Lithium Corp - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the transition period from [    ] to [    ]

Commission file number 000-54332

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (775) 410-5287

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, $0.001 par value 

 (Title of class) 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 the Securities Act. Yes ☐     No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act Yes ☐     No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the last 90 days. Yes ☒     No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒     No ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. Yes ☐     No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐     No ☒

The aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant on June 30, 2019, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $7,843,435 based on a $0.082 average bid and asked price of such common equity.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock as of the latest practicable date. 95,651,644 common shares as of March 18, 2020.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Item 1. Business

This annual report contains forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or our future financial performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may”, “should”, “expects”, “plans”, “anticipates”, “believes”, “estimates”, “predicts”, “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, including the risks in the section entitled “Risk Factors” that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements.

Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Except as required by applicable law, including the securities laws of the United States, we do not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results.

Our financial statements are stated in United States Dollars (US$) and are prepared in accordance with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

In this annual report, unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts are expressed in United States dollars and all references to “common shares” refer to the common shares in our capital stock.

As used in this current report and unless otherwise indicated, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” mean Lithium Corporation, unless otherwise indicated.

General Overview

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada on January 30, 2007 under the name “Utalk Communications Inc.”. At inception, we were a development stage corporation engaged in the business of developing and marketing a call-back service using a call-back platform. Because we were not successful in implementing our business plan, we considered various alternatives to ensure the viability and solvency of our company.

On August 31, 2009, we entered into a letter of intent with Nevada Lithium regarding a business combination which may be effected in one of several different ways, including an asset acquisition, merger of our company and Nevada Lithium, or a share exchange whereby we would purchase the shares of Nevada Lithium from its shareholders in exchange for restricted shares of our common stock.

Effective September 30, 2009, we effected a 1 old for 60 new forward stock split of our issued and outstanding common stock. As a result, our authorized capital increased from 50,000,000 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.001 to 3,000,000,000 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.001 and our issued and outstanding shares increased from 4,470,000 shares of common stock to 268,200,000 shares of common stock.

Also effective September 30, 2009, we changed our name from “Utalk Communications, Inc.” to “Lithium Corporation”, by way of a merger with our wholly owned subsidiary Lithium Corporation, which was formed solely for the change of name. The name change and forward stock split became effective with the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board at the opening for trading on October 1, 2009 under the stock symbol “LTUM”. Our CUSIP number is 536804 107.

On October 9, 2009, we entered into a share exchange agreement with Nevada Lithium and the shareholders of Nevada Lithium. The closing of the transactions contemplated in the share exchange agreement and the acquisition of all of the issued and outstanding common stock in the capital of Nevada Lithium occurred on October 19, 2009. In accordance with the closing of the share exchange agreement, we issued 12,350,000 shares of our common stock to the former shareholders of Nevada Lithium in exchange for the acquisition, by our company, of all of the 12,350,000 issued and outstanding shares of Nevada Lithium. Also, pursuant to the terms of the share exchange agreement, a director of our company cancelled 220,000,000 restricted shares of our common stock. Nevada Lithium’s corporate status was allowed to lapse and the company’s status with the Nevada Secretary of State has been revoked.

In June 2013, we purchased a claim in the Cherryville, BC area for 250,000 shares of our common stock. The claim area is known as the BC Sugar Property, and since this time we expanded the claim block considerably, and then have allowed a number of the less prospective claims to lapse. The company’s holdings here are currently 203 acres (82 hectares). In January, 2014, we agreed to buy back the shares issued pursuant to the June agreement for $2,500.

Effective April 23, 2014, we entered into an operating agreement with All American Resources, L.L.C and TY & Sons Investments Inc. with respect to Summa, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company incorporated on December 12, 2013, wherein we hold a 25% membership. Our company’s capital contribution to Summa, LLC was $125,000, of which $100,000 was in cash and the balance in services. To date we have contributed an additional $16,700 to Summa, LLC.

Effective August 15, 2014, we entered into an asset purchase agreement with Pathion, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and Pathion Mining Inc., a Nevada corporation. Pursuant to the Agreement, we agreed to sell to Pathion, Inc. and Pathion Mining, our rights, interests and assets relating to our Fish Lake Valley, San Emidio and BC Sugar properties. The asset purchase agreement was set to close at the end of September 2014, but was extended to October 17, 2014 by mutual agreement, and was further extended until January 19, 2015. After Pathion failed to close the agreement within the agreed upon extended timeframe, we gave notice on January 27, 2015 of the termination of the asset purchase agreement entered into on August 15, 2014.

On February 20, 2015, our company signed a letter of intent with Kingsmere Mining Ltd., which is the preliminary step whereby Kingsmere, or their appointee, may choose to buy or option our company’s lithium brine properties in Nevada. The letter allowed for a due diligence and election period until April 1, 2015 with closing by April 15, 2015. The terms of the letter of intent with Kingsmere were subsequently extended to May 31, 2015. Our company and Kingsmere were not able to reach an agreement and a press release notifying the public was issued on June 23, 2015.

In April of 2016, our Company established a wholly owned subsidiary called Lithium Royalty Corp. The subsidiary was a Nevada Corporation and was the entity through which we had planned to build a portfolio of lithium mineral properties. Also that April Lithium Royalty Corp. acquired through staking the North Big Smoky Prospect, a block of placer mineral claims in Nye County Nevada. On May 13, 2016 our wholly owned subsidiary sold 100% of the interest in the North Big Smoky Property through a Property Acquisition Agreement with 1069934 Nevada Ltd. (“Purchaser”) a private company. Consideration paid to Lithium Royalty Corp. consisted of $10,000.00, reimbursement of staking and filing fees, 300,000 shares in the “Purchaser Parent”, 1069934 B.C. Ltd. Lithium Royalty Corp. retained a 2.5% Net Smelter Royalty (“Vendor NSR”) on the North Big Smoky Property and the Purchaser had the right to purchase up to one-half (50%) of the Vendor NSR for $1,000,000 to reduce the Vendor NSR to 1.25%. By agreement dated September 13, 2017 Lithium Corporation agreed to sell back the shares of 1069934 Nevada Ltd. to San Antone Minerals Corp. (successor of 1069934) for $3,000, which was to be paid to Lithium Corporation upon completion of a $500,000 financing, or by October 27, 2017 whichever occured the earliest. The Company received the compensation under the agreement on November 2, 2017. The North Big Smoky claims were abandoned by the Purchaser in 2017 and as a result the Company’s NSR interest in the property was extinguished.

On February 16, 2017, we issued a news release announcing that we had signed a letter of intent with Nevada Sunrise Gold Corp., (“NEV” (TSX-V - NEV, OTC - NVSGF)) with respect to our Salt Wells lithium-in-brine prospect located in Churchill County Nevada. Under the terms of the agreement NEV was to earn a 100% interest in the property subject to a 2% Net Smelter Royalty (NSR), and by making staged payments of cash and shares over the next two years. Issues arose with respect to the claim block and Nevada Sunrise’s understanding of the placement of the block, and ultimately it was determined that the Company would be best served by cancelling the agreement and refunding the money (minus bank fees) that Nevada Sunrise had sent. An informal letter agreement releasing the parties of all obligations save for the Area of Mutual Interest clause was executed by both parties on May 5, 2017 and funds in the amount of $24,950 were returned to NEV.

Our Current Business

We are an exploration stage mining company engaged in the identification, acquisition, and exploration of metals and minerals with a focus on lithium mineralization on properties located in Nevada, and Graphite and other energy metals properties in British Columbia.

Our current operational focus is to conduct exploration activities on our San Emidio lithium-brine property in Nevada, and our titanium/ree/tantalum-niobium property, in British Columbia.

On March 2, 2017 we issued a news release announcing that we had signed a letter of intent with Bormal Resources Inc. with respect to three Tantalum-Niobium (Ta-Nb) properties (Michael, Yeehaw, and Three Valley Gap) located in British Columbia, Canada.

The Michael property in the Trail Creek Mining Division was originally staked to cover one of the most compelling tantalum in stream sediment anomalies as seen in the government RGS database in British Columbia. Bormal conducted a stream sediment sampling program in 2014, and determined that the tantalum-niobium in stream sediment anomaly here is bona fide, and in the order of 6 kilometers in length. In November of 2016 Lithium Corporation conducted a short soil geochemistry orientation program on the property as part of its due diligence, and determined that there are elevated levels of tantalum-niobium in soils here.

Also in the general area of the Michael property, the Yeehaw property has been staked over a similar but lower amplitude tantalum/total rare earth elements (TREE’s) in stream sediment anomaly. Both properties are situated in the Eocene Coryell Batholith, and it is thought that these anomalies may arise from either carbonatite or pegmatite type deposits. The Company conducted a helicopter borne bio-geochemical survey on these two properties in June 2017, which did return anomalous results. This was followed up by a geological and geochemical examination of the Yeehaw property in early July 2017, and additional work of a similar nature later in July, and again in early October 2017. These examinations uncovered a zone roughly 30 meters wide which included an interval that is mineralized with approximately 0.75% TREE’s. While markedly anomalous it is not exceedingly enriched in TREE’s. However this zone may not be the “main event” in the area but a harbinger of bigger and better things, and also it is enriched in titanium (Ti), which could possibly be in the form of Perovskite, a mineral of considerable interest for the next generation of photo-voltaic cells. Preliminary geological and geochemical work were performed on the Michael property in October of 2016, followed by a brief airborne biogeochemical survey in June of 2017, and additional ground geological and geochemical assessment work in early October, 2017. The third property – Three Valley Gap, is in the Revelstoke Mining Division and is situated in a locale where several Nb-Ta enriched carbonatites have been noted to occur. A brief field program by Bormal in 2015 located one of these carbonatites, and concurrent soil sampling determined that the soils here are enriched with Nb-Ta over the known carbonatite, and indicated that there are other geochemical anomalies locally that may indicate that more carbonatites exist here and are shallowly buried.

On February 23, 2018 we issued a news release announcing that we had dropped any interest in the Michael and Three Valley Gap properties, and had renegotiated the final share payment as required in the agreement from 750,000 to 400,000 shares. The final consideration shares have been issued and the Yeehaw property has been transferred by Bormal. During 2017 the Company conducted initial stream, rock and magnetometer surveys on the property, and discovered a 30 meter wide structure (Horseshoe Bend showing) that exhibits anomalous Titanium/REE mineralization. The company staked an additional 5227 acre (2115.51 hectares) mineral claim and conducted a brief exploration program in Spring 2018 of geological mapping and rock and soil sampling on the property. This program discovered a slightly stronger zone of similar mineralization approximately 660 feet (200 meters) to the northwest of the Horseshoe Bend, and similar float mineralization another 0.75 miles (1.2 kms) further to the northwest. Additional work was performed on the property in 2019 which extended the known strike of the Horseshoe Bend showing approximately 50 meters to the west, and mineralized float was found that possibly indicates it could continue to the east for another several hundred meters.

On February 16, 2016, we issued a news release announcing that our company has entered into a letter of intent with 1032701 B.C. Ltd. with respect to our Fish Lake Valley lithium brine property in Esmeralda County, Nevada. On March 10, 2016 we issued a news release announcing the signing of the Fish Lake Valley Earn-In Agreement. The terms of the Earn-In Agreement allow 1032701 to earn an 80% interest in Fish Lake Valley for payments over two years totaling $300,000 and issuance of 400,000 common shares of the publicly traded company anticipated to result from a Going Public Transaction, and work performed on the property over three years in the amount of $1,100,000. 1032701 then has a Subsequent Earn-In option to purchase Lithium Corporation’s remaining 20% working interest within one year of earning the 80% by paying the Company a further $1,000,000, at that point the Company would retain a 2.5% Net Smelter Royalty, half of which may be purchased by 1032701 for an additional $1,000,000. Should the Purchaser elect not to exercise the Subsequent Earn-In, a joint venture will be established. During the Joint Venture, should either party be diluted below a 10% working interest - their interest in the property will revert to a 7.5% Net Smelter Royalty. The first tranche of cash and shares are to be issued within 60 days of the signing of the formal agreement. Menika Mining, a publicly traded company on the TSX Venture Exchange trading under the symbol MML announced on March 8, 2016 that it intended to acquire 1032701 B.C. Ltd and the right to acquire the Fish Lake Valley Property. Menika Mining completed the acquisition of 1032701 B.C. and fulfilled the initial obligations of the Fish Lake Valley Earn-In-Agreement in April of 2016. Meninka later changed their name to American Lithium. While the Purchaser did comply with all terms of the agreement with respect to cash and share payments it did not meet the expenditure level necessary with respect to its work commitment on the property, and the Company received formal notice of the relinquishment of the Purchasers right to earn the interest in the property on April 30^th 2019. As this was the termination of the option agreement $443,308 was taken into income. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded a $159,859 allowance for the properties and has a net book value of $Nil.

Effective May 3, 2016, our company entered in to an Exploration Earn-In Agreement with 1067323 B.C. Ltd. with respect to our San Emidio property. The terms of the formal agreement are; payment of $100,000, issuance of 300,000 common shares of 1067323 B.C. Ltd., or of the publicly traded company anticipated to result from a Going Public Transaction, and work performed on the property by the Optionee in the amount of $600,000 over the next three years to earn an 80% interest in the property. 1067323 then had a subsequent Earn-In option to purchase Lithium Corporation’s remaining 20% working interest within three years of earning the 80% by paying our company a further $1,000,000, at that point our company would retain a 2.5% Net Smelter Royalty, half of which could have been purchased by 1067323 for an additional $1,000,000. Should the Purchaser elect not to exercise the Subsequent Earn-In, a joint venture would have been established. 1067323 B.C. Ltd. merged with American Lithium Corp., and the first tranche of cash and shares were issued in June of 2016. The Company waived the work requirement for the first year and received 100,000 shares of American Lithium Corp. in May of 2017. To date, we have received $100,000 and 300,000 common shares in relation to the San Emidio option agreement. During the period ended June 30, 2018, the Company received notification that the purchaser had returned the property and, as such, $202,901 was taken into income. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded a $217,668 allowance for the properties and has a net book value of $Nil.

The Company revised its trenching permit at BC Sugar in 2017 and conducted a program of 12 mechanized test pits in May 2018. This work was done in an area ranging from 1 to 1.5 kilometers to the east of the Weather Station Zone in a zone of numerous discrete conductors detected during the 2015 FDEM geophysical survey. Three of these pits intercepted weathered weak to moderately mineralized graphitic material with the best assay being 2.62% graphitic, carbon, and six test pits bottomed in non-mineralized bedrock. The remaining three did not reach bedrock or intercept graphitic material prior to reaching the maximum digging capability of the excavating equipment used. The Company has reduced its acreage holdings here to approximately 203 acres (82 hectares) to facilitate applying 5 years assessment credit to the property, and is effectively looking to place it on the “back burner” in favor of developing other prospects that are presently of greater commercial interest.

Competition

The mining industry is intensely competitive. We compete with numerous individuals and companies, including many major mining companies, which have substantially greater technical, financial and operational resources and staffs. Accordingly, there is a high degree of competition for access to funds. There are other competitors that have operations in the area and the presence of these competitors could adversely affect our ability to compete for financing and obtain the service providers, staff or equipment necessary for the exploration and exploitation of our properties.

Compliance with Government Regulation

Mining operations and exploration activities are subject to various national, state, provincial and local laws and regulations in United States and Canada, as well as other jurisdictions, which govern prospecting, development, mining, production, exports, taxes, labor standards, occupational health, waste disposal, protection of the environment, mine safety, hazardous substances and other matters.

We believe that we are and will continue to be in compliance in all material respects with applicable statutes and the regulations passed in the United States and Canada. There are no current orders or directions relating to our company with respect to the foregoing laws and regulations.

Research and Development

We have not incurred any research and development expenditures over the last two fiscal years.

Intellectual Property

We do not currently have any intellectual property, other than our domain name and website, www.lithiumcorporation.com.

Employees

We have no employees. Our officers and directors provide their services to our company as independent consultants.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our business operations are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to those set forth below:

Risks Associated with Mining

All of our properties are in the exploration stage. There is no assurance that we can establish the existence of any mineral resource on any of our properties in commercially exploitable quantities. Until we can do so, we cannot earn any revenues from operations and if we do not do so we will lose all of the funds that we expend on exploration. If we do not discover any mineral resource in a commercially exploitable quantity, our business could fail.

Despite exploration work on our mineral properties, we have not established that any of them contain any mineral reserve, nor can there be any assurance that we will be able to do so. If we do not, our business could fail.

A mineral reserve is defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission in its Industry Guide 7 (which can be viewed over the Internet at http://www.sec.gov/about/forms/industryguides.pdf) as that part of a mineral deposit which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination. The probability of an individual prospect ever having a “reserve” that meets the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Industry Guide 7 is extremely remote; in all probability our mineral resource property does not contain any “reserve” and any funds that we spend on exploration will probably be lost.

Even if we do eventually discover a mineral reserve on one or more of our properties, there can be no assurance that we will be able to develop our properties into producing mines and extract those resources. Both mineral exploration and development involve a high degree of risk and few properties which are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines.

The commercial viability of an established mineral deposit will depend on a number of factors including, by way of example, the size, grade and other attributes of the mineral deposit, the proximity of the resource to infrastructure such as a smelter, roads and a point for shipping, government regulation and market prices. Most of these factors will be beyond our control, and any of them could increase costs and make extraction of any identified mineral resource unprofitable.

Mineral operations are subject to applicable law and government regulation. Even if we discover a mineral resource in a commercially exploitable quantity, these laws and regulations could restrict or prohibit the exploitation of that mineral resource. If we cannot exploit any mineral resource that we might discover on our properties, our business may fail.

Both mineral exploration and extraction require permits from various foreign, federal, state, provincial and local governmental authorities and are governed by laws and regulations, including those with respect to prospecting, mine development, mineral production, transport, export, taxation, labor standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, land use, environmental protection, mine safety and other matters. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain any of the permits required for the continued exploration of our mineral properties or for the construction and operation of a mine on our properties at economically viable costs. If we cannot accomplish these objectives, our business could fail.

We believe that we are in compliance with all material laws and regulations that currently apply to our activities but there can be no assurance that we can continue to remain in compliance. Current laws and regulations could be amended and we might not be able to comply with them, as amended. Further, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain all permits necessary for our future operations, or that we will be able to obtain them on reasonable terms. To the extent such approvals are required and are not obtained, we may be delayed or prohibited from proceeding with planned exploration or development of our mineral properties.

If we establish the existence of a mineral resource on any of our properties in a commercially exploitable quantity, we will require additional capital in order to develop the property into a producing mine. If we cannot raise this additional capital, we will not be able to exploit the resource, and our business could fail.

If we do discover mineral resources in commercially exploitable quantities on any of our properties, we will be required to expend substantial sums of money to establish the extent of the resource, develop processes to extract it and develop extraction and processing facilities and infrastructure. Although we may derive substantial benefits from the discovery of a major deposit, there can be no assurance that such a resource will be large enough to justify commercial operations, nor can there be any assurance that we will be able to raise the funds required for development on a timely basis. If we cannot raise the necessary capital or complete the necessary facilities and infrastructure, our business may fail.

Mineral exploration and development is subject to extraordinary operating risks. We do not currently insure against these risks. In the event of a cave-in or similar occurrence, our liability may exceed our resources, which would have an adverse impact on our company.

Mineral exploration, development and production involves many risks which even a combination of experience, knowledge and careful evaluation may not be able to overcome. Our operations will be subject to all the hazards and risks inherent in the exploration for mineral resources and, if we discover a mineral resource in commercially exploitable quantity, our operations could be subject to all of the hazards and risks inherent in the development and production of resources, including liability for pollution, cave-ins or similar hazards against which we cannot insure or against which we may elect not to insure. Any such event could result in work stoppages and damage to property, including damage to the environment. We do not currently maintain any insurance coverage against these operating hazards. The payment of any liabilities that arise from any such occurrence would have a material adverse impact on our company.

Mineral prices are subject to dramatic and unpredictable fluctuations.

We expect to derive revenues, if any, either from the sale of our mineral resource properties or from the extraction and sale of lithium and/or associated byproducts. The price of those commodities has fluctuated widely in recent years, and is affected by numerous factors beyond our control, including international, economic and political trends, expectations of inflation, currency exchange fluctuations, interest rates, global or regional consumptive patterns, speculative activities and increased production due to new extraction developments and improved extraction and production methods. The effect of these factors on the price of base and precious metals, and therefore the economic viability of any of our exploration properties and projects, cannot accurately be predicted.

The mining industry is highly competitive and there is no assurance that we will continue to be successful in acquiring mineral claims. If we cannot continue to acquire properties to explore for mineral resources, we may be required to reduce or cease operations.

The mineral exploration, development, and production industry is largely un-integrated. We compete with other exploration companies looking for mineral resource properties. While we compete with other exploration companies in the effort to locate and acquire mineral resource properties, we will not compete with them for the removal or sales of mineral products from our properties if we should eventually discover the presence of them in quantities sufficient to make production economically feasible. Readily available markets exist worldwide for the sale of mineral products. Therefore, we will likely be able to sell any mineral products that we identify and produce.

In identifying and acquiring mineral resource properties, we compete with many companies possessing greater financial resources and technical facilities. This competition could adversely affect our ability to acquire suitable prospects for exploration in the future. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will acquire any interest in additional mineral resource properties that might yield reserves or result in commercial mining operations.

Risks Related to our Company

The fact that we have not earned any operating revenues since our incorporation raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue to explore our mineral properties as a going concern.

We have not generated any revenue from operations since our incorporation and we anticipate that we will continue to incur operating expenses without revenues unless and until we are able to identify a mineral resource in a commercially exploitable quantity on one or more of our mineral properties and we build and operate a mine. We had cash in the amount of $346,260 as of December 31, 2019. At December 31, 2019, we had working capital of $350,555. We incurred a net loss of $219,897 for the year ended December 31, 2019. We estimate our average monthly operating expenses to be approximately $28,000, including property costs, management services and administrative costs. Should the results of our planned exploration require us to increase our current operating budget, we may have to raise additional funds to meet our currently budgeted operating requirements for the next 12 months. As we cannot assure a lender that we will be able to successfully explore and develop our mineral properties, we will probably find it difficult to raise debt financing from traditional lending sources. We have traditionally raised our operating capital from sales of equity securities, but there can be no assurance that we will continue to be able to do so. If we cannot raise the money that we need to continue exploration of our mineral properties, we may be forced to delay, scale back, or eliminate our exploration activities. If any of these were to occur, there is a substantial risk that our business would fail.

Management has plans to seek additional capital through private placements of its capital stock. These conditions raise substantial doubt about our company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Although there are no assurances that management’s plans will be realized, management believes that our company will be able to continue operations in the future. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets, or the amounts of and classification of liabilities that might be necessary in the event our company cannot continue in existence.” We continue to experience net operating losses.

Risks Associated with Our Common Stock

Trading on the OCTQB may be volatile and sporadic, which could depress the market price of our common stock and make it difficult for our stockholders to resell their shares.

Our common stock is quoted on the OTCQB electronic quotation service operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. Trading in stock quoted on the OTCQB is often thin and characterized by wide fluctuations in trading prices, due to many factors that may have little to do with our operations or business prospects. This volatility could depress the market price of our common stock for reasons unrelated to operating performance. Moreover, the OTCQB is not a stock exchange, and trading of securities on the OTCQB is often more sporadic than the trading of securities listed on a quotation system like Nasdaq or a stock exchange like Amex. Accordingly, shareholders may have difficulty reselling any of the shares.

Our stock is a penny stock. Trading of our stock may be restricted by the Securities and Exchange Commission’s penny stock regulations and FINRA’s sales practice requirements, which may limit a stockholder’s ability to buy and sell our stock.

Our stock is a penny stock. The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has adopted Rule 15g-9 which generally defines “penny stock” to be any equity security that has a market price (as defined) less than $5.00 per share or an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. Our securities are covered by the penny stock rules, which impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell to persons other than established customers and “accredited investors”. The term “accredited investor” refers generally to institutions with assets in excess of $5,000,000 or individuals with a net worth in excess of $1,000,000 or annual income exceeding $200,000 or $300,000 jointly with their spouse. The penny stock rules require a broker-dealer, prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from the rules, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document in a form prepared by the SEC which provides information about penny stocks and the nature and level of risks in the penny stock market. The broker-dealer also must provide the customer with current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock, the compensation of the broker-dealer and its salesperson in the transaction and monthly account statements showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account. The bid and offer quotations, and the broker-dealer and salesperson compensation information, must be given to the customer orally or in writing prior to effecting the transaction and must be given to the customer in writing before or with the customer’s confirmation. In addition, the penny stock rules require that prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from these rules, the broker-dealer must make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction. These disclosure requirements may have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in the secondary market for the stock that is subject to these penny stock rules. Consequently, these penny stock rules may affect the ability of broker-dealers to trade our securities. We believe that the penny stock rules discourage investor interest in, and limit the marketability of, our common stock.

In addition to the “penny stock” rules promulgated by the SEC, FINRA has adopted rules that require that in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative low priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these rules, FINRA believes that there is a high probability that speculative low-priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. FINRA’s requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our common stock, which may limit your ability to buy and sell our stock.

Other Risks

Trends, Risks and Uncertainties

We have sought to identify what we believe to be the most significant risks to our business, but we cannot predict whether, or to what extent, any of such risks may be realized nor can we guarantee that we have identified all possible risks that might arise. Investors should carefully consider all of such risk factors before making an investment decision with respect to our common stock.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

As a “smaller reporting company”, we are not required to provide the information required by this Item.

Item 2. Properties

Our corporate head office is located at 1031 Railroad St., Ste 102B, Elko Nevada 89801, our monthly rent is $350, which also includes storage space for field gear.

Mineral Properties

Fish Lake Valley Property

Fish Lake Valley is a lithium/boron/potassium enriched playa (also known as a salar, or salt pan), which is located in northern Esmeralda County in west central Nevada, and the area of greatest interest is roughly centered at 417050E 4195350N (NAD 27 CONUS). After staking numerous new claims in 2016 we currently hold 143, nominally 80-acre Association Placer claims that cover approximately 11,360 acres (4,597 hectares). Lithium-enriched Tertiary-era Fish Lake formation rhyolitic tuffs or ash flow tuffs have accumulated in a valley or basinal environment. Over time interstitial formational waters in contact with these tuffs, have become enriched in lithium, boron and potassium which could possibly be economic, and amenable to extraction by evaporative methods.

The property was originally held under mining lease purchase agreement dated June 1, 2009, between Nevada Lithium Corporation, and Nevada Alaska Mining Co. Inc., Robert Craig, Barbara Craig, and Elizabeth Dickman. Nevada Lithium issued to the vendors $350,000 worth of common stock of our company in eight regular disbursements. All disbursements were made of stock worth a total of $350,000, and claim ownership was transferred to our company.

The geological setting at Fish Lake Valley is highly analogous to the salars of Chile, Bolivia, and Peru, and more importantly Clayton Valley, where Albemarle has its Silver Peak lithium-brine operation. Access is excellent in Fish Lake Valley with all-weather gravel roads leading to the property from state highways 264, and 265, and maintained gravel roads ring the playa. Power is available approximately 10 miles from the property, and the village of Dyer is approximately 12 miles to the south, while the town of Tonopah, Nevada is approximately 50 miles to the east.

Our company completed a number of geochemical and geophysical studies on the property, and conducted a short drill program on the periphery of the playa in the fall of 2010. Near-surface brine sampling during the spring of 2011 outlined a boron/lithium/potassium anomaly on the northern portions of the northern playa, that is roughly 1.3 x 2 miles long, which has a smaller higher grade core where lithium mineralization ranges from 100 to 150 mg/L (average 122.5 mg/L), with boron ranging from 1,500 to 2,670 mg/L (average 2,219 mg/L), and potassium from 5,400 to 8,400 mg/L (average 7,030 mg/L). Wet conditions on the playa precluded drilling there in 2011, and for a good portion of 2012, however a window of opportunity presented itself in late fall 2012. In November/December 2012 we conducted a short direct push drill program on the northern end of the playa, wherein a total of 1,240.58 feet (378.09 meters) was drilled in 20 holes at 17 discrete sites, and an area of 3,356 feet (1,023 meters) by 2,776 feet (846 meters) was systematically explored by grid probing. The deepest hole was 81 feet (24.69 meters), and the shallowest hole that produced brine was 34 feet (10.36 meters). The average depth of the holes drilled during the program was 62 feet (18.90 meters). The program successfully demonstrated that lithium-boron-potassium-enriched brines exist to at least 62 feet (18.9 meters) depth in sandy or silty aquifers that vary from approximately three to ten feet (one to three meters) in thickness. Average lithium, boron and potassium contents of all samples are 47.05 mg/L, 992.7 mg/L, and 0.535% respectively, with lithium values ranging from 7.6 mg/L to 151.3 mg/L, boron ranging from 146 to 2,160.7 mg/L, and potassium ranging from 0.1 to 1.3%. The anomaly outlined by the program is 1,476 by 2,461 feet (450 meters by 750 meters), and is not fully delimited, as the area available for probing was restricted due to soft ground conditions to the east and to the south. A 50 mg/L lithium cutoff is used to define this anomaly and within this zone average lithium, boron and potassium contents are 90.97 mg/L, 1,532.92 mg/L, and 0.88% respectively. On September 3, 2013, we announced that drilling had commenced at Fish Lake Valley. Due to storms and wet conditions in the area that our company had hoped to concentrate on, the playa was not passable, and so the program concentrated on larger step-out drilling well off the playa. This 11 hole, 1,025 foot program did prove that mineralization does not extend much, if at all, past the margins of the playa, as none of the fluids encountered in this program were particularly briny, and returned values of less than 5 mg/L lithium.

Results from the work done in the past by Lithium Corporation have been very positive, and our company believes that the playa at Fish Lake Valley may be conducive to the formation of a “Silver Peak” style lithium brine deposit.

Early in 2016 the company signed an Exploration Earn-In Agreement with 1032701 B.C. Ltd., a private British Columbia company with respect to our Fish Lake Valley lithium brine property, wherein 1032701 B.C. Ltd., may acquire an initial 80% undivided interest in the Fish Lake Valley property through the payment of an aggregate of US$300,000 in cash, completing a “Going Public Transaction” on or before May 6, 2016, and subject to the completion of the “Going Public Transaction, arranging for the issuance of a total of 400,000 common shares in the capital of the resulting issuer as follows: (i) within five business days following the effective date,

The Optionee must make qualified exploration or development expenditures on the property of $200,000 before the first anniversary, an additional $300,000 before the second anniversary, an additional $600,000 prior to the third anniversary, and make all payments and perform all other acts to maintain the Property in good standing before fully earning their 80% interest. Additionally, after the initial earn-in the Optionee has the right for up to 12 months to purchase our 20% interest in the property for $1,000,000, at which point our interest would revert to a 2 1/2% Net Smelter Royalty (NSR). The Optionee may then elect at any time to purchase one half (1.25%) of our NSR for $1,000,000.

American Lithium Corp. subsequently acquired 100% of 1032701 BC, and currently maintains 1032701 as a fully owned subsidiary. A formal option agreement was entered into, effective March 31, 2016. An amendment to the agreement was entered into on the 14^th of February 2018 whereby American Lithium will issue the 10,000 post consolidation “Agreement Year” shares to Lithium Corporation as mandated by the agreement, as well as a further 80,000 shares in consideration for Lithium Corporation agreeing to extend the work commitment date for Year 2 of the agreement to September 30, 2018. We had received all money, and common shares issuable in relation to the Fish Lake Valley option agreement, but the Purchaser did not satisfy the work commitment per the terms of the agreement, and issued formal notice of the relinquishment of the Purchasers right to earn the interest in the property on April 30^th 2019. As this was the termination of the option agreement $443,308 was taken into income. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded a $159,859 allowance for the properties and has a net book value of $Nil.

San Emidio Property

The San Emidio property, located in Washoe County in northwestern Nevada, was acquired through the staking of claims in September 2011. The twenty, 80-acre, Association Placer claims currently held here cover an area of approximately 1,600 acres (640 hectares). Ten claims in the southern portions of the original claim block that was staked in 2011 were allowed to lapse on September 1, 2012, and a further ten claims were then staked and recorded. These new claims are north of and contiguous to the surviving claims from our earlier block. In 2015 eight claims were allowed to lapse, but then in 2016 a further 10 claims were staked and recorded. The property is approximately 65 miles north-northeast of Reno, Nevada, and has excellent infrastructure.

We identified this prospect during 2009, and 2010 through surficial geochemical sampling, and geological interpretation. The early reconnaissance sampling determined that anomalous values for lithium occur in sediments over a good portion of the playa. Our company conducted near-surface brine sampling in the spring of 2011, and a high resolution gravity geophysical survey in summer/fall 2011. Our company then permitted a 7 hole drilling program with the Bureau of Land Management in late fall 2011, and a direct push drill program was commenced in early February 2012. Drilling here delineated a narrow elongated shallow brine reservoir which is greater than 2.5 miles length, somewhat distal to the basinal feature outlined by the earlier gravity survey. The anomaly aligns with the present day topographical low in the valley, which could be the result of extension along a north-easterly trending fault. Two values of over 20 milligrams/liter lithium were obtained from two shallow direct push probe holes located centrally in this brine anomaly.

We drilled this prospect in late October 2012, further testing the area of the property in the vicinity where prior exploration by our company discovered elevated lithium levels in subsurface brines. During the 2012 program a total of 856 feet (260.89 meters) was drilled at 8 discrete sites. The deepest hole was 160 feet (48.76 meters), and the shallowest hole that produced brine was 90 feet (27.43 meters). The average depth of the seven hole program was 107 feet (32.61 meters). The program better defined the lithium-in-brine anomaly that was discovered in early 2012. This anomaly is approximately 0.6 miles (370 meters) wide at its widest point by more than 2 miles (3 kilometers) long. The peak value seen within the anomaly is 23.7 mg/l lithium, which is 10 to 20 times background levels outside the anomaly. Our company believes that, much like Fish Lake Valley, the playa at San Emidio may be conducive to the formation of a “Silver Peak” style lithium brine deposit, and the recent drilling indicates that the anomaly occurs at or near the intersection of several faults that may have provided the structural setting necessary for the formation of a lithium-in-brine deposit at depth.

Our company entered into an exploration earn-in agreement on the property on May 3, 2016 with 1067323 B.C. Ltd., wherein the Optionee was to pay an initial $100,000 and issue 100,000 shares within 30 days of a “Going Public Transaction”. 1067323 subsequently merged with American Lithium Corp., who then assumed the duties of the Optionee, and fulfilled the initial obligations. The further terms of the agreement are that American Lithium is to issue 100,000 shares to Lithium Corporation on or before both the first & second anniversaries of the going public transaction. Additionally American Lithium is to conduct $100,000 exploration work in year 1, $200,000 in year 2, and $300,000 in year 3. On fulfillment of all its obligations American Lithium will have earned an 80% interest in the property. The Optionee also has the option to earn a further 20% interest in the property by paying $1,000,000 to the company within 36 months of the exercise of the initial earn-in. If American Lithium exercises its right with respect to the subsequent earn-in then Lithium Corporation’s interest will revert to a 2.5% Net Smelter Revenue (NSR) interest. American Lithium then has the right at any time to purchase one half of the NSR (1.25%) for $1,000,000. Competing claims have been staked by third parties to the east and south of Lithium Corporation’s property here.

The Company has re-permitted and bonded three drill sites on the property, and is currently considering drilling the property some time in 2020.

BC Sugar Flake Graphite Property

On June 6, 2013, we entered into a mining claim sale agreement with Herb Hyder wherein Mr. Hyder agreed to sell to our company a 50.829 acre (20.57 hectare) claim located in the Cherryville area of British Columbia. As consideration for the purchase of the property, we issued 250,000 shares of our company’s common stock to Mr. Hyder. In addition to the acquired claim, our company staked or acquired another 13 claims at various times over the subsequent months, to bring the total area held under tenure to approximately 19,816 acres (8,020 hectares). Since that time the company has let all but what appears to be the most prospective claims lapse, and currently the company holds one title – the “Heavy Weather” claim that is 1422 acres (575.67 hectares) in size. The flake graphite mineralization of interest here is hosted predominately in graphitic quartz/biotite, and lesser graphitic calc-silicate gneisses. The rocks and mineralization in the general area of the BC Sugar prospect are similar to the host rocks in the area of the crystal graphite deposit 55 miles (90 kms) to the southeast that is being mined by Eagle Graphite.

The BC Sugar property is within the Shushwap Metamorphic Complex, in a geological environment favorable for the formation of flake graphite deposits, and is in an area of excellent logistics and infrastructure, with a considerable network of logging roads within the project area. Additionally the town of Lumby is approximately 19 miles (30 kms) to the south of the property, while the City of Vernon is only 30 miles (50 kms) to the southwest of the western portions of the claim block.

Work progressed, and the property expanded throughout the summer of 2013, and culminated with the receipt of the final assays from the last phases of the prospecting and geological program in December of 2013. That work increased the area known to be underlain by graphitic bearing gneisses, and further evaluations were made in the area of the Sugar Lake, Weather Station, and Taylor Creek showings. In the general vicinity of the Weather Station showing that was initially discovered in early July 2013, a further 13 samples were taken, and hand trenching was performed at one of several outcrops in the area. In the trench a 5.2 meter interval returned an average of 3.14% graphitic carbon, all in an oxidized relatively friable gneissic host rock. Additionally a hydrothermal or vein type mineralized graphitic quartz boulder was discovered in the area which graded up to 4.19% graphitic carbon. The source of this boulder was not discovered during this program, but it is felt to be close to its point of origin. Samples representative of the mineralization encountered here were taken for petrographic study, which was received in late 2013. A brief assessment work program was performed in September 2014 to ensure all claims in the package were in good standing prior to the anticipated sale of this asset to Pathion Inc. Recommendations were made by the consulting geologist who wrote the assessment report with respect to trenching, and eventually drilling the Weather Station showing. Our company submitted a Notice of Work to the BC Government in early May 2015 to enable our company to conduct a program of excavator trenching, sampling and geological mapping on the Weather Station showing. In May of 2015 we signed an agreement with KLM Geosciences LLC of Las Vegas to conduct a short Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey on the property in the Weather Station – Taylor Creek areas. The GPR survey as well as a GEM-2 frequency domain electromagnetic (FDEM) survey took place in approximately mid-May 2015. The GPR survey did not provide useful data because of the moisture saturation in the shallow subsurface. The FDEM survey successfully generated an anomaly over known mineralization and possibly indicates that the mineralization may extend both to the west and to the east in areas blanketed by glaciofluvial till.

In August of 2015 our Notice of Work for trenching was approved by the BC Government and in October we commenced work. A trench of 265.76 feet (81 meters) was excavated and graphitic gneiss was mapped and sampled. In all 23 samples were taken over the 69 meters of exposed mineralization that could be safely sampled. Trench depths varied from 1.2 meters in areas of semi-consolidated rock to 4.8 meters in areas of mainly decomposed material. There was an approximately 12 meter section of the trench of sand, and fluvial till in an ancient stream bed where the excavator could not reach the graphitic material that is inferred to exist at depths greater than 5 meters. Also there was a 4 meter section at depths from 4.8 to 5 meters where graphite mineralization could be seen at depth, but could not be safely sampled.

The entire 69 meter interval that was sampled averaged 1.997% graphitic carbon, and mineralization remains open in all directions. Within that interval there was a 30 meter section that averaged 2.73% graphitic carbon, and within that interval there was a 12 meter section that averaged 2.99% graphitic carbon. The best mineralization, and most friable material is proximal to the aforementioned abandoned creek channel, and it appears that proximity to this feature gave rise to the deep weathering profile encountered here. Determining the tenor, and extent of the friable material were the two major objectives of this program as this material, which is very similar to that mined at Eagle Graphite’s operation is very easy/economical to be mined and processed, and typically contains the highest percentages of graphite over consistent widths.

A “min-bulk sample” was taken from the Weather Zone in October 2017, and submitted to SGS Vancouver for preliminary bench tests, and further petrographic analysis. Tests indicated that the “fairly coarse” flake graphite was easily liberated from the unconsolidated host material, and initial flotation tests were positive with over 80% of the graphite in the sample being floated off.

The Company revised its trenching permit in 2017 and conducted a program of 12 mechanized test pits in May 2018. This work was done in an area ranging from 1 to 1.5 kilometers to the east of the Weather Station Zone in a zone of numerous discrete conductors detected during the 2015 FDEM geophysical survey. Three of these pits intercepted weathered weak to moderately mineralized graphitic material with the best assay being 2.62% graphitic, carbon, and six test pits bottomed in non-mineralized bedrock. The remaining three did not reach bedrock or intercept graphitic material prior to reaching the maximum digging capability of the excavating equipment used. The Company has reduced its acreage holdings here to approximately 203 acres (82 hectares) to facilitate applying 5 years assessment credit to the property, and is effectively looking to place it on the “back burner” in favor of developing other prospects that are of greater commercial interest at this point.

The Hughes Claims

Effective April 23, 2014, we entered into an operating agreement with All American Resources, LLC and TY & Sons Investments Inc. with respect to Summa, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company incorporated on December 12, 2013. Through our 25% membership interest in Summa we hold an indirect interest in a number of patented mining claims that spring from the once considerable mineral holdings of Howard Hughes’s Summa Corp. Our company’s capital contribution paid to Summa, LLC was $125,000, of which $100,000 was in cash and the balance in services.

Lithium Corporation participated in the formation of Summa, which holds 88 fee-title patented lode claims that cover approximately 1,191.3 acres of prospective mineral lands. Our company signed a joint operating agreement with the other participants in Spring 2014 to govern the conduct of Summa, and the development of the lands. Our company’s director, Tom Lewis, was named as a managing member of Summa, and as such has a direct say in the day to day operations of that company.

The Hughes lands are situated in six discrete prospect areas in Nevada, the most notable of which being the Tonopah block in Nye County where Summa holds 56 claims that cover approximately 770 acres in the heart of the historic mining camp where over 1.8 million ounces of gold and 174 million ounces of silver were produced predominately in the early 1900’s. The Hughes claims include a number of the prolific past producers in Tonopah, such as the Belmont, the Desert Queen, and the Midway mines. In addition there are also claims in the area of the past producing Klondyke East mining district, which is to the south of Tonopah, and at the town of Belmont (not to be confused with the Belmont claim in Tonopah), Nevada, another notable silver producer from the 1800’s, which is roughly 40 miles to the northeast of Tonopah.

Summa has conducted preliminary research on the Hughes properties, focusing on the Tonopah area where reporting in the 1980’s, indicated that over 2.175 million tons of mine dumps and mill tailings exist at surface on Summa’s properties that contain in the order of 3.453 million ounces of silver, and 28,500 ounces of gold. In addition to this easily extractable surficial resource, other reports indicate that 300 - 500,000 tons of mineralized material is expected to remain at depth in old workings on Summa’s properties, which is believed to contain an average 20 ounces silver and 0.20 ounces gold per ton. Also several partially tested exploration targets have been identified on Summa’s Tonopah claims, where further work could potentially lead to a marked increase in known underground resources.

West Kirkland Mining has been working on the development of their 75% owned project in Tonopah, most recently drilling to increase the resource at the Three Hills gold/silver deposit where they intend to kick-off their mining efforts in the future. To that end they have bought an additional six patented mining claims here recently, and have also negotiated an agreement to procure rights for the water that they will need for processing. Presently the reserve at their Hasbrouck/Three Hills/Hill of Gold project stands at 45.3 million tons containing 762,000 ounces gold, and 10.6 million ounces Silver. Coeur Mines and partner Idaho North Resources drilled in the Klondyke area to the south of Tonopah (the same area where Summa holds several patented mining claims that arise from the Hughes acquisition), and have done some drilling recently in Tonopah on a prospect they have optioned adjacent and to the west of Summa’s holdings. In 2018 Coeur Mines also conducted drilling on Ely Gold’s claims to the west of Summa’s property on Patented claims that were once a portion of the Hughes holdings here. Although it has been reported that they intersected 5’ of 20 opt Ag, 0.3 opt Au, Coeur dropped their interest in this property. Recently Ely Gold entered into an agreement to purchase a further 75 patented claims adjacent to their Tonopah West prospect, and again announced on February 25, 2020 that they have signed a purchase/option agreement with Blackrock Gold Corp on the property. Under the terms of the agreement Blackrock is to pay $3,000,000 by April 01, 2020, and Ely will retain a 3% Nets Smelter Royalty on the property. Slightly further afield Gemfield Resources LLC., (a subsidiary of Waterton Global Resource Management) has recently completed the re-routing of Highway 95 south of Tonopah to facilitate the imminent mining of their 1.5 million ounce Au deposit near Goldfield Nevada.

The ongoing litigation with respect to Summa’s Tonopah holdings had precluded investing time or money into the property immediately after the court awarded Summa ownership in 2013, however in 2018 Summa won a “quiet title” case in the Fifth Judicial Court in Tonopah, which determined that Summas’ title is superior to all other claimants. The subsequent appeal of this verdict was quashed later in 2018, and there has been no further action on that account. Summa signed a Letter of Intent on January 14, 2020 with respect to the Tonopah property whereby 1237025 BC Ltd, can earn a 100% interest in the property (subject to a 1.0% Net Smelter Royalty or NSR) by paying $400,000 in cash, issuing $400,000 in shares, and incurring $1.5 million in exploration expenditures in stages over the next 5 years. The Optionee would also have the right to purchase ¼ of the NSR for $1,500,000, and the further right to purchase a further ¼ of the NSR for $2,500,000. Summa anticipates the signing of the definitive agreement by March 14, 2020.

British Columbia Tantalum/REE/Titanium Properties

On March 1^st 2017 the company signed a letter of intent (LOI) with Bormal Resources Inc. wherein the company may earn an interest in three properties in British Columbia. The Michael property in the Trail Creek Mining Division was originally staked by Bormal to cover one of the most compelling tantalum (Ta) in stream sediment anomalies as seen in the government RGS database in British Columbia. Bormal conducted a stream sediment sampling program in 2014, and determined that the tantalum-niobium (Nb) in stream sediment anomaly is bona fide, and in the order of 6 kilometers in length. In November of 2016 Lithium Corporation conducted a short soil geochemical orientation program on the property as part of its due diligence, and determined that there are elevated levels of niobium-tantalum in soils here.

Also in the general area of the Michael property the Yeehaw prospect has been staked by Bormal over a similar but lower amplitude Tantalum/Rare Earth Element (REE’s) stream sediment anomaly. Both properties are situated depicted on government geological maps as being within the Eocene Coryell batholith, and it is thought that these anomalies may arise from either carbonatite or pegmatite type deposits.

The third property at Three Valley Gap, is in the Revelstoke Mining Division and is situated in a locale where several Nb-Ta enriched carbonatites have been noted to occur. A brief field program by Bormal in 2015 located one of these carbonatites, and concurrent soil sampling determined that the soils here are enriched with Nb-Ta over the known carbonatite, and indicated that there are other geochemical anomalies locally that may indicate that more carbonatites exist here and are shallowly buried.

Lithium Corporation conducted fieldwork on the Michael, and Yeehaw properties during summer 2017. At Yeehaw a 30 meter wide structure was discovered that is anomalous for titanium and Rare Earth Elements, while soil sampling at Michael detected an anomaly that is greater than 800 meters in length that exhibits increased Tantalum-Niobium plus Rare Earth Element mineralization. The Company has dropped any further interest in both the Michael and Three Valley Gap properties, and has earned its 100% interest in the Yeehaw property. Field work on the Yeehaw property in Spring 2018 discovered a further zone of Ti/REE enrichment, and additional work was performed on the property in 2019 which extended the known strike of the Horseshoe Bend showing approximately 50 meters to the west, and mineralized float was found that possibly indicates it could continue to the east for another several hundred meters. The Company is currently assessing options for field season 2020 work here.

Our company is looking to ramp up its generative program exploring for new deposits of next generation battery related materials and are currently pursuing other properties which are believed to be prospective for hosting lithium, graphite or other “energy metals” as well as continuing to evaluate opportunities brought to our company by third parties.

We are currently pursuing other properties which are believed to be prospective for hosting lithium or graphite mineralization, as well as evaluating opportunities brought to our company by third parties.

Additionally our company is looking to ramp up its generative program exploring for new deposits of next generation battery related materials.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we may become involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of its operations in the normal course of business. We are not involved in any pending legal proceeding or litigation and, to the best of our knowledge, no governmental authority is contemplating any proceeding to which we area party or to which any of our properties is subject, which would reasonably be likely to have a material adverse effect on us, except for the following:

Lithium Corporations interest in the Tonopah Hughes property through its ownership of 25% of Summa, LLC was challenged in 2015. On March 13, 2018 Summa was victorious in a “Quiet Title” ruling set out in the Fifth Judicial District Court where Judge Wanker ruled that Summa’s claim to title in the contested claims was superior to that of any other entity that has come forward with a claim to date. An appeal of that decision filed later in 2018 was denied by the courts, and no further actions have since been filed.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Our common shares are quoted on OTC Market Groups QB Exchange under the symbol “LTUM.” The following quotations, obtained from Stockwatch, reflect the high and low bids for our common shares based on inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions.

The high and low bid prices of our common stock for the periods indicated below are as follows:

Our shares are issued in registered form. Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, 50 West Liberty Street, Suite 880, Reno, Nevada 89501 (Telephone: (775) 322-0626; Facsimile: (775) 322-5623 is the registrar and transfer agent for our common shares.

On March 18, 2020, the shareholders’ list showed 52 registered shareholders with 95,651,644 common shares outstanding.

Dividend Policy

We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and have no present intention of paying any dividends on the shares of our common stock. Our current policy is to retain earnings, if any, for use in our operations and in the development of our business. Our future dividend policy will be determined from time to time by our board of directors.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

On December 29, 2009, our board of approved the adoption of the 2009 Stock Plan which permits our company to issue up to 6,055,000 shares of our common stock to directors, officers, employees and consultants. This plan has not been approved by our security holders.

The following table summarizes certain information regarding our equity compensation plans as at December 31, 2019:

Convertible Securities

As of December 31, 2019, we had no outstanding options to purchase any shares of our common stock.

On May 31, 2012, the directors of our company determined that due to current adverse market conditions, it would be in the best interests of our company to re-price an aggregate of 500,000 incentive stock options granted to directors and officers of our company on September 23, 2010 with an exercise price of $0.28, and an aggregate of 450,000 incentive stock options granted to directors and officers of our company on September 23, 2010 with an exercise price of $0.25, to reflect the closing price for our company’s common shares quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board on May 29, 2012 of $0.07.

Also on May 31, 2012, our company granted an aggregate of 400,000 incentive stock options to certain directors and consultants of our company at an exercise price of $0.07, exercisable for a period of five years from the date of grant. This option price on all directors and consultants options was revised downward to $0.045 on March 15, 2013.

On March 15, 2013, we granted an aggregate of 200,000 stock options to consultants of our company pursuant to our 2009 Stock Option Plan. The stock options were exercisable for five years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.045 per share.

On November 12, 2014, our company granted an aggregate of 700,000 stock options to directors and consultants of our company pursuant to our 2009 Stock Option Plan. The stock options were exercisable for five years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.045 per share.

On January 18, 2016, our company granted 500,000 stock options to a director of our company pursuant to our 2009 Stock Option Plan. The stock options were all exercised on February 2018 at an exercise price of $0.125 per share.

On February 10, 2016, our company granted an aggregate of 850,000 stock options to directors and consultants of our company pursuant to our 2009 Stock Option Plan. The options were priced at $0.025 per share and 200,000 of these options were exercised in 2016, with the balance of 650,000 being exercised in 2018.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from Registered Securities

We did not sell any equity securities which were not registered under the Securities Act during the year ended December 31, 2019 that were not otherwise disclosed on our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or our current reports on Form 8-K filed during the year ended December 31, 2019.

Purchase of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

We did not purchase any of our shares of common stock or other securities during our fourth quarter of our fiscal year ended December 31, 2019.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

As a “smaller reporting company”, we are not required to provide the information required by this Item.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated audited financial statements and the related notes that appear elsewhere in this annual report. The following discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect our plans, estimates and beliefs. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in the forward looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to those discussed below and elsewhere in this annual report, particularly in the section entitled “Risk Factors” beginning on page 6 of this annual report.

Our consolidated audited financial statements are stated in United States Dollars and are prepared in accordance with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

Plan of Operations and Cash Requirements

Cash Requirements

Our current operational focus is to conduct exploration activities on the Fish Lake Valley property and San Emidio prospect in Nevada and the BC Sugar and Mount Heimdal properties in British Columbia. We expect to review other potential exploration projects from time to time as they are presented to us.

Our net cash from financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2019 was $Nil as compared to $422,535 during the year ended December 31, 2018.

Over the next twelve months we expect to expend funds as follows:

Estimated Net Expenditures During the Next Twelve Months

We have suffered recurring losses from operations. The continuation of our company is dependent upon our company attaining and maintaining profitable operations and raising additional capital as needed.

The continuation of our business is dependent upon obtaining further financing, a successful program of exploration and/or development, and, finally, achieving a profitable level of operations. The issuance of additional equity securities by us could result in a significant dilution in the equity interests of our current stockholders. Obtaining commercial loans, assuming those loans would be available, will increase our liabilities and future cash commitments.

There are no assurances that we will be able to obtain further funds required for our continued operations. As noted herein, we are pursuing various financing alternatives to meet our immediate and long-term financial requirements. There can be no assurance that additional financing will be available to us when needed or, if available, that it can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms. If we are not able to obtain the additional financing on a timely basis, we will be unable to conduct our operations as planned, and we will not be able to meet our other obligations as they become due. In such event, we will be forced to scale down or perhaps even cease our operations.

Results of Operations - Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

The following summary of our results of operations should be read in conjunction with our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2019, which are included herein.

Our operating results for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2018 and the changes between those periods for the respective items are summarized as follows:

Our financial statements report a net loss of $219,897 for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2019 compared to a net loss of $104,493 for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2018. Our losses have increased by $115,404, primarily as a result of a write-down of mineral properties of $390,200 offset by a an increase gain on sale of mineral property of $240,407 and decreases in operating expenses.

Our operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2019 were $262,226 compared to $361,629 as of December 31, 2018. The decrease in operating expenses was across the board as the Company looked to mitigate expenditures.

Liquidity and Financial Condition

Working Capital

Cash Flows

Our total current liabilities as of December 31, 2019 were $16,909 as compared to total current liabilities of $456,194 as of December 31, 2018. The decrease was a result of a decrease in the allowance for option properties as a result of the Company realizing income upon termination of the property option agreement in 2019.

Operating Activities

Net cash used in operating activities was $186,855 for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared with net cash used in operating activities of $393,594 in the same period in 2018.

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities was $21,914 for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to net cash provided by investing activities of $199,996 in the same period in 2018.

Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $Nil for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to $422,535 in financing activities in the same period in 2018.

Contractual Obligations

As a “smaller reporting company”, we are not required to provide tabular disclosure obligations.

Going Concern

As of December 31, 2019, our company had a net loss of $219,897 and has earned no revenues. Our company intends to fund operations through equity financing arrangements, which may be insufficient to fund its capital expenditures, working capital and other cash requirements for the year ending December 31, 2020. The ability of our company to emerge from the development stage is dependent upon, among other things, obtaining additional financing to continue operations, and development of our business plan. In response to these problems, management intends to raise additional funds through public or private placement offerings. These factors, among others, raise substantial doubt about our company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The accompanying financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to stockholders.

Critical Accounting Policies

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Preparing financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses. These estimates and assumptions are affected by management’s application of accounting policies. We believe that understanding the basis and nature of the estimates and assumptions involved with the following aspects of our financial statements is critical to an understanding of our financial statements.

Exploration Stage Company

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles related to accounting and reporting by exploration stage companies. An exploration stage company is one in which planned principal operations have not commenced or if its operations have commenced, there has been no significant revenues there from.

Accounting Basis

The Company uses the accrual basis of accounting and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP” accounting). The Company has adopted a December 31 fiscal year end.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash includes cash on account, demand deposits, and short-term instruments with maturities of three months or less.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts, the balances of which at times may exceed federally insured limits. The Company continually monitors its banking relationships and consequently has not experienced any losses in such accounts. The Company believes it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

The Company has yet to realize revenues from operations. Once the Company has commenced operations, it will recognize revenues when delivery of goods or completion of services has occurred provided there is persuasive evidence of an agreement, acceptance has been approved by its customers, the fee is fixed or determinable based on the completion of stated terms and conditions, and collection of any related receivable is probable.

Loss per Share

Basic loss per share is computed by dividing loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. The computation of diluted earnings per share assumes the conversion, exercise or contingent issuance of securities only when such conversion, exercise or issuance would have a dilutive effect on earnings per share. The dilutive effect of convertible securities is reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the “if converted” method. In the periods in which a loss is incurred, the effect of potential issuances of shares under options and warrants would be anti-dilutive, and therefore basic and diluted losses per share are the same.

Income Taxes

The asset and liability approach is used to account for income taxes by recognizing deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts and the tax basis of assets and liabilities.

Financial Instruments

The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash, deposits, prepaid expenses, and accounts payable and accrued liabilities. Unless otherwise noted, it is management’s opinion that the Company is not exposed to significant interest, currency or credit risks arising from these financial instruments. Because of the short maturity and capacity of prompt liquidation of such assets and liabilities, the fair value of these financial instruments approximate their carrying values, unless otherwise noted.

Mineral Properties

Costs of exploration, carrying and retaining unproven mineral lease properties are expensed as incurred. Mineral property acquisition costs are capitalized including licenses and lease payments. Although the Company has taken steps to verify title to mineral properties in which it has an interest, these procedures do not guarantee the Company’s title. Such properties may be subject to prior agreements or transfers and title may be affected by undetected defects. Impairment losses are recorded on mineral properties used in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets’ carrying amount.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Leases (Topic 842). In February 2016, FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (“ASU 2016-02”). The new standard establishes a right-of-use (“ROU”) model that requires a lessee to record a ROU asset and a lease liability on the balance sheet for all leases with terms longer than 12 months. Leases will be classified as either finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement. The new standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. A modified retrospective transition approach is required for lessees for capital and operating leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements, with certain practical expedients available.

The Company adopted the standard effective January 1, 2019. The standard allows a number of optional practical expedients to use for transition. The Company choose the certain practical expedients allowed under the transition guidance which permitted us to not to reassess any existing or expired contracts to determine if they contain embedded leases, to not to reassess our lease classification on existing leases, to account for lease and non-lease components as a single lease component for equipment leases, and whether initial direct costs previously capitalized would qualify for capitalization under FASB ASC 842. The new standard also provides practical expedients and recognition exemptions for an entity’s ongoing accounting policy elections. The Company has elected the short-term lease recognition for all leases that qualify, which means that we do not recognize a ROU asset and lease liability for any lease with a term of twelve months or less.

The most significant impact of adopting the standard was the recognition of ROU assets and lease liabilities for operating leases on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet but it did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations or consolidated statements of cash flows.

The Company did not have a cumulative effect on adoption prior to January 1, 2019.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820), Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this Update modify certain disclosure requirements of fair value measurements and are effective for all entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In June 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-07, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting , which expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. An entity should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards except for specific guidance on inputs to an option pricing model and the attribution of cost (that is, the period of time over which share-based payment awards vest and the pattern of cost recognition over that period). The new guidance is effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-05, Income Taxes (Topic 740) - Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118 . The amendment provides guidance on accounting for the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) and allows entities to complete the accounting under ASC 740 within a one-year measurement period from the Tax Act enactment date. This standard is effective upon issuance. The Tax Act has several significant changes that impact all taxpayers, including a transition tax, which is a one-time tax charge on accumulated, undistributed foreign earnings. The calculation of accumulated foreign earnings requires an analysis of each foreign entity’s financial results going back to 1986. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income . The guidance permits entities to reclassify tax effects stranded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income as a result of tax reform to retained earnings. This new guidance is effective for annual and interim periods in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted in annual and interim periods and can be applied retrospectively or in the period of adoption. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In July 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-11, Earnings Per Share (Topic 260), Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): I. Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Down Round Features; II. Replacement of the Indefinite Deferral for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Non-Controlling Interests with a Scope Exception. Part I of this update addresses the complexity of accounting for certain financial instruments with down round features. Down round features are features of certain equity-linked instruments (or embedded features) that result in the strike price being reduced on the basis of the pricing of future equity offerings. Current accounting guidance creates cost and complexity for entities that issue financial instruments (such as warrants and convertible instruments) with down round features that require fair value measurement of the entire instrument or conversion option. Part II of this update addresses the difficulty of navigating Topic 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity, because of the existence of extensive pending content in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. This pending content is the result of the indefinite deferral of accounting requirements about mandatorily redeemable financial instruments of certain nonpublic entities and certain mandatorily redeemable non-controlling interests. The amendments in Part II of this update do not have an accounting effect. This ASU is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its consolidated financial statements of the

adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting , which clarifies when a change to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award must be accounted for as a modification. The new guidance requires modification accounting if the fair value, vesting condition or the classification of the award is not the same immediately before and after a change to the terms and conditions of the award. The new guidance is effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-4, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): “Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. This update simplifies how an entity is required to test goodwill for impairment by eliminating Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. Step 2 measures a goodwill impairment loss by comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. Instead, under the amendments in this update, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity

should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value. An entity should apply the amendments in this update on a prospective basis. An entity is required to disclose the nature of and reason for the change in accounting principle upon transition. That disclosure should be provided in the first annual period and in the interim period within the first annual period when the entity initially adopts the amendments in this update. A public business entity that is an SEC filer should adopt the amendments in this Update for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in

fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-1, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business. The amendments in this update clarify the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The definition of a business affects many areas of accounting including acquisitions, disposals, goodwill, and consolidation. The amendments of this ASU are effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. The amendments in this Update are to be applied prospectively on or after the effective date. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

As a “smaller reporting company”, we are not required to provide the information required by this Item.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors andStockholders of Lithium Corporation

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Lithium Corporation (the Company) as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2019, and the related notes and schedules (collectively referred to as the financial statements). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2019, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continues as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, in past years, the Company has suffered net losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency, which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans regarding those matters are discussed in Note 2. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

M&K CPAS, PLLC.

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2016.

Houston, TX

March 18, 2020

LITHIUM Corporation

Balance Sheets

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

LITHIUM Corporation

Statements of Operations

(unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

LITHIUM Corparation

Statements of Stockholders' Deficit

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

LITHIUM Corporation

Statements of Cash Flows

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

Lithium Corporation

Notes to the Financial Statements

December 31, 2019

Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Lithium Corporation (formerly Utalk Communications Inc.) (the “Company”) was incorporated on January 30, 2007 under the laws of Nevada. On September 30, 2009, Utalk Communications Inc. changed its name to Lithium Corporation.

Nevada Lithium Corporation was incorporated on March 16, 2009 under the laws of Nevada under the name Lithium Corporation. On September 10, 2009, the Company amended its articles of incorporation to change its name to Nevada Lithium Corporation. By agreement dated October 9, 2009 Nevada Lithium Corporation and Lithium Corporation amalgamated as Lithium Corporation. Lithium Corporation is engaged in the acquisition and development of certain lithium interests in the state of Nevada, and flake graphite prospects in British Columbia and is currently in the exploration stage.

Accounting Basis

The Company uses the accrual basis of accounting and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP” accounting). The Company has adopted a December 31 fiscal year end.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash includes cash on account, demand deposits, and short-term instruments with maturities of three months or less.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts, the balances of which at times may exceed federally insured limits. The Company continually monitors its banking relationships and consequently has not experienced any losses in such accounts. The Company believes it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASC 606 — Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Under ASC 606, the Company recognizes revenue from the commercial sales of products, licensing agreements and contracts to perform pilot studies by applying the following steps: (1) identify the contract with a customer; (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determine the transaction price; (4) allocate the transaction price to each performance obligation in the contract; and (5) recognize revenue when each performance obligation is satisfied. For the comparative periods, revenue has not been adjusted and continues to be reported under ASC 605 — Revenue Recognition. Under ASC 605, revenue is recognized when the following criteria are met: (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (2) the performance of service has been rendered to a customer or delivery has occurred; (3) the amount of fee to be paid by a customer is fixed and determinable; and (4) the collectability of the fee is reasonably assured.

There was no impact on the Company’s financial statements as a result of adopting Topic 606 for year ended December 31, 2019 or 2018.

Loss per Share

Basic loss per share is computed by dividing loss available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. The computation of diluted earnings per share assumes the conversion, exercise or contingent issuance of securities only when such conversion, exercise or issuance would have a dilutive effect on earnings per share. The dilutive effect of convertible securities is reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the “if converted” method. In the periods in which a loss is incurred, the effect of potential issuances of shares under options and warrants would be anti-dilutive, and therefore basic and diluted losses per share are the same.

Income Taxes

The asset and liability approach is used to account for income taxes by recognizing deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts and the tax basis of assets and liabilities.

Financial Instruments

The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash, deposits, prepaid expenses, and accounts payable and accrued liabilities. Unless otherwise noted, it is management’s opinion that the Company is not exposed to significant interest, currency or credit risks arising from these financial instruments. Because of the short maturity and capacity of prompt liquidation of such assets and liabilities, the fair value of these financial instruments approximate their carrying values, unless otherwise noted.

Mineral Properties

Costs of exploration, carrying and retaining unproven mineral lease properties are expensed as incurred. Mineral property acquisition costs are capitalized including licenses and lease payments. Although the Company has taken steps to verify title to mineral properties in which it has an interest, these procedures do not guarantee the Company’s title. Such properties may be subject to prior agreements or transfers and title may be affected by undetected defects. Impairment losses are recorded on mineral properties used in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets’ carrying amount.

Optioned Properties

Properties under the Company’s ownership which have been optioned to a third party are deemed the Company’s property until all obligations under an option agreement are met, at which point the ownership of the property transfers to the third party. All non-refundable payments received prior to all obligations under an option agreement being met are considered liabilities until such time all obligations have been met, at which time ownership of the property transfers to the third party and the Company includes option payments into its statement of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Leases (Topic 842). In February 2016, FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (“ASU 2016-02”). The new standard establishes a right-of-use (“ROU”) model that requires a lessee to record a ROU asset and a lease liability on the balance sheet for all leases with terms longer than 12 months. Leases will be classified as either finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement. The new standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. A modified retrospective transition approach is required for lessees for capital and operating leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements, with certain practical expedients available.

The Company adopted the standard effective January 1, 2019. The standard allows a number of optional practical expedients to use for transition. The Company choose the certain practical expedients allowed under the transition guidance which permitted us to not to reassess any existing or expired contracts to determine if they contain embedded leases, to not to reassess our lease classification on existing leases, to account for lease and non-lease components as a single lease component for equipment leases, and whether initial direct costs previously capitalized would qualify for capitalization under FASB ASC 842. The new standard also provides practical expedients and recognition exemptions for an entity’s ongoing accounting policy elections. The Company has elected the short-term lease recognition for all leases that qualify, which means that we do not recognize a ROU asset and lease liability for any lease with a term of twelve months or less.

The most significant impact of adopting the standard was the recognition of ROU assets and lease liabilities for operating leases on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet but it did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations or consolidated statements of cash flows.

The Company did not have a cumulative effect on adoption prior to January 1, 2019.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820), Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this Update modify certain disclosure requirements of fair value measurements and are effective for all entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In June 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2018-07, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting , which expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. An entity should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards except for specific guidance on inputs to an option pricing model and the attribution of cost (that is, the period of time over which share-based payment awards vest and the pattern of cost recognition over that period). The new guidance is effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-05, Income Taxes (Topic 740) - Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118 . The amendment provides guidance on accounting for the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) and allows entities to complete the accounting under ASC 740 within a one-year measurement period from the Tax Act enactment date. This standard is effective upon issuance. The Tax Act has several significant changes that impact all taxpayers, including a transition tax, which is a one-time tax charge on accumulated, undistributed foreign earnings. The calculation of accumulated foreign earnings requires an analysis of each foreign entity’s financial results going back to 1986. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income . The guidance permits entities to reclassify tax effects stranded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income as a result of tax reform to retained earnings. This new guidance is effective for annual and interim periods in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted in annual and interim periods and can be applied retrospectively or in the period of adoption. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption on its consolidated financial statements.

In July 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-11, Earnings Per Share (Topic 260), Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): I. Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Down Round Features; II. Replacement of the Indefinite Deferral for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Non-Controlling Interests with a Scope Exception. Part I of this update addresses the complexity of accounting for certain financial instruments with down round features. Down round features are features of certain equity-linked instruments (or embedded features) that result in the strike price being reduced on the basis of the pricing of future equity offerings. Current accounting guidance creates cost and complexity for entities that issue financial instruments (such as warrants and convertible instruments) with down round features that require fair value measurement of the entire instrument or conversion option. Part II of this update addresses the difficulty of navigating Topic 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity, because of the existence of extensive pending content in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. This pending content is the result of the indefinite deferral of accounting requirements about mandatorily redeemable financial instruments of certain nonpublic entities and certain mandatorily redeemable non-controlling interests. The amendments in Part II of this update do not have an accounting effect. This ASU is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its consolidated financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting , which clarifies when a change to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award must be accounted for as a modification. The new guidance requires modification accounting if the fair value, vesting condition or the classification of the award is not the same immediately before and after a change to the terms and conditions of the award. The new guidance is effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-4, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): “Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. This update simplifies how an entity is required to test goodwill for impairment by eliminating Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. Step 2 measures a goodwill impairment loss by comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. Instead, under the amendments in this update, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value. An entity should apply the amendments in this update on a prospective basis. An entity is required to disclose the nature of and reason for the change in accounting principle upon transition. That disclosure should be provided in the first annual period and in the interim period within the first annual period when the entity initially adopts the amendments in this update. A public business entity that is an SEC filer should adopt the amendments in this Update for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment tests in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-1, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business. The amendments in this update clarify the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The definition of a business affects many areas of accounting including acquisitions, disposals, goodwill, and consolidation. The amendments of this ASU are effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. The amendments in this Update are to be applied prospectively on or after the effective date. The Company is currently unable to determine the impact on its financial statements of the adoption of this new accounting pronouncement.

Note 2 – Going Concern

As reflected in the accompanying financial statements, the Company has a working capital of $350,555 (2018: 192,018) as at December 31, 2019 and has used $186,855 (2018: $393,594) of cash in operations for the year ended December 31, 2019. This raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The ability of the Company to continue as a going concern is dependent on the Company’s ability to raise additional capital and implement its business plan. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

Management believes that actions presently being taken to obtain additional funding and implement its strategic plans provide the opportunity for the Company to continue as a going concern.

Note 3 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Under FASB ASC 820-10-5, fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (an exit price). The standard outlines a valuation framework and creates a fair value hierarchy in order to increase the consistency and comparability of fair value measurements and the related disclosures. Under GAAP, certain assets and liabilities must be measured at fair value, and FASB ASC 820-10-50 details the disclosures that are required for items measured at fair value.

The Company has certain financial instruments that must be measured under the new fair value standard. The Company’s financial assets and liabilities are measured using inputs from the three levels of the fair value hierarchy. The three levels are as follows:

The following schedule summarizes the valuation of financial instruments at fair value on a recurring basis in the balance sheets as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively:

Note 4 – Marketable Securities

The Company owns marketable securities (common stock) as outlined below:

The Company classifies it’s marketable securities as available for sale.

During year ended December 31, 2019, the Company sold 10 shares of Ablemarle Corporation held using the cost basis for cash proceeds of $623 for a realized loss of $919.

During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company realized a loss on sale of marketable securities of $919 respectively.

Note 5 - Prepaid Expenses

Prepaid expenses consisted of the following at December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Note 6 - Mineral Properties

Yeehaw and Melissa Properties

On March 17, 2017, the Company entered into an agreement whereby the Company has the option to acquire mineral properties in Revelstoke, British Columbia. To acquire the properties, the Company must issue 1,000,000 common shares on March 1, 2017 (issued) and 400,000 common shares (issued) on the anniversary of the agreement. The properties are subject to a 1% NSR, which may be purchased by the Company for $500,000. As at December 31, 2018, the Company had recorded $217,668 in acquisition costs related to the Yeehaw and Melissa properties. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded a $217,668 allowance for the properties and has a net book value of $Nil.

Fish Lake Property

The Company purchased a 100% interest in the Fish Lake property by making staged payments of $350,000 worth of common stock. Title to the pertinent claims was transferred to the Company through quit claim deed dated June 1, 2011, and this quit claim was recorded at the county level on August 3, 2011 and at the BLM on August 4, 2011. Quarterly stock disbursements were made on the following schedule:

As at December 31, 2018, the Company has recorded $436,764 in acquisition costs related to the Fish Lake Property and associated impairment of $276,908 related to abandonment of claims. The carrying value of the Fish Lake Property was $159,859 as of December 31, 2018. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded a $159,859 allowance for the properties and has a net book value of $Nil.

On March 10, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement with respect to the Fish Lake Property whereby the purchaser may earn an 80% interest in the property for payments of $300,000, 80,000 shares (post 10:1 rollback and 2:1 split) and work performed on the property over the next three years totaling $1,100,000 and $30,000 reimbursement of costs relating to the property. Should these terms be met, the purchaser has the ability to purchase the remaining 20% of the property for $1,000,000. The Company shall retain a 2.5% NSR on the property should they sell 100% of their interest.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company has received $330,000 and 240,000 common shares (valued at $112,267) in relation to the option agreement. The $443,308 had been recorded as a liability against the property until either the purchaser returns the property to the Company or the purchaser has met all the obligations associated with the agreement, at which time the liability will be charged to the statement of operations. During the year-ended December 31, 2019, the property was returned to the Company and $443,308 was taken into income.

Staked Properties

The Company has staked claims with various registries as summarized below:

The Company performs an impairment test on an annual basis to determine whether a write-down is necessary with respect to the properties. The Company believes no circumstances have occurred and no evidence has been uncovered that warrant a write-down of the mineral properties other than those abandoned by management and thus included in write-down of mineral properties.

On May 3, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement with respect to the San Emidio Property whereby the purchaser may earn an 80% interest in the property for payments of $100,000, 30,000 shares (post 10:1 rollback and 2:1 split) and work performed on the property over the next three years totaling $600,000. Should these terms be met, the purchaser has the ability to purchase the remaining 20% of the property for $1,000,000. The Company shall retain a 2.5% NSR on the property should they sell 100% of their interest.

As of December 31, 2018, the Company has received $100,000 and 40,000 common shares (valued at $102,901) in relation to the option agreement. The Company recorded $202,901 as a liability against the property until either the purchaser returns the property to the Company or the purchaser has met all the obligations associated with the agreement, at which time the liability will be charged to the statement of operations. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company received notification that the purchaser had returned the property and, as such, $202,901 was taken into income.

Note 7 – Allowance for Optioned Properties

Fish Lake Valley

On March 10, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement with respect to the Fish Lake Property whereby the purchaser may earn an 80% interest in the property for payments of $300,000, 80,000 shares (post 10:1 rollback and 2:1 split) and work performed on the property over the next three years totaling $1,100,000 and $30,000 reimbursement of costs relating to the property. Should these terms be met, the purchaser has the ability to purchase the remaining 20% of the property for $1,000,000. The Company shall retain a 2.5% NSR on the property should they sell 100% of their interest.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company has received $330,000 and 240,000 common shares (valued at $112,267) in relation to the option agreement. The $443,308 has been recorded as a liability against the property until either the purchaser returns the property to the Company or the purchaser has met all the obligations associated with the agreement, at which time the liability will be charged to the statement of operations. During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company received notification that the purchaser had returned the property and, as such, $443,308 was taken into income.

San Emidio

On May 3, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement with respect to the San Emidio Property whereby the purchaser may earn an 80% interest in the property for payments of $100,000, 60,000 shares (post 10:1 rollback and 2:1 split) and work performed on the property over the next three years totaling $600,000. Should these terms be met, the purchaser has the ability to purchase the remaining 20% of the property for $1,000,000. The Company shall retain a 2.5% NSR on the property should they sell 100% of their interest.

As of December 31, 2018, the Company has received $100,000 and 40,000 common shares (valued at $102,901) in relation to the option agreement. The $202,901 has been recorded as a liability against the property until either the purchaser returns the property to the Company or the purchaser has met all the obligations associated with the agreement, at which time the liability will be charged to the statement of operations. During the period ended December 31, 2018, the Company received notification that the purchaser had returned the property and, as such, $202,901 was taken into income.

Note 8 - Capital Stock

The Company is authorized to issue 300,000,000 shares of it $0.001 par value common stock. On September 30, 2009, the Company effected a 60-for-1 forward stock split of its $0.001 par value common stock.

Common Stock

On January 22, 2018, the Company issued 200,000 shares gross proceeds of $7,000 pursuant to the exercise of stock options.

On February 7, 2018, the Company issued 50,000 shares gross proceeds of $1,250 pursuant to the exercise of stock options.

On February 28, 2018, the Company issued 500,000 shares for gross proceeds of $12,500 pursuant to the exercise of stock options.

On February 28, 2018, the Company issued 400,000 at $0.365 shares per share as consideration for the Yeehaw and Melissa Properties (see Note 6).

On March 7, 2018, the Company issued 1,324,000 common shares for gross proceeds of $90,300 pursuant to the exercise of warrants.

On April 17, 2018, the Company issued 2,400,000 common shares for gross proceeds of $120,000 pursuant to the exercise of warrants.

On July 20, 2018, the Company issued 500,000 common shares for gross proceeds of $22,500 pursuant to the exercise of stock options.

On October 12, 2018, the Company issued 909,091 common shares for gross proceeds of $100,000.

There were 95,651,644 shares of common stock issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2019 (2018: 95,651,644).

Warrants

On March 27, 2017, as part of the issuance of common stock, the Company issued 2,400,000 warrants exercisable at $0.05 for the first 12 months after closing and $0.075 for the following 12 months after closing. The fair value of the warrants has been measured at $86,180. The warrants vested six months after being granted.

On July 31, 2017, as part of the issuance of common stock, the Company issued 1,900,000 warrants exercisable at $0.075 for 24 months after closing. The fair value of the warrants has been measured at $69,489. The warrants vested six months after being granted.

During the year-ended December 31, 2018, the Company received proceeds of $210,300 from the exercise of warrants.

The table below outlines the change in warrants for the years-ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Note 9 – Related Party Transactions

The Company paid consulting fees totaling $120,000 to related parties for the year ended December 31, 2019 (2018: $120,000).

Note 10 – Income Taxes

As of December 31, 2019, the Company had net operating loss carry forwards of approximately $4,628,000 that may be available to reduce future years’ taxable income in varying amounts through 2033. Future tax benefits which may arise as a result of these losses have not been recognized in these financial statements, as their realization is determined not likely to occur and accordingly, the Company has recorded a valuation allowance for the deferred tax asset relating to these tax loss carry-forwards.

The provision for Federal income tax consists of the following for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

The cumulative tax effect at the expected rate of 21% (2018: 21%) of significant items comprising our net deferred tax amount is as follows at December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Due to the change in ownership provisions of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, net operating loss carry forwards of approximately $4,628,000 for Federal income tax reporting purposes are subject to annual limitations. Should a change in ownership occur net operating loss carry forwards may be limited as to use in future years.

Note 11 – Commitment and Contingencies

From time to time, we may become involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of its operations in the normal course of business. We are not involved in any pending legal proceeding or litigation and, to the best of our knowledge, no governmental authority is contemplating any proceeding to which we area party or to which any of our properties is subject, which would reasonably be likely to have a material adverse effect on us, except for the following:

On December 4, 2015 a claim was filed in the United States District Court, District of Nevada against a number of defendants both individually, and in their various capacities with different organizations or governmental departments. Included in the list of defendants was our Company and its president Tom Lewis, amongst others. This challenge was with respect to land in Tonopah, Nye County that is a part of the Hughes claim package, and the plaintiff alleged that the recorded title to the parcel of land, that comprises the Hughes claims here, was wrongfully changed by the County Recorder to Summa, LLC, a company which our Company holds a significant investment. Additionally the plaintiff alleged that the defendants, including the Company and its president engaged in racketeering, and were part of a conspiracy to fraudulently strip the lands from the plaintiff. Title had been legally changed pursuant to a prior court order issued by the United States District Court of Nevada, and the Company, its president and all other defendants deny any wrongdoing.

Dual identical actions were filed by the plaintiff at this time against the Company and the other defendants: the first mentioned above was filed in the United States District Court, District of Nevada, and the second case was filed in the Fifth Judicial District Court of Nevada in Nye County against an identical list of defendants.

Tom Lewis was never legally served, and received notice in April 2016 that the Plaintiff was discontinuing its action against him.

On May 3, 2016, the case in the Fifth Judicial District Court of Nevada was dismissed with prejudice, and the defendants, including the Company, were awarded legal fees and costs to be paid by the plaintiff, and the Judge was to decide whether Nevada’s Anti-Slapp legislation for frivolous actions applied in this matter. Should the Anti-Slapp portion of the co-Defendants petition be approved it could result in punitive damages of up to $10,000 for each Defendant. The plaintiff immediately appealed, and March 8, 2017 was set as the date to hear the appeal.

On February 6, 2017, the United States District Court, District of Nevada dismissed with predjudice the case against the Company and the other defendants.

On March 8, 2017 the Fifth Judicial District Court of Nevada dismissed the appeal stemming from May 3, 2016, and upheld the defendant’s right to costs, and pending submittal of additional costs for council to attend that hearing will make a written final ruling shortly with respect to costs, and the Anti-Slapp sanctions. At the same time a trial date was set for May 8, 2018 where the court will hear Summa’s petition for “Quiet Title” with respect to its Tonopah properties.

On March 13^th 2018 Summa was victorious in a “Quiet Title” ruling set out in the Fifth Judicial District Court where Judge Wanker ruled that Summa’s claim to title in the contested claims is superior to that of any other entity that has come forward with a claim to date.

The Company is of the opinion that these actions were baseless and without merit, and intends to continue to vigorously defend our position as need be.

Note 12 - Subsequent Events

The Company has analyzed its operations subsequent to December 31, 2019 through the date these financial statements were issued, and has determined that it does not have any material subsequent events to disclose other than those below.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

There were no disagreements related to accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, internal controls or auditing scope or procedure during the two fiscal years and interim periods.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We have established disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to the officers who certify the Company’s financial reports and to other members of senior management and the Board of Directors.

Based on their evaluation, the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) were ineffective as of December 31, 2019 to ensure that the information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC rules and forms. Our officers also concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are ineffective to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of control procedures. The objectives of internal control include providing management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management’s authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework, as published in 1992.

Management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) 2013 Framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework. Based on this evaluation, management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded that, as of December 31, 2019, our internal control over financial reporting was ineffective.

A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, our management determined that there were control deficiencies that constituted material weaknesses, as described below:

Our management reviewed the results of its assessment with our Board of Directors. Notwithstanding the existence of these material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, our management believes that the financial statements included in its reports fairly present in all material respects our company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of our company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by our company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit our company to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Inherent limitations on effectiveness of controls

Internal control over financial reporting has inherent limitations which include but is not limited to the use of independent professionals for advice and guidance, interpretation of existing and/or changing rules and principles, segregation of management duties, scale of organization, and personnel factors. Internal control over financial reporting is a process which involves human diligence and compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from human failures. Internal control over financial reporting also can be circumvented by collusion or improper management override. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis, however these inherent limitations are known features of the financial reporting process and it is possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though not eliminate, this risk. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have been no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2019 that have materially or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

Item 9B. Other Information

None.

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

All directors of our company hold office until the next annual meeting of the security holders or until their successors have been elected and qualified. The officers of our company are appointed by our board of directors and hold office until their death, resignation or removal from office. Our directors and executive officers, their ages, positions held, and duration as such, are as follows:

Business Experience

The following is a brief account of the education and business experience during at least the past five years of each director, executive officer and key employee of our company, indicating the person’s principal occupation during that period, and the name and principal business of the organization in which such occupation and employment were carried out.

Tom Lewis – President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director

Tom Lewis acted as president, treasurer, secretary and director of our company since August 25, 2009. Mr. Lewis resigned as president, treasurer and secretary of our company on August 13, 2014 and resumed the positions of President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer on February 7, 2017 Mr. Lewis has more than 38 years’ experience in the oil and gas and mineral exploration industries. He has held various positions including project geologist, project manager, senior project geologist, and vice president exploration. He also was an integral member of the development team that explored, and developed the Cortez Hills deposit in Crescent Valley Nevada.

In 1974, Mr. Lewis started his career in the oil fields, and worked in the geophysical, and drilling industries until 1981, when he became a petroleum landman for Westburne Petroleum & Minerals. While there he was responsible for the acquisition and disposition of interests and maintaining title to petroleum lands in various locales in the United States, and Western Canada. In 1989, he started his own business as a consulting geologist and has worked in numerous locations over the past 30 years, including the United States, Mexico, Canada, Portugal, Chile, Africa, India and Honduras. Some of the positions he held include: working with Teck Cominco in 1996 evaluating and exploring precious metal deposits in Southern Mexico; project manager on the Farim phosphate deposit for Champion Resources in Guinea Bissau, West Africa in 1998; project geologist in 2001 and 2002 for Crystal Graphite Corporation, project geologist on the Midway Gold project in Tonopah, Nevada, followed by two years as senior geologist at the Cortez Joint Venture in Crescent Valley, Nevada. By August 2005 he was named vice president of exploration in Portugal for St. Elias Mines, working on the Jales project, and developing grass roots projects in Nevada. Following his experience in Portugal and Nevada he consulted to Selkirk Metals and New World Resource Corp. on projects in western Canada and Nevada. Most recently he consulted to Kinross Gold USA evaluating possible acquisitions.

James Brown - Director

James Brown has acted as a director of our company since December 19, 2012. Mr. Brown is a mining engineer with more than 25 years’ experience in the coal mining and exploration industry in Australia and Indonesia, including 22 years at Australian based coal producer New Hope Corporation. During this time he has held positions from front line mine planning and supervision, land acquisition, government approvals and mine and business development. Mr. Brown is also the managing director of Altura Mining Limited (ASX: AJM) an Australian listed company focused primarily on developing the Pilgangoora lithium deposit in Western Australia. Mr. Brown has overseen the growth of Altura from $10 million to $156 million in market capitalization. James is a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors (MAICD).

Brian Goss –Director

Brian Goss has acted as a director of our company since May 30, 2014. Mr. Goss acted as president, treasurer, secretary and director of our company since August 13, 2014. Mr. Goss resigned as president, treasurer and secretary of our company on February 7. 2017. Mr. Goss served as president, chief executive officer, chief financial officer, treasurer and a director of Graphite Corp. July 9, 2012 through August 12, 2014. Mr. Goss graduated from Wayne State University with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Geology in 2003. Mr. Goss worked the 2002-2003 field seasons for Kennecott Exploration during the early exploration stages of the Eagle Project, a Duluth Type high grade nickel and copper deposit in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. At the end of 2003, he moved to Northeast Nevada to explore for Carlin Type gold deposits. From 2004-2007, he worked as a staff geologist for Cameco Corporation, and subsequently in its spin out company, Centerra Gold Inc., on the REN deposit where the exploration team drilled deep exploration holes using pre-collars with core tails to contribute to the expansion of the +1 million ounce gold deposit that was subsequently taken over by Barrick Gold. Mr. Goss also held several other project geologist positions before founding Rangefront Geological in early 2008. Mr. Goss has built Rangefront into a premier geological services company that caters to a large spectrum of clients in the mining and minerals exploration industries, and also is a director and officer of several Canadian publicly listed companies.

Employment Agreements

We have no formal employment agreements with any of our directors or officers.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships between any of our directors, executive officers and proposed directors or executive officers.

Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

To the best of our knowledge, none of our directors or executive officers has, during the past ten years:

Compliance with Section 16(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires our executive officers and directors and persons who own more than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities to file with the SEC initial statements of beneficial ownership, reports of changes in ownership and annual reports concerning their ownership of our shares of common stock and other equity securities, on Forms 3, 4 and 5, respectively. Executive officers, directors and greater than 10% shareholders are required by the SEC regulations to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) reports they file.

Based solely on our review of the copies of such forms received by our company, or written representations from certain reporting persons that no Form 5s were required for those persons, we believe that, during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, all filing requirements applicable to our officers, directors and greater than 10% beneficial owners as well as our officers, directors and greater than 10% beneficial owners of our subsidiaries were complied with, with the exception of the following:

Code of Ethics

Effective March 25, 2011, our company’s board of directors adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to, among other persons, our company’s principal executive officer and our principal financial and accounting officer, as well as persons performing similar functions. As adopted, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics sets forth written standards that are designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:

Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics requires, among other things, that all of our company’s personnel shall be accorded full access to our president and secretary with respect to any matter which may arise relating to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Further, all of our company’s personnel are to be accorded full access to our company’s board of directors if any such matter involves an alleged breach of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by our president or secretary.

In addition, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics emphasizes that all employees, and particularly managers and/or supervisors, have a responsibility for maintaining financial integrity within our company, consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, and federal, provincial and state securities laws. Any employee who becomes aware of any incidents involving financial or accounting manipulation or other irregularities, whether by witnessing the incident or being told of it, must report it to his or her immediate supervisor or to our company’s president or secretary. If the incident involves an alleged breach of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by the president or secretary, the incident must be reported to any member of our board of directors. Any failure to report such inappropriate or irregular conduct of others is to be treated as a severe disciplinary matter. It is against our company policy to retaliate against any individual who reports in good faith the violation or potential violation of our company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by another.

Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics was attached as an exhibit to our annual report filed on Form 10-K with the SEC on April 15, 2013. We will provide a copy of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics to any person without charge, upon request. Requests can be sent to: Lithium Corporation, 1031 Railroad St, Suite 102B., Elko, Nevada 89801.

Board and Committee Meetings

Our board of directors held no formal meetings during the year ended December 31, 201912. All proceedings of the board of directors were conducted by resolutions consented to in writing by all the directors and filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the directors. Such resolutions consented to in writing by the directors entitled to vote on that resolution at a meeting of the directors are, according to the Nevada General Corporate Law and our Bylaws, as valid and effective as if they had been passed at a meeting of the directors duly called and held.

Nomination Process

As of December 31, 2019, we did not effect any material changes to the procedures by which our shareholders may recommend nominees to our board of directors. Our board of directors does not have a policy with regards to the consideration of any director candidates recommended by our shareholders. Our board of directors has determined that it is in the best position to evaluate our company’s requirements as well as the qualifications of each candidate when the board considers a nominee for a position on our board of directors. If shareholders wish to recommend candidates directly to our board, they may do so by sending communications to the president of our company at the address on the cover of this annual report.

Audit Committee

Currently our audit committee consists of our entire board of directors. We do not have a standing audit committee as we currently have limited working capital and no revenues. Should we be able to raise sufficient funding to execute our business plan, we will form an audit, compensation committee and other applicable committees utilizing our directors’ expertise.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

Currently our audit committee consists of our entire board of directors. We do not currently have a director who is qualified to act as the head of the audit committee.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

The particulars of the compensation paid to the following persons:

There are no arrangements or plans in which we provide pension, retirement or similar benefits for directors or executive officers. Our directors and executive officers may receive share options at the discretion of our board of directors in the future. We do not have any material bonus or profit sharing plans pursuant to which cash or non-cash compensation is or may be paid to our directors or executive officers, except that share options may be granted at the discretion of our board of directors.

2019 Grants of Plan-Based Awards

None.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End

None.

Option Exercises and Stock Vested

None.

Compensation of Directors

We do not have any agreements for compensating our directors for their services in their capacity as directors, although such directors are expected in the future to receive stock options to purchase shares of our common stock as awarded by our board of directors.

The following table sets forth a summary of the compensation paid to our non-employee directors in 2018:

Pension, Retirement or Similar Benefit Plans

There are no arrangements or plans in which we provide pension, retirement or similar benefits for directors or executive officers. We have no material bonus or profit sharing plans pursuant to which cash or non-cash compensation is or may be paid to our directors or executive officers, except that stock options may be granted at the discretion of the board of directors or a committee thereof.

Indebtedness of Directors, Senior Officers, Executive Officers and Other Management

None of our directors or executive officers or any associate or affiliate of our company during the last two fiscal years, is or has been indebted to our company by way of guarantee, support agreement, letter of credit or other similar agreement or understanding currently outstanding.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

The following table sets forth, as of March 26, 2019, certain information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our common shares by each shareholder known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our common shares, as well as by each of our current directors and executive officers as a group. Each person has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares of common stock, except as otherwise indicated. Beneficial ownership consists of a direct interest in the shares of common stock, except as otherwise indicated.