Bolivia is widely regarded as one of the most geologically prospective yet underexplored mining jurisdictions globally. Its mineral endowment spans a broad range of commodities, which may be categorised as follows: (i) base metals, including tin, zinc, copper and lead, primarily located along the Western Cordillera and southern Potosí; (ii) precious metals, particularly gold and silver, found in the northern region of La Paz and the Amazon basin; (iii) industrial and specialty minerals, such as tungsten, antimony, boron and potassium; (iv) bulk minerals, including iron ore deposits such as those in the Mutún area; and (v) critical and strategic minerals, including lithium, nickel, chromium, manganese and tantalum, particularly in the Precambrian Shield. Notably, Bolivia hosts approximately 23 million metric tonnes of verified lithium resources, positioning it among the largest lithium-holding jurisdictions worldwide and a key player in the global energy transition.

Bolivia operates under a civil law system and is a contracting state to the New York Convention, thereby recognising and enforcing foreign arbitral awards in accordance with international standards.

The Bolivian mining legal framework is grounded in the 2009 Bolivian Constitution, which establishes the State’s original and inalienable ownership over all mineral resources and mandates its control across the entire mining value chain. Within this constitutional framework, private participation is permitted exclusively through long term administrative mining contracts. The principal statute governing the sector is the Mining and Metallurgy Law (Law No. 535 of 2014), which regulates prospecting, exploration, exploitation, processing and commercialisation activities, as well as the granting, maintenance and termination of mining rights. These rights are characterised as administrative in rem rights and are subject to compliance with legal and contractual obligations. The framework is complemented by additional legislation, including Law No. 845 of 2016, which introduced mining production contracts; the Environmental Regulations for Mining Activities, approved by Supreme Decree No. 24782 of 1997, which regulates permitting requirements based on environmental impact assessments; and the Criminal Code , which contains provisions aimed at penalizing illegal mining and the illicit commercialisation of mineral resources. Administrative regulations further govern the procedures for the allocation and termination of mining rights. In parallel, specific regimes apply to strategic resources such as lithium, which are reserved to State participation through designated state-owned entities.

The role of the Bolivian State in the mining sector has been particularly significant over the past two decades, characterised by a dual function as both grantor-regulator and owner-operator. In its regulatory capacity, mining activities are overseen by several governmental bodies, most notably the Autoridad Jurisdiccional Administrativa Minera (AJAM, for its acronym in Spanish), responsible for granting mining rights, maintaining the mining registry, and supervising compliance. The Ministry of Mining and Metallurgy defines sectoral policy, while the Bolivian Geological Mining Service (SERGEOMIN, for its acronym in Spanish) provides geological and technical support. Concurrently, the State participates directly in mining operations through state-owned enterprises, including the Corporación Minera de Bolivia (COMIBOL, for its acronym in Spanish) and Yacimientos de Litio Bolivianos (YLB, for its acronym in Spanish), acting either as operators or contractual counterparties.

Recent policy signals from the current administration indicate a shift towards a more investment-friendly approach in strategic sectors, including mining, lithium and hydrocarbons. The government has expressed its intention to attract foreign direct investment, while maintaining constitutional principles of State ownership. A new mining law is currently under consideration, expected to introduce simplified permitting processes, enhanced legal certainty and stability mechanisms, and more efficient administrative procedures before the AJAM. The reform is also anticipated to enable more flexible partnership structures, including increased private sector participation in association with state-owned entities and mining cooperatives. If implemented, these measures could significantly strengthen the regulatory environment and unlock further development of Bolivia’s substantial mineral potential.

Bolivia is increasingly positioning itself as a relevant jurisdiction for the development of critical and strategic minerals, particularly lithium, rare earth elements, and other technology-related resources. While these minerals are not governed under a single, unified legal framework, the current regime reflects a policy-driven approach in which the State retains a central role while progressively enabling avenues for foreign participation.

Under the Mining and Metallurgy Law, certain strategic minerals, including lithium and potassium, are excluded from the general mining regime. This reflects their classification as strategic resources under the Political Constitution of the State, which mandates State control over their development. In practical terms, this has resulted in a differentiated regulatory model, particularly for lithium.

a. Lithium and evaporite resources.

Bolivia has adopted a State-led but partnership-oriented model for the development of its lithium resources, one of the largest globally. Upstream activities—including exploration and primary extraction—are carried out under the control of the State through YLB, established under Law No. 928 of 2017. This model ensures sovereign control over strategic resources, while creating structured opportunities for private sector participation.

Foreign investors may participate in lithium projects through association agreements with YLB in downstream and industrialisation stages. These include semi-industrial processing, value-added production, and technology deployment, where private expertise and capital are essential. Such partnerships are typically structured to preserve majority State participation, while allowing investors to benefit from long-term project involvement and access to large-scale resource bases.

In recent years, Bolivia has taken concrete steps to operationalise this model. Through international tenders for Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) projects in key salt flats such as the Salar de Uyuni and Salar de Coipasa, YLB has engaged leading global operators, including CATL & CMOC, Uranium One Group and other international companies. These processes demonstrate a clear policy intention to incorporate advanced technologies and foreign investment into Bolivia’s lithium industrialisation strategy.

Although the contractual framework remains largely negotiation-based and continues to evolve, this flexibility has enabled tailored project structures aligned with investor capabilities and technological contributions. Ongoing discussions regarding a dedicated lithium law are expected to further enhance legal certainty and standardisation in this area.

b. Rare earth elements and critical minerals.

Rare earth elements and other critical minerals are also gaining increasing strategic relevance. While current regulations limit direct private exploitation, recent policy developments indicate a shift towards progressive sector development. Public institutions, including COMIBOL, the SERGEOMIN and the Agencia Boliviana de Energía Nuclear (ABEN, for its acronym in Spanish), are actively advancing exploration programmes and institutional capacity-building initiatives.

At the same time, the Government has introduced strategic planning instruments aimed at integrating Bolivia into global supply chains for technological minerals. The creation of specialised governmental bodies and technical units focused on rare earths underscores a growing commitment to unlocking this segment of the sector. Early-stage exploration campaigns have already identified promising areas across multiple regions of the country.

c. Policy outlook and investment trajectory.

Bolivia is currently undergoing a policy transition towards greater openness to foreign investment in strategic minerals. Recent government initiatives include the preparation of new sector-specific legislation, covering mining, lithium, and investment, as well as the active promotion of investment opportunities in international forums such as Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC).

Looking ahead, the expected regulatory reforms are likely to introduce clearer rules, more predictable partnership structures, and enhanced investor protections. In this context, Bolivia offers a high-potential, frontier investment environment, combining significant untapped resources with a State-driven development model that is increasingly oriented towards international collaboration.

The Bolivian government provides a range of targeted support mechanisms for the mining sector, combining tax incentives, financial assistance, and operational facilitation measures. While not structured as a comprehensive subsidy regime, these initiatives reflect a policy objective of promoting investment, modernization, and continuity of mining operations.

From a fiscal perspective, specific tax incentives have been introduced under Law No. 1391 of 2021 and Supreme Decree No. 4579 of 2021. These include a 0% Value Added Tax (VAT) regime applicable to the import of capital goods, industrial plants, and heavy machinery destined for mining activities. In addition, the domestic commercialization of such imported machinery may also benefit from a zero-rate VAT treatment, effectively reducing upfront capital costs for mining projects.

Financial support is primarily channeled through the Fondo de Financiamiento para la Minería (FOFIM), a State-backed institution that provides credit facilities for the acquisition of equipment, concentration plants, and the upgrading of mining infrastructure. These financing mechanisms have traditionally focused on supporting mining cooperatives, although they contribute more broadly to sector development and capacity building.

In operational terms, the government has also adopted measures aimed at ensuring the continuity of mining activities. These include facilitating access to key inputs, such as fuel and explosives, as well as advancing the regularization of mining contracts to provide greater legal certainty to ongoing operations.

Overall, Bolivia’s approach to State support is selective and policy-driven, focusing on reducing capital costs, improving access to financing, and maintaining operational stability within the mining sector.

As a general rule, foreign individuals and companies are permitted to invest in, own, and operate mining projects in Bolivia, without any general requirement to partner with local entities. The regime is therefore broadly open to foreign capital, subject to targeted restrictions, aimed at safeguarding strategic national interests and certain categories of mining actors.

The most significant constitutional restriction applies to border areas. Foreign investors are prohibited from directly or indirectly acquiring property rights, including mining rights, within 50 kilometers of Bolivia’s international borders. This limitation applies irrespective of the size of participation and therefore extends to both majority and minority interests. As a result, acquisitions of minority stakes in mining projects located within these zones fall within the scope of the restriction. Outside border areas, foreign investors may generally participate in mining projects through both equity and asset transactions, subject to standard administrative approvals and compliance with applicable environmental, social, and contractual requirements.

Additional restrictions arise in connection with mining cooperatives, which represent a distinctive institutional feature of the Bolivian mining sector. These entities, owned and managed collectively by their members, are subject to limitations on private sector participation. Pursuant to Article 151 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, cooperatives are prohibited from entering into joint ventures or association agreements with private companies, whether domestic or foreign, effectively limiting foreign participation in cooperative-led operations.

This framework, however, is currently subject to potential reform. In December 2025, the Government reached an agreement with the Federación Nacional de Cooperativas Mineras de Bolivia (FENCOMIN) to amend the existing regime and allow cooperatives to enter into partnership arrangements with private investors. Although the proposed amendment has yet to be enacted, it reflects a policy shift aimed at promoting investment, improving operational efficiency, and facilitating strategic alliances within the sector.

In addition, investors should consider certain strategic and operational constraints embedded in the mining regime. The State may designate specific areas as “reserva fiscal minera”, within which only the State may conduct mining activities for a defined period. State-owned entities also benefit from preferential rights to apply for licenses or to enter into mining administrative contracts in such areas. Furthermore, the State has reserved a number of strategic salt flats for its exclusive control, including the Salar de Uyuni and the Salar de Coipasa, reflecting the importance of evaporite resources.

Finally, although Bolivian law currently restricts the exploitation of radioactive minerals and rare earth elements, these resources are regarded as strategic and are expected to be governed by specific policies and regulatory frameworks currently under development by the State, as outlined in Section 2 above.

Bolivia does not impose general restrictions on the repatriation of capital, profits, dividends, or other returns derived from mining investments. Pursuant to Article 97 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, mining stakeholders are entitled to receive the profits or surplus generated from their activities and may remit such funds abroad, subject to compliance with applicable tax regulations and other relevant legal provisions.

Foreign investors are, in principle, free to transfer funds outside Bolivia. The primary consideration in this context is fiscal. Remittances to non-resident beneficiaries, such as dividends or transfers to foreign parent companies, are subject to the Corporate Income Tax on Foreign Beneficiaries (IUE-BE, for its acronym in Spanish), which applies at an effective rate of 12.5% on the amount remitted. This withholding operates as a final tax, with no additional tax liabilities arising in Bolivia in respect of such payments.

No exchange control restrictions specifically targeting the mining sector are currently in place. Overall, Bolivia provides a relatively predictable and permissive framework for profit repatriation, with administrative requirements largely limited to standard tax compliance.

Bolivia does not impose a general prohibition or quota system on the export of minerals and metals, including raw materials. Export activities are permitted as part of the mining value chain under the Mining and Metallurgy Law. However, exports are subject to a robust system of administrative, technical, and fiscal controls, reflecting the strategic nature of natural resources under the Bolivian Constitution.

The primary oversight authority is the SENARECOM (for its acronym in Spanish). Mining operators must obtain a Mining Identification Number (NIM) and comply with mandatory reporting requirements, including the filing of export declarations (M-03 forms) detailing volumes, values, and applicable royalties. In addition, certain tariff classifications are subject to prior control, and physical verification of shipments may be conducted at border points. Compliance with these requirements is a condition for export authorization.

Exports are also subject to the payment of mining royalties, which constitute a non-reimbursable economic obligation linked to the exploitation of mineral resources.

With respect to local beneficiation, Bolivia does not impose a strict legal requirement to process minerals prior to export. Nevertheless, both the Political Constitution of the State and sector legislation promote domestic industrialization as a strategic policy objective, encouraging value-added activities within the country. While not mandatory, this policy direction may influence project structuring and investment incentives.

Overall, the regime allows the export of minerals without quantitative restrictions, but within a framework of strong regulatory oversight and policy-driven encouragement of local value addition.

Bolivia does not impose specific export tariffs on minerals and metals as such. Instead, the main government take applicable to the commercialisation and export of mineral products is the mining royalty (Regalía Minera), as regulated under the Mining and Metallurgy Law.

The mining royalty applies to the exploitation, processing, and commercialisation of minerals and metals, at the point of export. It is calculated on the gross sales value of the mineral product, based on international reference prices and the fine metal content. Applicable rates vary depending on the mineral and market conditions, generally ranging between approximately 1% and 7%, depending on the mineral and applicable price-based formula.

From a trade perspective, Bolivia does not maintain a system of export duties specifically targeting mining products. On the import side, general customs duties may apply under the standard customs regime. However, exemptions or temporary admission regimes (e.g., for processing or industrialisation purposes), are available, particularly where no transfer of ownership occurs.

Overall, while no formal export tariffs are imposed, the mining royalty operates as the functional equivalent of a production-based charge on mineral exports and constitutes a key consideration for investors assessing project economics.

Bolivian mining law establishes a significant degree of State involvement across the metals and mining value chain, both as regulator and market participant, as outlined in Section 1. In its regulatory capacity, mining activities are supervised by the AJAM, under the policy direction of the Ministry of Mining and Metallurgy, with technical support provided by SERGEOMIN. AJAM is also vested with the authority to grant mining rights to private operators, enabling them to conduct operations on their own, without participation by the State.

In parallel, the State participates directly in mining operations through state-owned enterprises, most notably COMIBOL and YLB, acting either as operators or as contractual counterparties in mining projects. Bolivian legislation provides the use of “state association contracts” as the primary mechanism for structuring large-scale mining investments involving State participation. Pursuant to Article 148 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, State-owned entities must retain a minimum participation of 55% of project profits, with detailed economic terms to be agreed contractually. Pre-existing private arrangements must adapt to this framework, with economic conditions to be renegotiated, to ensure project viability.

As a result, while foreign and private investment is permitted, investors should anticipate a structured form of State participation, particularly in projects involving strategic mineral resources.

Pursuant to Article 348 of the Bolivian Constitution, mineral resources are classified as strategic natural resources, essential to the country’s development. Accordingly, all mineral deposits are owned by the Bolivian State, which exercises permanent, inalienable and imprescriptible ownership over all mineral deposits, irrespective of their location.

Within this framework, the State assumes a dual role as both grantor-regulator and, in certain instances, operator, across the mining value chain, as outlined in Section 1. Mining rights are not granted as ownership titles over the underlying resources, but rather as administrative licenses and contracts that entitle their holders to carry out exploration and exploitation activities within a defined area, subject to strict compliance with legal and contractual obligations.

In line with Article 93 of the Bolivian Mining and Metallurgy Law, mining rights do not confer ownership or possessory rights over mining areas, nor do they allow their holders to lease such areas. Furthermore, these rights cannot be directly transferred, assigned, sold or encumbered. Nevertheless, the legal framework does permit the transfer of shares in companies holding mining rights. In practice, this results in an indirect transfer of the underlying administrative mining contract, including all associated rights, obligations and liabilities.

In Bolivia, mining tenure is legally distinct from surface land ownership. Mineral resources are owned by the State, and mining rights are granted to public or private operators, through administrative mining contracts, over defined “mining areas,” which are measured in standardized grid units (cuadrículas). Each grid constitutes a non-divisible three-dimensional volume extending from the surface to the center of the earth, thereby defining the scope of the holder’s rights.

Mining areas may be requested where they qualify as “free areas” and are not subject to pre-existing rights or State reservations. These rights are formally registered and administered by the competent authority, providing legal certainty regarding their extent and location.

The granting of mining rights does not automatically confer rights over the surface. Under Article 109 of the Mining Law, titleholders may obtain surface rights within their contract areas or neighboring properties, subject to agreement with surface owners, payment of compensation, and compliance with applicable authorization procedures. These rights enable operators to construct treatment plants, tailings dams, infrastructure, and other facilities necessary for mining activities. In the absence of an agreement, statutory procedures under Article 108 apply to ensure access.

Titleholders must secure access to the land through agreements with surface owners, lawful occupants, or indigenous peoples and communities. Operators are generally required to provide compensation for land use or any resulting damages, and may also be subject to prior consultation processes where constitutionally protected indigenous rights are affected. Statutory mechanisms such as mining easements, are also available to facilitate access.

Accordingly, while the mining tenure regime provides a clear and structured framework for resource development, the successful implementation of mining projects requires careful management of land access, community relations, and social license considerations.

The Bolivian mining legal framework provides a structured and sequential regime for the granting of exploration rights, primarily through two types of authorisations: (i) prospecting and exploration licences, and (ii) aerial prospecting licences, both governed by the Mining and Metallurgy Law. These instruments are designed to facilitate early-stage geological assessment, while preserving the State’s control over the allocation of mineral resources.

A prospecting and exploration licence grants its holder the right to conduct geological, geophysical, geochemical and related exploration activities within a defined mining area. A key feature of this regime is that the licence confers a preferential (priority) right in favour of the holder to subsequently negotiate and enter into an administrative mining contract for exploitation over the same area, subject to compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements. These licences may cover a maximum area of 500 mining grid units (each equivalent to 25 hectares) and are granted for an initial term of five years, renewable once for an additional three-year period, upon demonstration of technical necessity and continued investment.

An aerial prospecting licence allows operators to carry out large-scale reconnaissance activities, typically using remote sensing, geophysical surveys and other non-invasive techniques. These licences are intended for regional-scale assessments and may cover significantly larger areas—up to 8,000 grid units. They are granted for a term of six years, with the possibility of a limited extension of up to six months. As with standard exploration licences, aerial prospecting licences also confer a preferential right to advance to subsequent stages of project development.

The process for acquiring exploration rights is administrative and centralised under the AJAM. It begins with an application for a certificate of free mining area, which confirms that the requested area is not subject to pre-existing mining rights. This certificate is valid for a short period (typically 10 days), within which the applicant must submit a complete application file. Required documentation includes evidence of legal incorporation and good standing, tax registration, a duly granted power of attorney, and a detailed exploration and investment programme outlining the proposed activities, timelines and budget.

Following a submission, the AJAM conducts a formal compliance review, after which the technical aspects of the exploration programme are evaluated by the SERGEOMIN. Where the requested area overlaps with indigenous or local communities, a prior consultation process must be carried out in accordance with constitutional and statutory requirements. Once all procedural and substantive requirements are satisfied, the AJAM issues an administrative resolution granting the licence, which must be formalised through a registration in the Mining Registry. In practice, the overall process typically takes approximately 12 months, although timelines may vary depending on the complexity of the project and the need for community consultation.

Licence holders are subject to a series of ongoing obligations aimed at ensuring the effective use of mining areas. These include the payment of an annual mining tax (patente minera), which amounts to approximately USD 6 per hectare for standard exploration licences, and, in the case of aerial prospecting licences, a fixed fee per licence. Operators must also implement the approved exploration programme and submit biannual activity reports to the AJAM detailing progress and results. In addition, licence holders are required to commence activities within one year of registration and may not suspend operations for a continuous period exceeding one year.

Failure to comply with these obligations may result in administrative sanctions, including the revocation of the licence. Grounds for revocation include non-payment of the mining tax, failure to initiate or maintain operations, failure to submit reports on two consecutive occasions, or the unauthorised conduct of exploitation activities under an exploration licence. Revocation decisions issued by the AJAM are subject to administrative appeal before the Ministry of Mining and Metallurgy and may ultimately be challenged before the Supreme Court.

The transition from exploration to exploitation is perfected through the exercise of the licence holder’s preferential right to enter into an administrative mining contract, which constitutes the legal basis for the development and operation of mining projects in Bolivia. This transition is subject to compliance with additional legal, environmental and social requirements, including environmental licensing and community engagement.

Overall, Bolivia’s exploration regime provides a clear and legally structured pathway from early-stage exploration to project development, combining defined rights for investors with regulatory safeguards aimed at ensuring responsible and continuous resource development.

The Bolivian mining regime is primarily based on the granting of mining administrative contracts, as regulated under the Mining and Metallurgy Law. Pursuant to Article 139, a mining administrative contract is the legal instrument through which the State, acting on behalf of the Bolivian people, grants a mining operator the right to carry out specific activities within the mining value chain, including exploration and exploitation activities.

Mining rights confer the exclusive right to conduct authorized mining activities within a defined area, but do not grant ownership over the underlying mineral resources. These contracts are typically granted for a maximum term of up to 30 years, which may be extended subject to compliance with legal and contractual obligations, as well as the continued viability of the mining project.

The process for obtaining a mining administrative contract is regulated by the competent authority, the AJAM, and further detailed in Ministerial Resolution No. 23/2015. The procedure involves several stages:

a) obtaining a “free area certificate” confirming that the requested area is not subject to existing mining rights;

b) submission of a formal application, including corporate documentation, technical work programs, investment plans, and, where applicable, agreements with indigenous communities;

c) technical evaluation of the proposed exploration or exploitation program by the SERGEOMIN;

d) verification of the presence of indigenous communities and, if required, the completion of a prior consultation process;

e) issuance of an administrative resolution authorizing the execution of the mining administrative contract;

f) approval of the contract by the Legislative Assembly, followed by notarization and registration.

In practice, this process may take approximately two years from the issuance of the free area certificate.

Mining rights holders are subject to ongoing legal, financial, and operational obligations. These include, most notably: (i) the annual payment of the mining tax (patente minera), calculated on a per-hectare basis; and (ii) the obligation to carry out exploration and/or exploitation activities, in accordance with the approved work and investment plans.

Compliance is monitored through several mechanisms, including the submission of annual operational reports to the AJAM, the implementation of environmental monitoring systems, and the maintenance of detailed operational records (control books), particularly in relation to mining waste management. In addition, operators must commence activities within one year of contract registration and may not suspend operations for more than six consecutive months. Failure to comply with these conditions may result in the contract being terminated.

Mining rights may be revoked by the AJAM in cases of non-compliance, including failure to pay the mining tax, unjustified suspension or delay in operations, or failure to submit required reports. Revocation decisions are subject to administrative appeal before the Ministry of Mining and judicial review by the competent courts.

In addition to mining administrative contracts, Bolivian law recognizes other contractual arrangements. These include association agreements between State-owned companies and private or cooperative actors, governed by Articles 145 et seq. of the Mining Law, typically subject to public tender or direct negotiation depending on the project stage. Such agreements generally require a minimum State participation of 55% in profits.

Other structures include production contracts with the COMIBOL, as well as private contracts between mining operators, which must be authorized and registered before the AJAM, but which do not entail a transfer of mining rights. Cooperative mining entities remain subject to specific restrictions, particularly regarding their ability to associate with private investors.

Overall, the Bolivian regime provides a structured but administratively intensive process for the granting and maintenance of mining rights, combining contractual security with strict regulatory oversight.

The fiscal regime applicable to mining activities in Bolivia comprises three principal sources of government revenue: (i) general taxation, (ii) mining royalties, and (iii) the annual mining licence fee (patente minera), as established under the Mining and Metallurgy Law and the Political Constitution of the State.

a. General taxes.

Mining operators are subject to the standard corporate tax framework. This includes Value Added Tax (VAT) at a rate of 13%, which is recoverable through input tax credits; the Transactions Tax (IT) at 3% on gross transactions; and the Corporate Income Tax (IUE) at 25% on net profits. In addition, remittances abroad are subject to a withholding tax (IUE-BE) of 12.5%. Customs duties may also apply to imports under the Consolidated Customs Tax (GAC), although specific regimes,  such as temporary import mechanisms, may provide relief.

b. Mining royalties.

Mining royalties constitute the principal government take specific to the sector. Although not formally classified as a tax, they represent a mandatory economic burden on mining producers. Royalties are calculated on the gross sales value of minerals and metals, with rates generally ranging between 3% and 7%, depending on the type of mineral and prevailing international prices.

The regime includes incentives aimed at promoting domestic value addition. In particular, Article 224 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law provides for a reduction of up to 40% in the applicable royalty rate where minerals are processed and commercialised as refined metal products, whether in domestic or export markets. Additionally, the Government has considered the introduction of further incentives to encourage exploration activities, although such measures remain under discussion.

c. Mining tax rights (patente minera).

In addition to royalties and general taxes, mining right holders must pay an annual mining tax right (patente minera), calculated on a per-hectare basis in accordance with Article 230 of the Mining Law. Payment of this fee is essential to maintaining the validity of mining rights and forms part of the “economic and social function” requirement under Bolivian law, together with the obligation to initiate and sustain mining activities.

Overall, Bolivia’s mining fiscal regime combines conventional taxation with production-based royalties and holding fees, resulting in a layered government take that investors must carefully consider when structuring mining projects. Notably, the current Government is in the process of designing fiscal policies aimed at attracting increased domestic and foreign investment into the mining sector. In this context, further regulatory and tax reforms are expected in the near to medium term, which may significantly reshape the fiscal landscape applicable to mining activities.

In Bolivia, mining rights are not freely assignable. Pursuant to Article 136 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, holders of administrative mining contracts with the AJAM are expressly prohibited from transferring or assigning the rights and obligations arising from such contracts. As a result, any direct assignment of mining tenements to third parties is not permitted under the current legal framework. Nevertheless, the legal framework does permit the transfer of shares in companies holding mining rights, as outlined in Section 12. In practice, this results in an indirect transfer of the underlying administrative mining contract, including all associated rights, obligations and liabilities.

Similarly, mining rights cannot be used as collateral or be subject to security interests. Article 98 establishes that mineral resources in situ are the collective property of the Bolivian people and may not be registered as private property or used for securitization, guarantees, or similar financial operations. This restriction extends to both domestic and foreign investors. The pledge of shares in companies holding mining rights, is permitted and allows an indirect form of granting security over mining rights.

However, holders retain full ownership and disposal rights over investments, extracted production, and related assets, including equipment and infrastructure (Article 95). While these assets may be encumbered, the underlying mining rights themselves remain non-transferable and cannot be pledged as security.

Overall, the regime reflects a restrictive approach, limiting both the assignment and securitization of mining tenements, while allowing financing structures based on operational assets and technical information.

Indigenous and local community rights are a central feature of Bolivia’s mining legal framework, particularly in light of the country’s constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples and its adherence to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) principles. These rights are grounded in the Bolivian Constitution, as well as in international instruments such as the ILO Convention 169 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, both of which have been incorporated into the domestic legal framework.

Under Article 207 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, local communities must be consulted through appropriate procedures prior to the commencement of exploitation activities. This requirement is reinforced by Article 352 of the Political Constitution of the State, which mandates that any exploitation of natural resources within indigenous territories is subject to a process of prior, free and informed public consultation, to be conducted by the State in good faith. Such consultation processes are intended to ensure that affected communities are adequately informed and able to participate in decisions regarding the development of natural resources within their territories.

Although the formal obligation to carry out consultation lies with the State, in practice mining operators play a critical role in facilitating community engagement and securing what is often referred to as a “social license to operate”. As a result, it is customary, and in many cases, effectively required, for mining companies to enter into agreements with local communities prior to initiating exploitation activities. These agreements typically address matters such as community development, infrastructure, employment opportunities and environmental mitigation.

While prior consultation is not expressly mandated for early-stage exploration activities, it is generally advisable to engage with local communities at an early stage. In certain jurisdictions, evidence of such engagement may be required in order to obtain environmental permits or to mitigate potential social conflicts that could delay project development.

In addition to consultation rights, certain indigenous communities have established recognized autonomous governance structures (Autonomía Indígena Originaria Campesina), which entitle them to exercise self-governance within their territories in accordance with their own norms and procedures, as recognized under the Bolivian Constitution and the Law of Autonomies and Decentralization (Law No. 031 of 2010). These entities may impose additional conditions on mining projects operating within their jurisdictions.

In practice, both the AJAM and environmental authorities typically require evidence of executed Community Development Agreements with affected communities, prior to the commencement of substantive mining operations or the issuance of environmental licenses. Accordingly, effective management of FPIC-related processes is a critical component of legal compliance and project viability in Bolivia’s mining sector.

Environmental protection in Bolivia’s mining sector is governed by a comprehensive legal framework primarily composed of the Environmental Law (Law No. 1333 of 1992), the Mining and Metallurgy Law (Law No. 535 of 2014), and the Environmental Regulations for Mining Activities (Supreme Decree No. 24782 of 1997). This framework establishes a permitting system based on environmental licensing, impact assessment, and ongoing compliance obligations.

As a general rule, all mining activities require an environmental licence prior to commencement. The scope and complexity of the environmental permitting process depend on the stage and nature of the mining activity. Prospecting and exploration activities are subject to a simplified regime and are generally exempt from submitting a full Environmental Baseline Study (linea base ambiental) and a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Instead, applicants are typically required to submit a technical description of the proposed activities and their anticipated environmental impact, upon which the relevant departmental authority may grant the environmental licence.

By contrast, exploitation and mineral processing activities are subject to a more rigorous approval process. In such cases, the environmental licence is issued by the Ministry of Environment and Water, in coordination with the Ministry of Mining and Metallurgy. Applicants must submit both an Environmental Baseline Study and a detailed Environmental Impact Assessment. The EIA must include multidisciplinary analyses covering environmental, archaeological, socio-economic, hydrological, air and soil impacts. Importantly, it must also incorporate a mine closure plan (Plan de Cierre), setting out the technical and environmental measures to be implemented to rehabilitate the site at the conclusion of operations.

Although Bolivian legislation does not impose a uniform system of mandatory rehabilitation bonds or financial guarantees comparable to those in some other jurisdictions, environmental obligations are embedded within the licensing framework. In practice, environmental authorities may require operators to commit to specific remediation measures and ongoing monitoring obligations as part of the approved environmental management plan.

Additional permits may be required depending on the nature of the operation. These include licences for the use of hazardous substances, authorisations for explosives issued by the Ministry of Defence, and permits for controlled substances granted by the competent authority under the Ministry of Government. Municipal authorisations are also required for the construction and operation of processing facilities.

Mining activities may, under limited circumstances, be conducted in protected areas pursuant to Article 220 of the Mining and Metallurgy Law, provided that such activities do not contravene the conservation objectives of those areas. In practice, however, the granting of new mining rights in protected areas is highly restricted.

Failure to comply with environmental laws and regulations may result in significant administrative, civil and criminal liabilities. Operating without a valid environmental licence renders mining activities illegal and may trigger criminal sanctions, including imprisonment under provisions of the Bolivian Criminal Code relating to the unauthorised exploitation of mineral resources. In addition, environmental damage may give rise to administrative penalties (including fines and suspension of operations), civil liability for damages to third parties, and criminal sanctions for environmental offences, including aggravated environmental damage, destruction of ecosystems, or harm to protected or archaeological assets.

Overall, Bolivia’s environmental regulatory regime imposes a structured and increasingly robust framework for environmental oversight, with a growing emphasis on impact mitigation, site rehabilitation, and accountability throughout the mining lifecycle.

Health and safety in the Bolivian mining sector is governed by a combination of general labor regulations and specific industry standards. The Mining and Metallurgy Law provides, as a core principle, the obligation to comply with industrial safety and occupational health regulations throughout all mining activities.

At a general level, employers must adhere to the Labor Code and the General Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, which set out requirements on risk prevention, workplace conditions, use of protective equipment, and employer liability. These rules are complemented by sector-specific provisions, including the Mining Industrial Hygiene and Safety Regulations, which establish technical standards tailored to mining operations, such as underground work, ventilation, handling of hazardous materials, and emergency response.

Institutionally, entities such as the Centro de Investigaciones Minero Metalúrgicas (CEIMM, for its acronym in Spanish) play a role in developing and promoting technical training programs on industrial safety and risk management within the sector.

Compliance is also indirectly enforced through administrative mechanisms. For example, proof of compliance with social security and health contributions is required for certain transactions and export procedures, reinforcing adherence to occupational health obligations.

Overall, Bolivia maintains a structured regulatory framework combining general and sector-specific rules, with an emphasis on prevention, worker protection, and regulatory oversight.

Bolivia does not currently impose specific legal obligations requiring the disclosure or reporting of climate change-related risks across the mining value chain. There is no equivalent framework to international climate-related financial disclosure standards mandating the identification, assessment, or publication of climate risks by mining operators.

However, climate-related considerations may arise indirectly within the broader environmental regulatory regime. Mining activities are subject to prior environmental licensing requirements, including the preparation and approval of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), which are required for the granting of environmental permits. These studies must evaluate potential environmental impacts and establish mitigation and monitoring measures, which may encompass certain climate-related variables, such as water availability, ecosystem sensitivity, and environmental resilience.

Ongoing compliance obligations include environmental monitoring, periodic reporting, and adherence to approved environmental management plans. While these mechanisms contribute to environmental oversight, they do not amount to a formal climate risk disclosure regime.

At present, Bolivia does not yet have a fully developed framework mandating climate risk disclosure in the mining sector. However, there are emerging legislative and policy discussions aimed at strengthening the environmental regulatory regime and aligning it with international ESG and climate change standards. Although these initiatives signal a forward-looking approach, no specific, binding disclosure obligations have been enacted to date.

Bolivia does not currently impose specific legal obligations requiring mining operators to implement decarbonization measures across the mining value chain. While environmental regulations establish general requirements for emissions control, resource management, and occupational health and safety, there are no binding legal mandates obliging operators to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or adopt carbon-neutral practices.

However, mining operators are required to prepare and implement comprehensive mine closure and rehabilitation plans at the end of their operations. These plans, approved by the competent authorities, must outline measures to restore the mined area, manage environmental impacts, and ensure long-term ecological stability. While not framed as explicit decarbonization obligations, these requirements indirectly support sustainability and environmental protection goals.

Emerging legislative discussions and policy proposals aim to strengthen Bolivia’s environmental regulatory framework and align it with international ESG and climate change standards. The reforms under consideration are expected to enhance environmental oversight, potentially including obligations related to emissions reduction and sustainable management of mining operations, consistent with global best practices.

Overall, although Bolivia does not yet have formal decarbonization obligations, its legal framework emphasises environmental responsibility, with a forward-looking orientation towards international ESG compliance.

Bolivia does not currently impose specific carbon taxes or binding decarbonization obligations applicable to mining operators across the value chain. Existing environmental regulations focus primarily on general emissions control, resource management, and compliance with approved Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and environmental management plans. While such requirements may include measures related to energy efficiency, waste management, or mitigation of certain emissions, they do not constitute formal climate change or decarbonization obligations.

Mining operators are also required to implement comprehensive mine closure and rehabilitation plans, which include measures to restore the environment and manage long-term ecological impacts. These obligations, while indirectly supporting sustainability and climate mitigation, are not framed as decarbonization mandates.

There are, however, emerging legislative proposals and policy discussions aimed at aligning Bolivia’s environmental and mining regulations with international ESG and climate change standards. These initiatives may lead to more explicit climate-related requirements in the future, reflecting a growing emphasis on sustainable mining practices.

In addition to general taxes, mining royalties, and the annual mining licence fee outlined in Section 13, mining operators in Bolivia may be subject to certain sector-specific contributions linked to domestic transactions and exports of minerals. For example, transactions registered through the official system maintained by SENARECOM require mandatory contributions to social security, health funds, and industry-specific or gremial bodies. These obligations are unique to the mining sector and arise in connection with operational and commercial activities, rather than as general corporate taxes.

Apart from these contributions, the Bolivian mining tax framework does not impose other unusual or extraordinary taxes specific to mining operations. The system remains largely predictable, providing clarity for structuring investments and operations. Ongoing policy discussions and potential legislative reforms may further refine these sector-specific obligations, in line with broader efforts to attract domestic and foreign investment into the mining sector.

Bolivia’s mining sector offers a diverse range of investment opportunities, particularly in minerals, rare earths, and lithium, reflecting the country’s strategic resource base. Following a shift in policy orientation after two decades, the Bolivian Government has signalled a clear openness to foreign investment in the mining sector. This commitment was showcased at the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC), one of the world’s leading mining investment forums, where numerous projects were presented to international investors, highlighting the potential for exploration, development, and value-added processing.

Further the Bolivian Government has publicly stated its intention of pushing forward a comprehensive investment promotion law as well as reforms to the existing Mining Law and Lithium Law. Legislative changes the government expects will facilitate the development of new large scale mining projects.

The sector benefits from a relatively predictable legal and fiscal framework, combining general taxation, mining royalties, and annual licence fees, alongside sector-specific obligations such as environmental compliance and mandatory mine closure and rehabilitation plans. Emerging legislative initiatives further indicate a trend towards alignment with international ESG and climate standards, enhancing the long-term sustainability and attractiveness of mining projects.

Mining operators also benefit from institutional support through bodies such as the AJAM and the CEIMM, which provide regulatory oversight, technical guidance, and specialised training in mining operations, safety, and environmental management.

Overall, Bolivia presents a unique investment landscape: a stable regulatory environment, significant mineral potential, and a government actively promoting foreign participation. These factors combine to create promising opportunities for international investors seeking to engage in the development of strategic minerals and sustainable mining operations.