🇲🇱 When Gold Is the Soil and Land Is the Leverage
What Mali’s Mining Code Teaches Black America About Ownership
In 2023–2024, the government of Mali made a decision that sent shockwaves through global mining markets.
Under the leadership of Assimi Goïta, Mali revised its mining code to increase state ownership in gold projects to as much as 35%, raise royalties, and require stronger local participation.
The message was simple:
If the gold comes from our soil, we deserve a larger stake in the outcome.
This was not symbolic.
It was structural.
And it raises a deeper question for us:
If ownership determines destiny, what are we actually owning?
Mali’s Move: From Participation to Control
Mali is one of Africa’s top gold producers. Gold accounts for the majority of its export earnings and government revenue.
For years, multinational mining companies extracted billions in value. The state collected taxes and modest equity stakes. But as gold prices surged, Mali reconsidered the math.
The revised code:
Increased the government’s free carried interest from 10% to 20%.
Allowed the state to purchase an additional 15%.
Adjusted royalty structures tied to gold prices.
Required stronger domestic participation.
This was not just about revenue.
It was about leverage.
Mali shifted from being primarily a tax collector to being a meaningful equity partner.
That difference changes everything.
The American Parallel: Land Is the Gold
African Americans do not collectively control subsoil mineral rights.
We do not control oil basins.
We do not control national gold reserves.
But there is one resource that functions as gold in America:
Land.
Urban land.
Commercial corridors.
Redevelopment zones.
Infrastructure sites.
Historically, Black Americans once owned approximately 14 million acres of farmland in 1910. Today that number has shrunk dramatically.
Urban Black neighborhoods have also experienced:
Redlining
Highway construction displacement
Urban renewal demolition
Stadium and institutional expansion
Value was extracted.
Equity participation was limited.
Ownership concentration shifted.
The pattern looks familiar.
The Structural Difference
Mali can say to multinational corporations:
“If you want access to our resource, these are our terms.”
Black communities in America often say:
“If you develop in our neighborhood, please include us.”
One is a sovereign negotiating position.
The other is a request.
That is not an emotional observation. It is a structural one.
Participation vs. Equity
Jobs are participation.
Contracts are participation.
Grants are participation.
Equity is ownership.
When public dollars fund development projects in Black neighborhoods, the question becomes:
Who owns the asset?
Who receives the long-term dividends?
Who benefits when the valuation increases?
Who controls refinancing and resale?
Mali’s strategy centered on ownership percentage.
Ownership percentage determines generational wealth capture.
What a “Mali Strategy” Would Look Like Here
Without sovereign authority, Black communities still have tools:
1️⃣ Equity Mandates in Publicly Funded Projects
If tax dollars are involved, equity participation can be negotiated.
2️⃣ Community Development Entities (CDEs)
Structured vehicles that channel capital into low-income communities while retaining influence.
3️⃣ Opportunity Zone Funds
Equity-focused investment strategies rather than purely developer-driven gains.
4️⃣ Community Land Trusts
Long-term control over appreciating land assets.
5️⃣ Capital Stack Literacy
Understanding tax credits, debt layers, equity tranches, and how to structure ownership positions instead of fee-based participation.
The shift is philosophical before it is financial.
From:
“How many jobs will this create?”
To:
“What percentage do we own?”
The Hard Question
Why does electoral representation not automatically translate into proportional fiscal influence?
If we can win elections but not ownership stakes, something structural is missing.
Mali’s decision forces us to confront a similar question:
If a nation rich in gold can remain poor without leverage,
What happens to a community rich in land but poor in ownership?
A Data-Driven, Scrutiny-Proof Observation
This is not about grievance.
It is about capital structure.
Across American metropolitan areas:
Property ownership concentration determines wealth accumulation.
Infrastructure ownership determines revenue flow.
Equity position determines long-term control.
Those principles are politically neutral. They are financial realities.
Mali adjusted its capital structure.
The deeper question is whether Black America is willing to do the same — within the tools legally available in the U.S. system.
The Strategic Lesson
Mali did not ask for sympathy.
It recalibrated leverage.
The lesson is not that Black America needs sovereignty.
The lesson is that ownership percentage determines economic destiny.
Land is the resource.
Capital literacy is the negotiation tool.
Equity is the multiplier.