President Donald Trump’s move on Thursday to kickstart deep-sea mining could be a lifeline for the Canadian company that is pushing to be the first to supply strategic minerals from the ocean floor.

The firm signalled its intention weeks ago to seek permits from the US administration for the activity in a challenge to UN governance, but whether the gambit pays off remains to be seen. The plan faces strong opposition from many countries and scientists who fear the industry could have catastrophic effects on the ocean ecosystem.

Years of deadlock in global efforts to agree rules for commercial mining of the ocean floor had been straining the finances and patience of the Vancouver-based The Metals Company (TMC) – one of the most prominent among a clutch of aspiring deep-sea mining companies.

Then, in an abrupt shift in company policy, TMC Chief Executive Gerard Barron said in a statement at the end of March that it was time to bypass the International Seabed Authority (ISA) – the little-known UN body created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

“What we need is a fair hearing and a regulator willing to engage,” said Barron, going on to accuse various actors at the ISA of acting in “bad faith” by obstructing the completion of a mining code.

“Looking back at our 16-year experience of the ISA brand of multilateralism, we believe the United States made the right decision when they chose not to ratify UNCLOS,” Barron said.

Trump tries to upend international order

The company’s share price – which has struggled since it listed in 2021 – jumped this week after Trump signed an executive order calling for deep-sea mining, including beyond US territorial waters, in a bid to secure critical minerals like nickel, cobalt and copper and counter China’s dominance in the sector.

“Vast offshore seabed areas hold critical minerals and energy resources,” Trump said in the order. “These resources are key to strengthening our economy, securing our energy future, and reducing dependence on foreign suppliers for critical minerals.”

Xi commits China to full climate plan but emissions-cutting ambition still unclear

He directed his administration to expedite the issue of mining permits under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resource Act (DSHMRA), a piece of largely untested legislation dating back to 1980 before UNCLOS existed.

Following Trump’s announcement, TMC’s Barron said that “with a stable, transparent, and enforceable regulatory pathway available under existing US law, we look forward to delivering the world’s first commercial nodule project – responsibly and economically”.

Financial lifeline

Crucially, the step could give TMC some financial breathing space.

“They have had very little money, and a lot of debt, for a long time,” Bobbi-Jo Dobush, a US.-based environmental attorney, told Climate Home before Trump’s order was signed on Thursday.

TMC made a net loss of over $81 million last year, with a total deficit of $631 million piled up since it began operating. According to its latest annual accounts, the company had only $3.5 million in the bank at the end of 2024 and access to a potential $41.5 million loan offered by its main investors, Silicon Valley financier Andrei Karkar and Gerard Barron himself.

A company spokesperson declined to comment on its financial position.

The wider deep-sea mining industry has been in choppy financial waters due to persistent uncertainty over its viability. Norwegian company Loke Marine Minerals filed for bankruptcy earlier this month after a long search for additional capital from investors proved unsuccessful, its CEO Walter Sognnes was quoted as telling Norwegian newspaper DN.

International backlash

The ISA has under its supervision huge swathes of the Pacific Ocean beyond national jurisdictions that hold the world’s largest reserves of polymetallic nodules – potato-sized rocks packed with minerals that have a multitude of industrial uses – from weapons to clean energy technology.

For years, diplomats at the ISA have been trying to hash out deep-sea mining standards but deep divisions persist and much work remains to be done. Thirty-two countries, including France, Germany and Canada, have also called for either a full ban or a precautionary pause in deep-sea mining activities.

That means Trump’s unilateral decision to expedite licences in both US and international waters is likely to spark a backlash from the international community.

“Any unilateral action would constitute a violation of international law and directly undermine the fundamental principles of multilateralism, the peaceful use of the oceans and the collective governance framework,” said Leticia Carvalho, the secretary general of the ISA, when TMC unveiled its plans in March. Dozens of nations, both in the Global North and South, echoed her opposition.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakan said on Friday the US move “violates international law and harms the collective interests of the international community”. China holds the largest number of exploration permits in the Pacific Ocean under the ISA, but it has been waiting for the mining rulebook’s completion before conducting any commercial extraction activity.

‘Rip up the deep sea for profit’

Trump’s executive order also drew immediate condemnation from environmentalists who say deep-sea mining would cause irreversible damage to the ocean ecosystem while being financially prohibitive and unnecessary because land-based mineral resources and recycling could cover demand.

“Authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite – it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and US credibility all at once,” said Arlo Hemphill of Greenpeace.

“The United States government has no right to unilaterally allow an industry to destroy the common heritage of humankind, and rip up the deep sea for the profit of a few corporations,” he added.

TMC is one of the companies with the most to potentially gain.

In a call with analysts in late March, an executive from the Vancouver-based firm indicated that the US backing could be a much-needed spur to attract external investment.

“If we get to the point where regulatory uncertainty is no longer there and, you know, things are moving along at a very fast clip, let’s say through the US process, well that may put us in a different financial position,” said Craig Shesky, the company’s CFO.

TMC’s rapid pivot

As recently as a few months ago, the company was still lobbying US lawmakers to get behind new legislation calling on the US government to support international governance of seafloor resource exploration.

TMC spent $312,000 on US lobbying activities in 2024, according to lobbying disclosure records.

It is unclear why TMC’s longstanding policy position changed, but during a presentation with analysts, company executives name-checked Steven Groves, a former White House staffer during Trump’s first term.

At energy security talks, US pushes gas and derides renewables

Groves is a policy director at the Heritage Foundation, a fossil-fuel funded think-tank that routinely opposes climate policies and casts doubts on universally accepted climate science. He also co-edited ‘Project 2025’, the controversial 900-page conservative policy blueprint for reshaping the federal government.

TMC’s Shesky said Groves agreed that applying for a mining licence under DSHMRA would be “a viable path based on robust and well thought out regulations”.

Choppy waters ahead

But other experts vehemently disagree. Dobush told Climate Home it is “very ironic and highly likely untrue” that going through the United States provides regulatory certainty when the national legislation has never been used for exploitation.

In 2022, weapons maker Lockheed Martin – the only existing holder of DSHMRA exploration permits – said that activities had been delayed as a result of a lack of international recognition of the US licences.

Duncan Currie, legal advisor at the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, said he expected plenty of potential legal issues down the line for TMC before any mining takes place.

For instance, countries like Canada, Switzerland and the Netherlands – where TMC and its partner Allseas are respectively based – could risk breaching the terms of the UNCLOS if they fail to prevent the companies from acting unilaterally, he said.

Nations that rely on the UNCLOS to protect their freedom of navigation or fisheries rights may also be motivated to prevent the US government from setting a precedent in sidestepping international governance.

“Island states and seafaring nations place a great deal of importance on UNCLOS,” added Currie. “I would imagine that those countries will be working to ensure that this doesn’t happen.”