environmental and social compliance, community consultation and applicable international standards.
Energy and profitability
Energy costs are another critical factor.
Nickel processing is highly energy-intensive, meaning that the electricity structure of a project can have a direct impact on profitability. Mining projects should therefore assess from an early stage alternatives such as direct power purchase agreements, self-generation or supply arrangements with private generators.
For projects of this nature, energy is no longer a secondary operational consideration. It becomes a central component of both the financial and legal assessment of the investment.
Investment protection must be designed before closing
Guatemala’s experience in investment arbitration also provides important lessons for new entrants.
The source material highlights that significant disputes in the sector have not necessarily arisen from mining legislation itself, but rather from administrative measures, license revocations and failures to provide full protection and security.
For this reason, the structuring of a critical minerals investment should consider from an early stage the jurisdiction through which the investment is made, the treaty protection available and the dispute-resolution mechanisms that may apply.
What should investors review?
For U.S. companies and Guatemalan groups assessing critical minerals opportunities, an integrated review should focus on at least three areas:
- Legal and social validity of the project: review of mining rights, administrative procedures, consultation records and relevant court proceedings.
- Energy and logistics: analysis of transportation costs, electricity supply and offtake conditions.
- Investment architecture: corporate structure, legal protection and arbitration mechanisms before closing the transaction.
Guatemala has strategic mineral resources and a relevant commercial position. The challenge is to structure projects with sufficient legal certainty, traceability and compliance discipline to integrate them competitively into international supply chains.
Author:
Juan Pablo Carrasco de Groote
Partner – CENTRAL LAW Guatemala
Head of the Foreign Investment Department
This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute, nor should it be interpreted as, legal advice from its author or CENTRAL LAW.
