logo
Trump goes to bat for big oil on climate rules in EU trade talks

Trump goes to bat for big oil on climate rules in EU trade talks

Mint7 hours ago

Oil executives enlisted President Trump in fights against clean-car rules, drilling restraints and climate laws from New York to California. Now, they have won his support in their effort to quash Europe's flagship environment rules.
American oil chieftains and their lobbyists have urged Trump and his cabinet members to use ongoing trade talks with the European Union to push for a rollback of two major climate laws in the European Green Deal. Trump officials have pressed their EU counterparts to scale back those laws in recent negotiations, according to people familiar with the matter.
The administration's willingness to give priority to the interests of the oil executives—alongside those of several other industries—in a dispute with a vital trading partner shows how influential they have become in Trump's second term. Oil donors sent millions of dollars to Trump's third presidential campaign last year, and the administration in turn has tried to shore up demand for their products and rescinded U.S. environmental rules.
Trump last month threatened to impose 50% tariffs on most goods from the EU unless they reach a trade deal by July 9. Many fossil-fuel producers quietly oppose Trump's plans to place tariffs on countries that buy their fuels. But they have pounced on the U.S. trade dispute with the EU, which for years has tried to transition the bloc's economy away from fossil fuels and curb emissions that contribute to climate change.
One of the EU laws that U.S. companies are railing against is called the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, or CSDDD, which the EU adopted last year. It aims to push companies with more than 450 million euros, equivalent to about $522 million, in revenue across the bloc to pinpoint and curb human-rights violations and the climate impact of their operations and global supply chains.
International oil producers and other companies are balking now at its requirement to report the greenhouse-gas emissions of thousands of suppliers around the world. The law directs them to cut their emissions to levels they say are impossibly low with today's technology. They also argue that penalties for failing to comply—up to 5% of a company's net annual turnover, or revenue after deducting rebates and some taxes—are too hefty.
Exxon Mobil Chief Executive Darren Woods has become prominent among oil executives who oppose the legislation. His company already cut investments in Europe by some 70% in recent years following increases in taxes and other regulations. It has sold or shut down 11 chemical and refining facilities and sold eight businesses in its upstream unit across the bloc.
During a January meeting at Mar-a-Lago, Woods explained to Trump why he believed CSDDD would bog down American companies in Europe. Woods and other executives raised the issue again in March at a meeting with Trump at the White House. And at a forum in Brussels this month, Woods warned that the implementation of CSDDD could accelerate the industry's exodus from Europe.
'This is probably one of the most irresponsible pieces of legislation I've seen come across in any country," Woods said in a recent Fox News interview. 'The business I do in Texas or Australia or China all have to basically comply with EU regulations."
In subsequent conversations with the White House, the Treasury Department, the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, senior Trump officials indicated to oil executives that they plan to include the issue in trade talks with the EU. Trump's negotiators haven't fully developed all of their negotiating points yet, but have had preliminary discussions about CSDDD, according to people familiar with the matter.
A White House official declined to comment on the specifics of ongoing negotiations but said Trump's trade and economics team is focused on 'unfair regulatory burdens placed on American companies and exports by our trading partners."
Other oil chieftains running companies with global operations have voiced their opposition to the EU's supply-chain law. Qatar Energy Minister Saad Sherida al-Kaabi has said his country isn't going to supply Europe with natural gas if its global revenue is subject to fines by the EU.
In March, Republican Sen. Bill Hagerty of Tennessee introduced a bill that would allow U.S. companies to not comply with the law.
Policymakers in France and Germany have also called for scrapping the legislation. The EU made changes to the law in April as part of a broader initiative to simplify its rules and make the bloc more competitive, leading to some delays in its implementation. But oil executives said European lawmakers haven't gone far enough yet. Other changes are currently in limbo.
The other EU climate standards that U.S. oil companies are asking Trump to target are methane regulations that would require companies shipping liquefied natural gas and other fuels to Europe to begin measuring and reporting methane intensity in 2028. By 2030, the EU plans to require companies to cap the methane intensity of fuel imported to Europe.
When the EU approved the methane rules last year, officials said it would allow the bloc to tackle the second-highest contributor to climate change and air pollution after carbon dioxide.
Oil executives have criticized the EU's methane regulations in part because they would require American frackers to prove which natural-gas facilities produced which molecules of methane. The path from the wellhead to LNG facilities in the U.S. is far too complex for that, they say.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that U.S. trade officials circulated a draft text indicating that U.S. energy exports to Europe could be exempt from EU methane rules as part of a trade deal with the bloc.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who leads the EU's executive body, appeared to push back on that idea during a Monday press conference. Asked if the bloc might agree to a trade deal with the U.S. that includes changes to existing rules, she said the sovereignty of the EU's decision-making process is 'absolutely untouchable."
Write to Collin Eaton at collin.eaton@wsj.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions
Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions

Hindustan Times

time31 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions

* Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions US, NATO allies disagree on Putin's ultimate aims * Rubio says Russia wants Ukrainian territories; Rutte warns of attack on Europe * Lack of Russia strategy a blot on otherwise successful summit By Gram Slattery THE HAGUE, - For U.S. President Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin is a man looking for an off-ramp to his bloody three-year assault on Ukraine. But according to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Russian leader may be just getting started. If the alliance does not invest in its defense capabilities, Rutte warned the annual NATO summit on Tuesday, Russia could attack an alliance country within three years. By most measures, this year's NATO summit in The Hague was a success. Member states largely agreed to a U.S. demand to boost defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product. Trump, who once derided the alliance as a "rip-off," said his view had changed, while a budding bromance blossomed between him and Rutte, who compared the U.S. president to a stern "daddy" managing his geopolitical underlings. But the summit, which ended on Wednesday, also highlighted the widening gap between how the U.S. and Europe see the military ambitions of Russia, the bloc's main foil. That is despite some lawmakers in Trump's own Republican Party hardening their rhetoric in recent weeks, arguing that while the president's ambition to negotiate an end to Russia's war in Ukraine is laudable, it is now clear that Putin is not serious about coming to the table. In a Wednesday press conference, Trump conceded that it was "possible" Putin had territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. But he insisted that the Russian leader - buffeted by manpower and materiel losses - wanted the war to end quickly. "I know one thing: He'd like to settle," Trump said. "He'd like to get out of this thing. It's a mess for him." Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed Trump's view in a sideline interview with Politico, saying the U.S. was holding off on expanding its sanctions against Moscow, in part to keep talks going. "If we did what everybody here wants us to do - and that is come in and crush them with more sanctions - we probably lose our ability to talk to them about the ceasefire," he said. The message from others at the summit was starkly different. A senior NATO official told reporters in a Tuesday briefing that Putin was not in fact interested in a ceasefire - or in engaging in good-faith talks at all. "Regardless of battlefield dynamics, we continue to doubt that Russia has any interest in meaningful negotiations," the official said. Russia's ambitions, the senior official said, go beyond control of "certain territories at their administrative lines," as Rubio put it. Putin is instead bent on imposing his "political will" on neighboring states. Rutte put the Russian threat in existential terms. "If we do not invest now," he said on Tuesday, "we are really at risk that the Russians might try something against NATO territory in three, five or seven years." RUSSIA STRATEGY REMAINS ELUSIVE The U.S. is not the only NATO member with a more optimistic view of Russia. Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a longtime Trump ally and critic of European institutions, said Russia was "not strong enough to represent a real threat to NATO." Still, as the alliance's largest contributor and most powerful member, Washington's position is a central preoccupation in most NATO capitals. The White House, asked for comment, referred to Trump's comments at the Wednesday press conference. In response to a request for comment, a separate NATO official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, disputed that there were differing assessments within the alliance, pointing to a NATO declaration on Wednesday which referenced the "long-term threat posed by Russia." The Russian embassy in Washington referred to Thursday comments by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, who criticized NATO for wasting money on defense. "It seems that only by invoking the fabricated 'Russian threat' will it be possible to explain to ordinary people why their pockets are being emptied once again," she said. The U.S. State Department and the Ukrainian embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment. The lack of a common understanding about Putin's goals will complicate future diplomatic plans to wind down the war, said Philippe Dickinson, the deputy director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council and a former British diplomat. "To reach a peace agreement, it's not just something that Trump and Putin can agree themselves," Dickinson said. "There does need to be European involvement. That needs to mean that there is some sort of sharing of views among allies on what Putin is trying to achieve." European leaders likely have not given up on trying to change Trump's views on Russia, Dickinson said. But they were always unlikely bring up thorny conversations at the NATO summit. The alliance's main goal was to simply get through it without major blowups, he said, an aim that was accomplished. Still, peace came at a cost - the lack of substantive discussion around Ukraine and Russia, he argued, was conspicuous. "The lack of a Russia strategy is a real glaring omission from what the summit could have produced," Dickinson said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Trump administration's plan to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a third country sparks outrage
Trump administration's plan to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a third country sparks outrage

Economic Times

time35 minutes ago

  • Economic Times

Trump administration's plan to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a third country sparks outrage

Kilmar Abrego Garcia's immigration case has once again made headlines. Abrego Garcia was wrongfully deported once before and returned to the United States, but the Trump administration now intends to deport him again. This time, they want to send Abrego Garcia to a third country rather than his home country, El Salvador, raising legal and human rights concerns. Officials say there is no set timeline yet. Garcia, who was recently returned to the United States and released from jail, is still facing legal uncertainty as deportation approaches.A federal prosecutor told a federal judge in Maryland on Thursday that once Kilmar Abrego Garcia is released from jail in Tennessee, the administration of President Donald Trump intends to deport him to a nation other than his native El Salvador, as per a report by Guynn, an attorney with the Justice Department, stated that the removal process would take place in a "third country." However, the prosecutor added that the U.S. government would abide by all court orders and that there are "no imminent plans" to deport Abrego Garcia. ALSO READ: Microsoft layoffs: Xbox faces turbulence - up to 2,000 jobs on the line as studio shutdowns loom With the Supreme Court's approval, the Trump administration has incorporated deportations to non-origin nations into its immigration this month, Abrego Garcia was brought back to the United States and the Justice Department was directed to free him from Tennessee prison pending trial, as per a Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw stated that Abrego Garcia is likely to be deported to his native El Salvador. Abrego Garcia entered a not guilty plea to charges of smuggling illegal immigrants into the United States. At the DOJ's civil division, Jonathan Guynn, deputy assistant attorney general, told the court on Thursday, "Our plan is that he will be taken into ICE custody and removal proceedings will be initiated," according to NOTUS. "To El Salvador or a third country?" Judge Paula Xinis of the U.S. District inquired. "To a third country is my understanding," he Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said that Abrego Garcia will never go free on American for Abrego Garcia expressed concern that he might be released from Tennessee on Friday and then taken away over the weekend by Immigration and Customs the call on Thursday, Guynn informed the judge that "there's no timeline." He declared, "We do intend to abide by the orders we have received from this court and other courts." "However, there is no schedule for these particular proceedings."In a hurried conference call with U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis and Abrego Garcia's lawyers in Greenbelt, Maryland, Guynn acknowledged the government's plans. In order to prevent deportation before trial, Abrego Garcia's attorneys had submitted an urgent request to Xinis, asking him to direct the government to transport him to Maryland upon his release from Tennessee, as per a report by The isn't Abrego Garcia deported to El Salvador?The administration intends to deport him to a third country, though it has not specified which. Is there a timeline for his deportation? No. Officials say there are no imminent plans, but removal proceedings have begun.

What Iran's Khamenei Said On Trump's "Surrender" Remark
What Iran's Khamenei Said On Trump's "Surrender" Remark

NDTV

time38 minutes ago

  • NDTV

What Iran's Khamenei Said On Trump's "Surrender" Remark

Tehran: Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has strongly criticised US President Donald Trump's call for Iran's surrender, describing it as "too big to come out of his mouth." "The US President stated, "Iran must surrender." Needless to say, this statement is too big to come out of the US president's mouth," Khamenei wrote on X. The US President stated, "Iran must surrender." Needless to say, this statement is too big to come out of the US president's mouth. — (@khamenei_ir) June 26, 2025 According to The Hill, he said that the US "achieved nothing" from its military strikes on his nation and warned against any further attacks. In his first public remarks since the US bombed three Iranian nuclear sites Saturday, Khamenei declared victory in the conflict and pushed back on President Trump's claims that the strikes were a "spectacular military success." "My congratulations on our dear Iran's victory over the US regime. The US regime entered the war directly because it felt that if it didn't, the Zionist regime would be completely destroyed," Khamenei said in his more-than 10 minute address, according to a translated passage posted to his account on the social platform X. "It entered the war in an effort to save that regime but achieved nothing," he added. Trump has said that the strikes "obliterated Iran's nuclear program," but the Iranian supreme leader pushed back on that assessment. Recently, Trump shared a post on his social media, Truth Social, saying "Unconditional surrender" Trump warned that he could order further action if Tehran does not agree to a satisfactory peace agreement. In his address to the nation from the White House on Saturday (local time), Trump said, "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we've witnessed over the last eight days." "This cannot continue. There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill," Trump added. The conflict between Iran and Israel began on June 13 when Israel launched a large-scale airstrike targeting Iranian military and nuclear facilities under "Operation Rising Lion". Iran responded by launching "Operation True Promise 3", a campaign involving missile and drone attacks against Israel's infrastructure.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store