THE ECONOMIST: How to invest your huge inheritance. Don't make mistakes of Gilded Age with generational wealth

What do you stand to inherit? It still feels like a question from a different age, despite its growing importance today. In 2025 people across the rich world will inherit some $US6t, or around 10 per cent of GDP — a figure that has climbed sharply in recent decades.
French bequests have doubled as a share of national output since the 1960s; those in Germany have tripled since the 1970s; Italian inheritances are now worth around 20 per cent of GDP
There are two entirely reasonable responses to this. One is to worry about the new inheritocracy harming society: how it could corrode incentives to work, say, or widen inequality and distort the marriage market.
The other, if a windfall is coming your way, is to rub your hands in glee and ponder what you ought to do with it.
The typical inheritance is closer to the value of a typical home than to a Vanderbilt-style fortune. Even so, a rising number of people are in line for a bonanza. UBS, a bank, reckons that 53 people became billionaires in 2023 by inheriting money; many more will have received amounts in the hundreds of millions.
Asset prices have climbed so high in recent decades, and inheritance taxes have fallen so low, that the number of very wealthy scions is growing all the time.
Descend from the stratosphere, and a sizeable cohort is set to receive far lower sums that will nevertheless be life-changing. In Britain, for instance, a quarter of 35- to 45-year-olds are expected to inherit more than £280,000 ($586,000).
For these lucky people, the experience of the Vanderbilts and their contemporaries offers a cautionary tale. At the turn of the 20th century, America's census recorded about 4,000 millionaires, note Victor Haghani and James White, two wealth managers, in their book, 'The Missing Billionaires'.
Suppose a quarter of them had at least $US5m (the richest had hundreds) and had invested it in America's stockmarket. Had they then procreated at the average rate, paid their taxes and spent two per cent of their capital each year, their descendants today would include nearly 16,000 old-money billionaires.
In reality, it is a struggle to find a single one who traces their fortune back to the first Gilded Age.
That is not down to inflation or the 20th century's wars, but to poor investment and spending decisions. After all, spending 2 per cent of $US5m ($7.68m) in 1900 — that is, $US3.8m in today's money — would not exactly have consigned anyone to penury. The big question for a 21st-century heir is how to avoid the mistakes of those of the past. In other words, how can you enjoy a nice life while ensuring your inheritance lasts for ever?
Silver spoons for all
Some cheery news is that the question of how to invest, which sounds like the hardest part, need not be solved perfectly. In theory, this would mean finding the blend of risky assets with the best volatility-adjusted return, and comparing it with the 'safe' return on inflation-protected government bonds.
You would then solve for an optimal split between the two, which would vary with market conditions.
Thankfully, far simpler procedures can produce spectacular results. Our putative 20th-centurymaires just plonked everything in America's stockmarket, and did very well. Today, we know they could have done even better without much more effort.
A simple rule-of-thumb known as the 'Merton share' can approximate the optimal split between stocks and inflation-protected government bonds, by comparing their expected returns and volatility.
Messrs Haghani and White have calculated the annualised returns on such a strategy since 1900 (using a proxy for inflation-linked bonds for before 1997, when they were first issued).
Had the Gilded Age crowd and their descendants invested in this manner, they would have scored an annualised real return of 10 per cent, compared with 6.6 per cent from the all-stock strategy.
Remarkably, it would also have been 40 per cent less volatile. That would have produced vastly more old-money billionaires today.
The worse news is that deciding how much to spend is trickier than it sounds. Popular rules for drawing down retirement savings, such as spending a largish fixed percentage of the initial value each year, are definitely out. In truth, these are not wise even for pensioners.
Suppose you had kept a classic 60/40 split between American stocks and government bonds, starting in 2000, and drawn down 5 per cent of the value of your initial savings a year.
You would have run out of money in 2019, despite earning an annualised return of 5.25 per cent, since you would have depleted too much capital in the market's 'down' years.
Even if you spent only 4 per cent of the initial value each year — well below the portfolio's return — you would run a high risk of going bust.
Simulate many different market outcomes, based on the 60/40 portfolio's expected return and volatility, and the 4 per cent spending rule leads to ruin within three decades about a third of the time.
To avoid this trap, the optimal amount to spend each year must be a percentage of the portfolio's value at that point (the 'spending ratio'), not of its initial value.
In other words, if you want to take the risk required to generate outsize returns, you must vary your (maximum) spending from year to year.
That way, after a bad spell for the markets, you will not deplete too much of the remaining pot, allowing it to recover. Each year you could, for example, spend a proportion of the portfolio's value equal to its annualised expected return.
This is similar to the spending rule adopted by university endowments, which aim to solve the same problem. The median outcome is that the fund's value, and hence annual spending, stays roughly constant with time (provided you have not been overly optimistic about your returns).
Nice — but hardly enough to start a dynasty. Ideally, you want to increase your portfolio's value, which means spending less to let the returns rack up. The trade-offs here are difficult to parse.
You will get pleasure (or, in economists' jargon, 'utility') from spending more today, albeit with diminishing marginal returns as you get more and more profligate.
Doing so will also trim your descendants' purchasing power, especially if the portfolio has a large expected return, which you in part forgo by spending now. Yet such returns are inherently uncertain. In any case, it is only human to prefer an immediate pay-off to a delayed one ('time preference').
The solution is to plug these dynamics into a mathematical model, simulate possible paths for financial markets and calculate the utility derived from each for a given level of spending.
You can then calculate the expected utility for each rule and pick the one that maximises this. Unsurprisingly, the procedure is hard, and generates results that are sensitive to the inputs. Maybe spend some of your money on an excellent financial adviser.
Yet there are straightforward lessons that everyone can absorb. Although greater expected returns allow you to spend more, they do not do so by as much as you might think.
With higher returns, the gap between these and the optimal spending ratio widens (since there is more value in sacrificing spending to let the portfolio grow). Higher volatility means lower spending, since it drags on your annualised return.
The more reluctant you are to vary year-to-year outlays, the less you can tolerate investing in stocks, since their value fluctuates.
The smaller your minimum spending requirement, the more risk you can take, meaning your expected returns, and hence your overall spending, can rise.
A more important lesson is that making your inheritance last for ever means spending far less than its expected return. Exactly how much less depends on market conditions and your risk and time preference.
But under reasonable assumptions, a near-optimal portfolio might have an expected annualised return of 4.1 per cent and an optimal pre-tax spending ratio of 2.4 per cent per year.
Even that is before allowing for how much your family tree might grow, cutting whatever you pass on into smaller chunks.
'People often want to know how much they need to have to give each member of their family's next few generations a modest income,' says Mr Haghani. 'The answer is: a lot more than most anyone thinks.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Advertiser

8 hours ago

• The Advertiser

EU-Aust free trade deal: a "middle finger to Trump"

There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations. There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations.

Perth Now

10 hours ago

• Perth Now

EU-Aust free trade deal: a "middle finger to Trump"

There is appetite for the European Union and Australia to signal a "middle finger to Trump" by uniting on a long-awaited free trade deal but some in Brussels are tempering expectations of a quick turnaround. Trade talks kicked off in 2018 but Canberra walked away about 18 months ago over unsatisfactory market access for beef and lamb producers, and a reluctance to give up naming rights on products for geographical origin reasons, including feta, parmesan and prosecco. Fast forward to 2025 and US President Donald Trump's tariff antics have brought both parties back to the negotiating table. There was speculation of a quick conclusion with the Australian Financial Review reporting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had flagged a trip to Australia for late July or early August in anticipation of signing a deal. This echoed the fact she had also been quick to flag an agreement while offering Anthony Albanese her congratulations on becoming prime minister via Twitter in 2022. But multiple EU spokespeople have declined to confirm the travel, telling AAP a Down Under trip is "not on the radar". Despite acknowledging renewed political will, various sources in Brussels are cautioning patience. "There is no rush," according to one inside the EU Commission. "I wouldn't even say the end of the year, I would say more next year." Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow with Brussels think-tank Bruegel, estimates it could take at least another six months to resolve outstanding issues on agricultural tariffs and quotas. "The broad contour of the deal is already negotiated," he told AAP. "They know where the skeletons are buried. It takes a political grand bargain to do it." He noted that if the EU makes concessions, it would likely encounter an angry backlash from French and Polish farmers, who also opposed the EU's deal last year with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. However tractor and manure street protests wouldn't be enough to block a deal with Canberra, he said. Amid Washington's shift to extreme trade protectionism, an EU-Australian free trade deal would send a strong message to the Trump administration, Kirkegaard said. "As two of America's traditional allies, if both the EU and Australia find themselves subject to US tariffs, what better way than to do a deal with each other," he said. "So perhaps both countries feel this political signal is kind of a middle finger to Trump as well." Back in Melbourne, Sicilian-born cheesemaker Giorgio Linguanti from That's Amore Cheese faces an anxious wait to find out whether he can continue to market his wares using generic terms like parmesan or mozzarella. Yet he is open to compromise. "We should call it Australian parmesan and Australian feta because Australian milk is the best in the world," he said. Canberra and Brussels announced on Wednesday separate negotiations on a defence pact to boost defence industry, cyber-security and counter-terrorism co-operation. But it would not have military deployment obligations.

The Age

13 hours ago

• The Age

Dark clouds gather over Australia's red earth riches

Spearing out of the deep-red Hammersley Range in Western Australia's Pilbara region is an 18-kilometre conveyer belt. It rumbles day and night on rollers transporting a steady flow of iron ore from a monster four-storey crusher at the area's newest open-cut mine. Rio Tinto's $2.4 billion Western Range iron ore mine – officially opened this month – is the latest in a long line of mega-projects that have carved up the desert here for the past 60 years, sending mountains of crushed rock to the port and onto huge bulk carriers bound for steel mills in Asia. China's voracious appetite for iron ore, the reddish dirt that's turned into steel inside giant blast furnaces, has kept the Australian economy prosperous for decades, bringing in hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue and creating the world's two most valuable miners, BHP and Rio Tinto, along the way. Loading To this day, the commodity still ranks as Australia's single biggest export earner, fetching $138 billion in the past financial year alone, accounting for up to 5 per cent of the country's gross domestic product. But demand in China is starting to cool, which is a cause of considerable concern because Chinese steelmakers are the biggest buyers of our iron ore by far. Deteriorating conditions in the Chinese property sector, which accounts for 30 per cent of its steel demand, is crunching building activity, just as US President Donald Trump's tariffs loom as another economic threat that could hinder the effectiveness of Beijing's stimulus measures. At the same time, a wave of additional iron ore from the next generation of mines in Africa and Australia is raising the risk of an oversupply, while the declining quality of Australia's iron ore output means it will be unsuitable for less-polluting steel-making practices becoming more popular in the push to avert catastrophic global warming. All of these headwinds are leading to one important question: could Australia's iron ore earnings powerhouse be finally facing the beginning of long and gradual structural decline? The risk, analysts warn, is real. The fundamentals are certainly 'less constructive' than they have been in the past, says Lachlan Shaw, a mining analyst at UBS. 'The downside case for iron ore rests on a combination of supply growth from new projects including Simandou in Guinea, Onslow and Iron Bridge in WA and recovering production in Brazil,' he says. 'This, coupled with expectations for China's steel production to ease lower over coming years, results in an outlook that would, if it comes to pass, put downward pressure on iron ore prices.' However, it's also worth remembering that the iron ore price has long defied repeated predictions it is overdue for a fall, he adds. China's steel output has probably peaked, but this is unlikely to spell disaster. Production in China is likely to plateau at 'relatively high levels' for some time, UBS says, and demand growth in the emerging steel sectors of South-East Asia, India and the Middle East could help offset weakening conditions in China. The development of projects to unleash new iron ore supplies may also come under pressure from higher costs and more costly and complicated approvals and heritage management processes. 'The collective market has a long history of over-confidence in forecasting iron ore's demise,' Shaw says. 'There are important offsets that may see iron ore trade stronger than the more bearish forecasts on the street.' The slowdown in China presents the most immediate threat to demand. But a debate has also begun intensifying among the Pilbara iron ore giants about a longer-term question: could the shift to less-polluting steel-making methods which require higher grades of iron ore than Australian mines are producing hasten their demise? 'We're going to be in the Pilbara for decades. It has got a strong future if we do the work.' Rio's head of iron ore, Simon Trott Chinese steel mills' shift from traditional blast furnaces to cleaner processes, which use electricity instead of coal and require iron ore with fewer impurities, could turn the Pilbara into a wasteland, Andrew Forrest, the billionaire chairman of Western Australia's third-largest iron ore shipper, Fortescue Metals Group, said recently. 'They are going to shut down the old-fashioned, two-century-old technology of burning sticks and logs, putting in coal, putting in iron ore, burning it all and sending up masses of pollution into the atmosphere and producing steel,' Forrest told a mining summit in Perth. 'They're looking straight into a future that may or may not include WA.' Analysts agree that the momentum in the industry towards cleaner steel-making processes makes the outlook for lower grade iron ore 'more challenged' relative to higher-grade products. To maintain demand for the Pilbara's mid- to low-grade iron ore, technical innovation would be required to secure their use as feedstocks for lower-carbon steel-making processes, they say. BHP and Rio Tinto have partnered with BlueScope Steel to build an electric iron-making furnace as part of a demonstration project at Kwinana near Perth. Forrest's Fortescue is investing heavily in a push to diversify into green hydrogen as a substitute for coal in the steel-making process, and has plans to build a commercial-scale green iron plant in the Pilbara. 'Australian industry is starting to do the work here,' says Shaw. The opportunity for Australia to shift to a green iron producer and away from an iron ore miner and shipper is 'real', he adds, but will face technical and economic challenges. 'Innovation, commitment and supportive policy settings will likely be needed in combination to realise such an enormous transition,' he says. 'They are going to shut down the old-fashioned, two-century-old technology of burning sticks and logs, putting in coal, putting in iron ore, burning it all and sending up masses of pollution into the atmosphere and producing steel.' Fortescue's Andrew Forrest While the industry is responding to growing efforts to decarbonise the steel sector, which accounts for at least 8 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, Forrest's suggestion that the Pilbara is at risk of becoming a wasteland is one that Rio Tinto's head of iron ore, Simon Trott, rejects. 'We're going to be in the Pilbara for decades,' he says. 'It has got a strong future if we do the work.' Asked to explain the progressive decline in ore quality coming out of the region, Trott says: 'You tend to start with the best bits first. That's what happened when the Pilbara got developed through the '60s, and since then, as a whole, the Pilbara has gradually declined.' Rio Tinto says its new mines, such as Western Range, will shore up growth. The Anglo-Australian mining giant also believes it has an ace up its sleeve at its Rhodes Ridge development, which is expected to be ready by the end of this decade and contains more than 6 billion tonnes of higher grade ore. 'The good news for us is that it's in front of us rather than behind us,' says Trott. Loading Rod Sims, the long-serving former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, paints a more optimistic picture of the Pilbara's future. Where the industry sees a threat, he sees lucrative potential to create a green iron manufacturing hub for which, he says, Australia is 'superbly well positioned'. Now chair of the Superpower Institute, a think tank he co-founded with energy expert and economist Ross Garnaut, Sims says Australia's abundant iron ore, when coupled with world-class wind and solar resources, could power a green steel export industry potentially worth $386 billion a year by 2060. 'Green iron is the next great chapter in Australia's export story,' he says. 'As the world decarbonises, our fossil fuel exports will inevitably decline – but by using our unparalleled renewable energy resources to make green iron, we can replace those exports with high value, zero carbon products that the world will need.' One way to fulfil that vision is to use green hydrogen to replace coal in the steelmaking process, creating an emission-free product, a technology Forrest is placing big bets on. The hydrogen is sourced by splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen using electrolysis powered by fields of solar panels or wind turbines. However, the technology remains far more expensive than basic furnaces, and is not widely used yet. Loading With big challenges ahead, how Australia's mining giants position themselves for the next decade will be critical. BHP and Rio Tinto are searching for new leadership talent to steer them through. Both companies are heading into capital-intensive, construction-heavy periods with a focus on projects aimed at boosting their supplies of commodities that stand to benefit from growing global efforts to tackle global warming, such as electric battery raw material lithium, and copper, a key ingredient in electric wiring. BHP is focusing on several new and expanded copper mines, while Rio Tinto is concentrating on copper and lithium. 'Both businesses will need to pivot to a more technical, execution-driven capability within senior leadership ranks,' says Shaw. 'It will come down to the right balance of senior leaders being able to surround themselves with the technical skills and talent they need and can trust, versus potential new leadership with stronger technical experience.' Rio Tinto chair Dominic Barton surprised investors with his disclosure three weeks ago that chief executive Jakob Stausholm will leave later this year. The miner didn't name a successor, prompting speculation the transition was hasty and a result of friction between Stausholm and Barton. Stausholm has rejected talk of a rift. There is 'no disalignment', he told reporters at Western Range last week. 'We have completely agreed between ourselves that it is the right time to look for succession, and I will be stepping down. I am very happy and proud about my what will be five years as CEO of this company,' he said. Any incoming boss at Rio Tinto will need to 'double down to deliver greater operational performance', Barton said, intimating the company is focusing on candidates for the top job with deep mining experience. Change at the top of resource giant BHP has been smoother. Former National Australia Bank chief executive Ross McEwan seamlessly took over as company chair from eight-year veteran Ken MacKenzie in March, although there are now suggestions the Big Australian is looking to replace CEO Mike Henry but no official acknowledgement. For Shanghai-based Baowu, Rio Tinto's partner in Western Range, there is no equivocation on the Pilbara's future. The world's largest steel producer, wholly owned by the Chinese government, is firmly rooted in the region's red earth, owning 46 per cent of the joint venture since 2002. Its chairman, Hu Wangming, describes it almost poetically as a place 'where partnership and friendship flourish, like the ore veins of the Western Range: strong, deep and everlasting'.