Gold and silver prices hit new highs on Monday amid increased demand for safe-haven assets due to the situation surrounding Greenland.
Traders fear that increased pressure from US President Donald Trump, who is laying claim to Greenland, will provoke a large-scale trade war between the US and Europe.
On Saturday, Trump announced that he would impose 10% tariffs on a number of European countries that support Denmark and Greenland starting in February. From June 1, 2026, the tariffs for these countries will be 25% and will remain in effect “until an agreement is reached on the full purchase of Greenland by Washington,” Trump said.
European countries are ready for a coordinated response to the introduction of US tariffs, said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. According to the Financial Times, EU countries are considering imposing tariffs on US goods worth €93 billion or a series of restrictions on American companies.
The trade tensions surrounding Greenland are different from last year’s situation with the US imposing large-scale tariffs, notes Charu Chanan, chief investment strategist at Saxo Markets in Singapore.
“The use of tariff threats within NATO is a kind of blow to confidence that could provoke a more persistent risk premium on asset values,” she says.
The spot price of gold rose 1.6% to $4,670.47 per ounce by 9:30 a.m. on Monday, while silver rose 3.4% to $93.1755 per ounce. During the session, the price of gold rose to a record $4,690.59 per ounce, and silver to $94.1213 per ounce.
“Geopolitical risks are intensifying,” said Kyle Rodda, an analyst at Capital.com Inc. in Melbourne. “New trade uncertainty is clouding the growth outlook, and US foreign policy is undermining confidence in the dollar. This is the perfect set of conditions for gold and silver prices to rise.”
US stock index futures are down 0.8-1.3% on Monday. Trading activity on the futures market is weak as US exchanges are closed for the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.
Reference: The Experts Club analytical center previously released a video analysis of the twenty largest silver-producing countries and their competition for leadership in 1971-2024 – https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HvKK-YET8vs
The Experts Club also previously presented an analysis of the world’s leading gold-producing countries — https://youtube.com/shorts/DWbzJ1e2tJc?si=BywddHO-JFWFqUFA
In its January review, the International Grains Council (IGC, headquartered in London) raised its forecast for global grain harvest in 2025/26 (July-June) by 31 million tons to a record 2 billion 461 million tons.
This is primarily due to improved forecasts for corn harvests, mainly in the US and China, and barley harvests in Canada and Australia.
In the 2024/25 season, the harvest amounted to 2 billion 238 million tons.
“Thanks to an increase in yield (by 5%) and an increase in acreage (by 1%), the grain harvest in the 2025/26 season will break all existing records. In addition to record corn and wheat harvests, barley and sorghum harvests are also expected to reach multi-year highs,” the review says.
The estimate for grain consumption has been raised by 16 million tons to 2.416 billion tons. Carryover stocks at the end of the season are forecast at 634 million tons, which is almost 16 million tons higher than the previous estimate.
Global trade this season is estimated at 446 million tons, which is 4 million tons higher than the previous forecast and 5% higher on an annualized basis.
The wheat harvest forecast has risen to 842 million tons, which is 12 million tons higher than the previous estimate. In the 2024/25 season, the harvest amounted to 801 million tons. “It is expected that in the 2026/27 season, the area sown with wheat will decrease slightly, and assuming average yields in the next season, the harvest is preliminarily forecast to decline by about 2%,” the review says. “As demand has reached a new peak, a slight reduction in global stocks is expected, but aggregate stocks in major exporting countries will remain at comfortable levels.”
The corn harvest forecast for the 2025/26 season has been raised to 1.313 billion tons from the previous 1.298 billion tons. Last season, 1.238 billion tons were harvested.
The estimate for global rice production has remained virtually unchanged at 543 million tons. Taking into account a slight decline in consumption, stocks at the end of the 2025/26 season will increase by 2 million tons. Expectations for global trade volume in calendar year 2026 have declined slightly, but at 60 million tons (a 2% increase), it will still be a record high, the review notes.
Earlier, the Experts Club analytical center presented a video analysis of global grain production by leading agricultural countries in the period 1991-2024. The video is available here: https://youtube.com/shorts/2XwiBWf9GrM?si=F9-QsXbWRl2jqV8M
The Ukrainian passive fire protection market in 2025, according to preliminary estimates, is worth $8-12 million, with the share of imported materials falling from 80% in 2016 to 17% in 2025, according to the Experts Club analytical centre.
‘Local production reduces costs compared to imported counterparts, which is especially important for large-scale restoration projects,’ said Konstantin Kalafat, co-owner and director of Kovlar Group, quoted in the article.
According to an analytical study by the Ukrainian manufacturer of passive fire protection products, Kovlar Group, based on the interim results of the Ukraine Recovery Conference 2025 in Rome, provided that the hostilities end, the market could grow to $25 million by 2026. It is expected that the demand structure will be dominated by specialised fire-retardant paints (70-80%), fire-retardant plasters and slabs – 5-10%; passage sealing and communication protection systems – 5-10%; ventilation, smoke ducts and wood protection products – about 5%. An additional driver may be the growing demand for epoxy and polyurethane fire protection systems for oil and gas infrastructure, energy and strategic facilities – a segment that was previously limited by the high cost of imported analogues.
Experts Club notes that against the backdrop of war and logistical constraints, import substitution continues, and in 2025, Ukrainian manufacturers and international brands were simultaneously present on the market through suppliers and certified systems, in particular Ammokote, Hensotherm, Defens, Promapaint, and Steelguard. The leader of the segment in public estimates is Kovlar Group, which claims a share of about 65% of the Ukrainian fire protection materials market and a portfolio of more than 25 items of fire protection products and related materials; other notable Ukrainian manufacturers include Kapitel Dnipro and NVP Spetsmaterialy.
EXPERTS CLUB, fire protection material, Kovlar Group, Калафат
Silver prices hit historic highs amid growing demand for safe-haven assets and expectations of monetary policy easing in the US. According to Reuters, the spot price of silver rose to a record $86.22 per troy ounce on January 12.
At the same time, silver futures on the US market rose above $89 per ounce during trading on January 13, Investopedia reported. A number of industry publications noted that at certain points during the session, silver rose by about 5%, reflecting the metal’s increased volatility. Analysts surveyed by Reuters do not rule out a further movement of prices towards $90 per ounce if the current combination of factors supporting precious metals remains in place.
Reference: The Experts Club analytical center previously released a video analysis of the twenty largest silver-producing countries and their competition for leadership in 1971-2024 – https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HvKK-YET8vs
On January 1, 2026, a number of changes came into force in Ukraine that affect companies’ expenses, tax burdens, and foreign trade operations—from new state budget parameters and individual tax innovations to updates to energy tariffs and export licensing rules, according to the Experts Club information and analytical center.
The 2026 state budget has set new social standards that directly affect the wage fund, social security contributions, and the calculation of fines and mandatory payments linked to the minimum wage and subsistence minimum.
In terms of taxation, businesses should take into account the updated indicators for the simplified system and military tax. The tax service’s explanations for 2026 separately note the amounts of payments for individual entrepreneurs in groups 1-2, as well as the introduction/application of the military levy for single tax payers (in particular, a fixed payment for groups 1-2 and a percentage of income for group 3), plus a number of related administrative changes.
A separate section is devoted to labor regulation. Starting in 2026, the requirements for employers regarding the employment of people with disabilities will be updated (a change in the approach to meeting the quota and financial responsibility for non-compliance). This affects personnel policy, budgeting, and internal HR procedures, especially in companies with a large number of employees.
In foreign trade for 2026, the government has maintained zero quotas (a ban through quotas) on exports of natural gas of Ukrainian origin and a number of other items, while canceling quotas on exports of table salt and coking coal, and maintaining the licensing regime for certain agricultural items for export to a number of EU countries.
In the energy sector, the NEURC set the tariff for Ukrenergo’s electricity transmission services for 2026: for January-March – UAH 713.68/MWh (excluding VAT) for most system users and UAH 373.93/MWh (excluding VAT) for green electrometallurgy enterprises; for April-December – UAH 742.91/MWh and UAH 378.49/MWh, respectively (excluding VAT).
Changes in excise and financial matters are also important for certain industries. In particular, the schedule for increasing excise duty on motor fuel, previously introduced by amendments to the Tax Code, continues to apply, and an increased income tax rate has been set for banks for 2026.
As we know, personnel are everything. This is not just an empty phrase, because in science, where training sometimes takes decades, the future of a country is determined by the availability of qualified researchers.
After the collapse of the USSR, where scientists occupied an honorable place in the hierarchy of professions, Ukraine acquired one of the largest research systems in Europe. The scientific school of the Ukrainian SSR era was known for its advanced technologies and groundbreaking ideas. Subsequently, in the early years of independence, changes in the structure of the economy began. While in 1991-1995 the share of industry in GDP exceeded 40%, by 2024 it had fallen to 19.0%, and the service sector had taken the lead, growing from 40% to over 70%.
The country’s economic problems and economic transformation also led to a reduction in funding for science. The dynamics of this reduction are shown below:
Table 1. Dynamics of expenditure on research and development in 2010-2023.
|
Years |
Research and development expenses – total, million UAH | Share of research and development expenditure in GDP, % |
| 2010 | 8107,1 | 0,75 |
| 2011 | 8513,4 | 0,65 |
| 2012 | 9419,9 | 0,67 |
| 2013 | 10248,5 | 0,70 |
| 2014 | 9487,5 | 0,60 |
| 2015 | 11003,6 | 0,55 |
| 2016 | 11530,7 | 0,48 |
| 2017 | 13379,3 | 0,45 |
| 2018 | 16773,7 | 0,47 |
| 2019 | 17254,6 | 0,43 |
| 2020 | 17022,4 | 0,41 |
| 2021 | 20973,8 | 0,38 |
| 2022 | 17117,8 | 0,33 |
| 2023 | 21348,1 | 0,33 |
The share of science spending in gross domestic product (GDP) has been steadily declining since 2010 and has fallen to 0.33% in recent years. Back in 2017, the World Bank noted that “…the current innovation policy and corresponding state funding do not meet the critical needs of the Ukrainian national innovation system.” A significant reduction in funding has led to the disappearance of a number of scientific institutions (SIs) and a decline in the prestige of scientific work. Young people are not going into science because of low salaries and the low status of scientists. It cannot be otherwise, given that the salary of a senior researcher at the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine is 13,034 hryvnia.
All this has led to increased migration, a decrease in the number of scientists, and a loss of opportunities to reproduce human resources. The number of personnel in the field of research and development (R&D) has decreased sevenfold: from more than 400,000 people in 1991 to 63,800 in 2024. Below you can see the dynamics of the number of personnel engaged in R&D.
Fig. 1. Dynamics of the number of personnel employed in R&D in Ukraine

Table 2. Dynamics of the number of personnel employed in R&D in Ukraine
| Years | Number of employees involved in scientific research and development – total, persons | Including | ||
| researchers | technicians | support employees | ||
| person / as a percentage of the total number of employees involved in scientific research and development | person / as a percentage of the total number of employees involved in scientific research and development | person / as a percentage of the total number of employees involved in scientific research and development | ||
| 2010 | 182484 | 133744 / 73.3 | 20113 / 11.0 | 28627 / 15.7 |
| 2011 | 175330 | 130403 / 74.4 | 17260 / 9.8 | 27667 / 15.8 |
| 2012 | 164340 | 122106 / 74.3 | 15509 / 9.4 | 26725 / 16.3 |
| 2013 | 155386 | 115806 / 74.5 | 14209 / 9.2 | 25371 / 16.3 |
| 2014* | 136123 | 101440 / 74.5 | 12299 / 9.0 | 22384 / 16.5 |
| 2015 | 122504 | 90249 / 73.7 | 11178 / 9.1 | 21077 / 17.2 |
| 2016 | 97912 | 63694 / 65.1 | 10000 / 10.2 | 24218 / 24.7 |
| 2017 | 94274 | 59392 / 63.0 | 9144 / 9.7 | 25738 / 27.3 |
| 2018 | 88128 | 57630 / 65.4 | 8553 / 9.7 | 21945 / 24.9 |
| 2019 | 79262 | 51121 / 64.5 | 7470 / 9.4 | 20671 / 26.1 |
| 2020 | 78860 | 51427 / 65.2 | 7117 / 9.0 | 20316 / 25.8 |
| 2021 | 68808 | 44321 / 64.7 | 5879 / 8.6 | 18288 / 26.7 |
| 2022* | 53221 | 36084 / 67.8 | 5020 / 9.4 | 12117 / 22.8 |
| 2023 | 58567 | 38845 / 66.3 | 4542 / 7.8 | 15180 / 25.9 |
| 2024 | 63847 | 42670 / 66.8 | 5148 / 8.1 | 16029 / 25.1 |
The period of sharp decline in the number of R&D personnel (1991-1999) was characterized by a drop in funding. Subsequently, in 2000-2008, the number of research personnel stabilized at 200,000. The financial crisis accelerated negative trends in the dynamics of R&D personnel. This was followed by the annexation of Crimea and parts of the eastern regions, and the war. In 2024, the UNESCO report “Analysis of war damage to the Ukrainian science sector and its consequences” noted that as a result of the Russian Federation’s aggression, 12% of scientists were forced to emigrate or move within the country. Of these, 6.3% were forced to emigrate to other countries, and 5.5% became internally displaced persons. About 30% of all scientists began to work remotely. In other words, there was a “brain drain” from science. According to some data, more than 20,000 R&D workers were temporarily displaced or left Ukraine in 2022. Thus, losses associated with the war were added to the traditional outflow of scientific personnel. Changes in the structure of science have also led to the disappearance of the previously massive category of designers and technologists. Ukraine’s recovery will take place through investment projects that will require a huge amount of design and technological documentation, which no one is left to prepare.
Table 3 shows that, in addition to the decline in the number of scientists, there is also an aging of science. The most numerous age group in science is scientists over 65 years of age. Scientists aged 55 and older make up about 40% of scientists.
Table 3 Number of researchers involved in R&D by age:
| up to and including 25 years of age | 25-29 years | 30-34 years | 35-39 years | 40-44 years | 45-49 years | 50-54 years | 55-59 years | 60-64 years | 65 years old and older | |
| 2016 | 1876 | 6418 | 7863 | 7488 | 6216 | 4936 | 5816 | 6593 | 6328 | 10160 |
| 2020 | 949 | 3165 | 5418 | 6239 | 5714 | 4927 | 4123 | 4957 | 5191 | 10744 |
| 2016 | 2.9% | 10.1% | 12.3% | 11.8% | 9.8% | 7.7% | 9.1% | 10.4% | 9.9% | 16.0% |
| 2020 | 1.8% | 6.2% | 10.5% | 12.1% | 11.1% | 9.6% | 8.0% | 9.6% | 10.1% | 20.9% |
The situation with personnel in science is such that it can be described in the words of Ernest Hemingway: “Ask not for whom the bell tolls, for it tolls for thee.” And without personnel, there will be no science.
In the structure of science funding, the largest share is concentrated in the business sector – 59.9%, in the public sector it is 33.4%, and in the higher education sector – about 6.7% of expenditures. In terms of personnel, the public sector accounts for 49%, the business sector for 34.6%, and higher education for 16.4%. Scientific institutions and universities are predominantly state-owned. Research in universities is not a key activity and is largely separate from teaching.
The main channels of public funding are the Ministry of Education and Science, sectoral academies, and the National Research Fund of Ukraine. Another source is the foreign sector. In the pre-war period, foreign sources accounted for 20-25% of R&D funding in Ukraine. In the context of the war, foreign partners have stepped up grant funding.
For many years, Ukrainian science has been unsuccessfully trying to establish links with business due to the lack of a comprehensive policy aimed at supporting such cooperation. However, these efforts are often fragmented, short-term, and insufficiently integrated into national innovation and industrial strategies. The lack of coordination between universities, business, and government agencies hinders the development of an innovation system.
Another feature of Ukrainian science is the almost complete absence of funding from regional sources, which is incomprehensible given the decentralization and significant increase in community budgets, which are not being used for regional science. It appears that local authorities know nothing about science and do not want to use it.
The negative changes in the state of Ukraine’s scientific human resources urgently require state intervention to stabilize and further reduce these influences. The state body responsible for the development of science, the Ministry of Education and Science, is monitoring these trends and attempting to change the situation.
Recently, the Ministry of Education and Science prepared the Concept for the Support and Development of Human Resources in the Field of Scientific and Scientific-Technical Activities, “National System of Researchers of Ukraine” (NSR), which was approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. The concept “aims to identify, recognize, support, and promote the best Ukrainian scientific and scientific-pedagogical workers who have achieved outstanding results in scientific and scientific-technical activities and made a significant contribution to the development of science in the country, as well as to provide them with further individual financial support.” Support will be provided to scientists on the basis of questionnaires, regardless of their current ability to conduct research.
The proposed NSD is based on a rating assessment of scientists’ achievements, with additional funding for the best researchers. However, distributing money based on questionnaires among a limited number of scientists, as is essentially proposed, is not rational.
The set of indicators for determining the best mainly duplicates the indicators used in state certification of institutions. It is unclear how the summarization will be carried out and how the characteristics of different scientific disciplines will be taken into account. And how, for example, can a representative of fundamental science be compared with someone from an industry or a theoretical physicist with a lawyer? Furthermore, scientists perform different functions in scientific teams: some generate ideas, some conduct experiments, etc.
Furthermore, with the support of individual scientists, the place and role of creative teams and infrastructure and information support are completely negated. Scientists do not work alone, but as part of teams with their own functions.
The use of mechanistic approaches to ratings will primarily support scientists with many years of experience in science and managers (they have better publication indicators, in particular thanks to the opportunities for co-authorship and the “duration” of scientific work). It is impossible to apply the same requirements to everyone. Therefore, the general ranking of Ukrainian scientists is an artificial measure. In developed countries, such rankings are not conducted. The idea of distributing funds among scientists based on rankings is not new. In Ukraine, there was an attempt to create something similar in the Lviv region. There are no mentions of its results.
Another example of support for scientists at the national level is Mexico, where the NSD has been operating since the mid-1980s as a response to the mass emigration of scientists to the United States. It is difficult to assess the effectiveness of this system because, in addition to it, the government has applied other incentives, in particular various grant programs. However, the level of emigration of scientists from Mexico remains high, and the results of the impact of the creation of the NSD are unclear to its initiators. Other Latin American countries with similar problems have not introduced it.
Ukraine needs solutions that are not copies of foreign models, but responses to its own challenges. To overcome Ukraine’s personnel problems in science, it is necessary to:
1. Strictly comply with the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Science and Scientific Activity” with a level of funding for science at 1.7% of GDP.
2. Make scientific work prestigious by significantly increasing scientists’ salaries, which will ensure the competitiveness of Ukrainian science.
3. Ensure acceptable basic funding for universities and substantial funding on a competitive basis, as well as partial funding for regional science and education institutions from local budgets.
4. Create and implement mechanisms for financing regional science aimed at solving regional problems from community budgets.
5. Introduce a number of specialized competitions at various levels (national, regional, departmental, etc.), including in cooperation with foreign partners, where the customers would be national government bodies, regions, and private companies seeking to solve priority problems. This will lead to the financing of scientific teams for work on relevant projects, rather than individual scientists receiving rent for questionnaires.
6. Allow only organizations from the “Register of Scientific Institutions” to participate in competitions for research using budget funds.
Today, Ukrainian science is on the brink of survival. Without systematic action on the part of the state and society, we risk losing the intellectual capital necessary for the restoration and modernization of the country.
Author: Volodymyr Khaustov, scientific secretary of the State Institution “Institute of Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine”, Honored Economist of Ukraine, Candidate of Technical Sciences.