Busting the ownership façade: How Ivanhoe Atlantic’s China ties stalled its A$300m IPO amid US Congress scrutiny
- Talafah T. Tabolo
- 4 days ago
- 2 min read
Ivanhoe Atlantic has indefinitely postponed its planned A$300 million (US$190 million) initial public offering (IPO) on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), pushing the listing from late 2025 to mid‑2026 amid intensifying pressure from members of the U.S. Congress. The delay marks a significant setback for mining magnate Robert Friedland, who has spent much of the past decade presenting his West African Kon Weni iron ore venture as a strategically aligned U.S. interest in the global race for iron ore and infrastructure.
While the company has not publicly detailed the specific reasons for the suspension, the move follows a December 9 letter from U.S. Representative John Moolenaar, chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. The correspondence, addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, warns of “systemic” security risks embedded in Ivanhoe’s corporate structure — allegations that appear to have frozen the company’s capital raise.
Ivanhoe Atlantic is marketed to investors as a Delaware‑domiciled, U.S.-backed vehicle anchored by Friedland’s technology firm, I‑Pulse Inc., rather than as a neutral, stand‑alone player. However, the Select Committee argues this distinction is illusory, citing the deep entanglement of Friedland’s flagship entity, Ivanhoe Mines (TSX: IVN), with the Chinese party‑state. Ivanhoe Mines is approximately 40% owned by CITIC Group and Zijin Mining. In his letter, Moolenaar characterizes these entities not as passive investors, but as strategic arms of Beijing’s overseas economic policy.
The Committee further alleges that specific directors within the wider Ivanhoe network maintain ties to the United Front Work Department, the CCP organ tasked with co‑opting foreign elites. For Washington regulators, the fear is structural: that Ivanhoe Atlantic’s “Western” iron ore from Guinea — and the associated Liberia–Guinea export corridor — would ultimately sit inside a supply chain shaped, monitored or leveraged by a geopolitical rival. As one industry critic noted, a company “cannot claim to be the West’s shield while its sword is forged by CITIC.”
Compounding the geopolitical headwinds is a dispute over transparency surrounding the company’s infrastructure ambitions in West Africa. Ivanhoe Atlantic’s valuation depends heavily on the Kon Kweni iron ore project in Guinea, which requires export access via the proposed US$1.8 billion Guinea–Buchanan rail corridor through Yekepa in neighboring Liberia.
A controversial series of “advance payments” totaling US$37 million made between 2019 and 2022 by HPX, Ivanhoe Atlantic’s precursor, to the Liberian government remains a key concern. The company describes these funds as access fees to secure rail rights, but critics have flagged the payments as “suspicious” and allege they were used to constrain ArcelorMittal, a major Western‑aligned operator, from using the line. The maneuver has attracted the attention of U.S. policymakers, who now question whether the venture’s tactics meet the governance standards expected for U.S.‑backed strategic projects in the region.
The deferral of the IPO to 2026 is widely viewed as an effort to buy time — either to lobby Washington or to reinforce the company’s claim to U.S. strategic alignment. What is now under scrutiny is Ivanhoe Atlantic’s assertion that it is a U.S.-aligned strategic asset, even as it remains heavily funded by, and intertwined with, Chinese state‑linked investors.
_______________________________
Get Involved
Do you have additional facts to add to this insight or an opinion you would like to express?
Email Us
Comments