OPEC+ panel stresses need for full compliance with output limits
Ministers from the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee, which includes top energy ministers from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies led by Russia, convened online for brief talks.
The JMMC meets every two months and has the power to call for a full meeting of OPEC+ to address market developments if deemed necessary.
"The committee reiterated the critical importance of achieving full conformity and compensation," OPEC said in a statement after the meeting. Compensation cuts are those that some countries, such as Iraq and Kazakhstan, are being asked to carry out to make up for earlier overproduction.
The JMMC asked countries that are not fully compliant to submit updated compensation plans by August 18.
OPEC, in a post on X late on Friday, said the committee does not hold decision-making authority over production levels, and "its role is limited to monitoring conformity with production adjustments and reviewing overall market conditions".
OPEC+, which pumps about half of the world's oil, has been curtailing production for several years to support the market. But it reversed course this year to regain market share, and as U.S. President Donald Trump demanded OPEC pump more to help keep a lid on gasoline prices.
Eight members began to raise output in April and since then have accelerated the hikes. Their most recent decision calls for an oil output increase of 548,000 barrels per day in August.
The eight countries hold a separate meeting on August 3 and remain likely to agree to a further 548,000 bpd increase for September, three OPEC+ sources said last week, as reported by Reuters earlier this month.
This would mean that, by September, OPEC+ would have unwound its most recent production cut of 2.2 million bpd, and the United Arab Emirates would have delivered a 300,000 bpd quota increase ahead of schedule.
Oil prices have remained supported despite the OPEC+ increases thanks to summer demand and the fact that some members have not raised production as much as the headline quota hikes have called for. Brent crude was trading above $70 a barrel on Monday.
(Reporting by Ahmad Ghaddar, Olesya Astakhova and Alex Lawler. Editing by Mark Potter)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arabian Post
2 hours ago
- Arabian Post
Hidden Burn Bags at FBI HQ Reveal Alleged Russia Collusion Plot
FBI Director Kash Patel has uncovered thousands of documents stored in burn bags within a previously undisclosed room at FBI headquarters. The materials, related to the 2016 Trump–Russia investigation and including a classified annex to the Durham report, are now undergoing declassification and have been submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee Chair, Chuck Grassley. Patel asserts that the files were deliberately concealed by former FBI leadership and ignored by previous administrations. The classified annex reportedly contains intelligence suggesting government officials inside the FBI played a role in shaping the narrative that President Trump colluded with Russia before the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was formally launched. President Trump, responding to questions from reporters, described the original Russia probe narrative as a 'scam' orchestrated for political gain. When asked about the discovery, he expressed uncertainty and declined to elaborate. ADVERTISEMENT Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Patel, and Intelligence Community leaders, including Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, jointly facilitated the document transmission to the Senate. The DOJ press brief notes the move aligns with directives for transparency. Intelligence files recently released by Gabbard include a whistleblower memorandum describing alleged pressure placed on an analyst to endorse the ICA's findings regarding Trump and Russia. The analyst's initial independent conclusions reportedly conflicted with the wider community's narrative, prompting claims of internal coercion within the Obama administration. Declassified intelligence memos dating from 2016 reveal that senior figures from Hillary Clinton's campaign, including foreign policy adviser Julianne Smith, reportedly initiated efforts to link Trump to Russia as a diversion from Clinton's email scandal. Open Society Foundations operatives Leonard Benardo and Jeffrey Goldstein held confidential meetings with the Democratic National Committee where this strategy was discussed. Special Counsel John Durham's investigation determined that some of these communications were likely authentic and should have been examined by federal agencies at the time—though the FBI did not properly investigate them, according to Durham's findings. Supporters of the disclosure argue the documents expose what they describe as a politically motivated conspiracy to craft the false narrative of Trump-Russia collusion. House Intelligence Committee Chair Rick Crawford suggested the information is the 'final nail in the coffin of the Russia hoax,' calling it among the greatest political frauds in US history. Critics of the newly aired narrative highlight that multiple US intelligence agencies, including the CIA and FBI, concluded that Russia engaged in sweeping interference efforts targeting the 2016 election—campaign disruption via cyberattacks and social media manipulation. A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report affirmed that Russian interference occurred and rejected theories suggesting the dossier triggered the probe. Former CIA Director John Brennan and other intelligence community leaders have repudiated the idea that the collusion narrative was fabricated. Susan Miller, ex-head of the CIA Russia interference assessment team, maintains the investigation relied on credible intelligence, not political pressure. As the declassification process continues, congressional committees are reviewing the documents to determine whether misconduct occurred. Senator Grassley emphasised that this information has been 'buried for years' and that its release is essential to restoring public trust. The story is evolving rapidly. Those involved in the probe, as well as critics, are watching closely as new evidence surfaces, national security implications emerge and accountability debates intensify.
Gulf Today
5 hours ago
- Gulf Today
US President Trump says imposing 25% tariff on Indian imports
President Donald Trump said on Wednesday the United States will impose a 25% tariff on goods imported from India starting on Aug.1. He said India, which has the world's fifth largest economy, will also face an unspecified penalty on Aug.1, but did not elaborate on the amount or what it was for. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that India "is our friend' but its "Tariffs are far too high' on US goods. "While India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high, among the highest in the World, and they have the most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers of any Country," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. "They have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of ENERGY, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE - ALL THINGS NOT GOOD!" India's commerce ministry, which is leading the trade negotiations with the United States, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump's decision dashes hopes of a limited trade agreement between the two countries, which had been under negotiation for several months. The Republican president added that India buys military equipment and oil from Russia, which he said has enabled the war in Ukraine. As a result, he intends to charge an additional "penalty' starting on Friday as part of the launch of his administration's revised tariffs on multiple countries. The new tariffs could put India at a disadvantage in the US market relative to Vietnam, Bangladesh and, possibly, China, said Ajay Sahai, director general of the Federation of Indian Export Organisations. "We are back to square one as Trump hasn't spelled out what the penalties would be in addition to the tariff," Sahai said. "The demand for Indian goods is bound to be hit.' US and Indian trade negotiators had held multiple rounds of discussions to resolve contentious issues, particularly over market access for American agricultural and dairy products. Despite progress in some areas, Indian officials resisted opening the domestic market to imports of wheat, corn, rice and genetically modified soybeans, citing risks to the livelihood of millions of Indian farmers. The new tariffs are expected to impact India's goods exports to the US, estimated at around $87 billion in 2024, including labour-intensive products such as garments, pharmaceuticals, gems and jeweler, and petrochemicals. The United States currently has a $45.7 billion trade deficit with India. India now joins a growing list of countries facing higher tariffs under Trump's "Liberation Day" trade policy, aimed at reshaping US trade relations by demanding greater reciprocity. The White House had previously warned India about its high average applied tariffs - nearly 39% on agricultural products, with rates climbing to 45% on vegetable oils and around 50% on apples and corn. The setback comes despite earlier commitments by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump to conclude the first phase of a trade deal by autumn 2025 and expand bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030, up from $191 billion in 2024. President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he'll impose a 25% tariff on goods from India, plus an additional import tax because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. The announcement comes after a slew of negotiated trade frameworks with the European Union, Japan, the Philippines and Indonesia — all of which Trump said would open markets for American goods while enabling the US to raise tax rates on imports. The president views tariff revenues as a way to help offset the budget deficit increases tied to his recent income tax cuts and generate more domestic factory jobs. While Trump has effectively wielded tariffs as a cudgel to reset the terms of trade, the economic impact is uncertain as most economists expect a slowdown in US growth and greater inflationary pressures as some of the costs of the taxes are passed along to domestic businesses and consumers. Trump's approach of putting a 15% tariff on America's longstanding allies in the EU is also generating pushback - possibly causing European partners as well as Canada to seek alternatives to US leadership on the world stage. Reuters / AP
Gulf Today
5 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Plot twist: Republicans just got families more money
Abby McCloskey, Tribune News Service Washington is a funny place. I don't think President Donald Trump was thinking about former President Joe Biden with his One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). But it certainly seems to poke fun at Biden's BBB (Build Back Better) plan in name — and exceed it in some of its family priorities. The Democrats' BBB was all about supporting working families with child care, paid leave and an expanded Child Tax Credit — but it never made it past the Democratic-held Senate. Somehow it was Republicans who ended up taking ground on these working family policies in their behemoth reconciliation package. How's that for a political scramble? The OBBBA will impact families in myriad ways — but while Medicaid cuts, Trump Accounts and the expanded Child Tax Credit have all gotten attention, two working family provisions have flown under the radar. The first is child care — specifically, tax incentives to get employers to include it as part of their compensation packages. The law expands the employer-provided child care credit (45F) in size and scope. The law increases the maximum annual credit from $150,000 to $500,000, raises the percentage of qualifying expenses to 40%, and allows small businesses to access a credit up to $600,000 at 50% of qualified expenses. The credit is intended to persuade companies to build or operate child care facilities or to contract with an existing child care provider to secure slots for employees' children. Critics are sceptical that this will impact child care in a meaningful way. They argue that the take-up of this tax credit has been relatively small in the past. It can end up rewarding large companies that are already offering such support. And even with a partial offset, child care is a huge expense and most companies simply don't have the margin to subsidize it. This is a critique I also have lobbed, preferring for the money to go directly to parents. A 2022 GAO study supports these concerns, finding that only 200 companies filed for the credit in 2016 (the most recent data available) for a total of less than $20 million in benefits. But supporters say the credit has been underused because the offset has not been large enough and that the significant OBBBA expansion will help, especially for small businesses. Time will tell. The tax-and-spending law also expands direct child care support for families. The law increased the maximum annual amount for dependent care flexible spending accounts (an employer-sponsored account similar to a health care FSA). Parents can use these funds to pay for daycare for children under 13 with pretax dollars, but the cap had not been raised since 1986. The new law raises it from $5,000 to $7,500. For me, the big win in the OBBBA is that it expands the Child and Dependent Tax Credit — not to be confused with the Child Tax Credit. (The CTC is a general payment to family, while the CDCTC is used against child care expenses specifically.) The expansion of the CDCTC allows it to cover up to 50% of eligible child care costs, and the cap is now indexed to inflation. This tax credit was created nearly 50 years ago, with an average claimed credit of$206 (or $1,166 in today's dollars). Inflation and the relative cost of child care have eaten away at the size of that credit, which has not been expanded since 2001 except for a pandemic-related boost. I've long argued that the CDCTC should be thought of as a school-choice programme for early childhood care. Just like states are starting to give parents public vouchers to use towards the cost of a K-12 school of parents' choice, a CDCTC payment could help to offset the cost of a parent's choice for an early childhood care provider, be it to help pay for a nanny or centre-based care or faith-based Mom's Day Out programme, whether full-time, part-time, or something in between. There are still ways the credit can be improved, such as being made larger and refundable, distributed in a timelier manner, and paired with reform to child care regulation. In wilder moments, I've proposed that the entirety of the CTC be converted into the CDCTC to be used as a $10,000 educational voucher given every year for the first five years of a child's life. (For families not requiring child care in the early years, these funds could apply to homeschool materials, tutoring, private primary and secondary school, or college.) But the expansion is a step in the right direction — thanks in large part to the bipartisan leadership of senators Katie Britt, Republican of Alabama, and Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia. But wait, there's more. The OBBBA made permanent a temporary credit for paid leave passed by a Republican Congress in 2017. This credit partially offsets costs to companies that provide paid family and medical leave (45S) and allows it to be applied against insurance premiums. There's no question that greater access to paid leave would result in improved health and economic outcomes for parents and children, especially with regard to childbirth.
