Oil set for weekly loss on fading Mideast supply risks
June 27 (Reuters) - Oil was set to fall this week with the Iran-Israel ceasefire holding and easing concerns over Middle East supply risks, although prices rose on Friday as the summer driving season ramped up fuel demand in the United States.
Brent crude futures rose 34 cents, or 0.5%, to $68.07 a barrel by 0111 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude gained 33 cents, or 0.51%, to $65.57 a barrel.
The benchmarks were set to fall about 12% for the week.
Oil futures hit their lowest in more than a week on Tuesday after U.S. President Donald Trump said a ceasefire had been agreed between Iran and Israel.
Oil prices inched up on Thursday, though, as U.S. government data showed crude oil and fuel inventories last week, with refining activity and demand rising.
"The market is starting to digest the fact that crude oil inventories are very tight all of a sudden," said Phil Flynn, senior analyst with the Price Futures Group.
Also supporting oil prices, the dollar index sank to a three-year low on a report that President Donald Trump was planning to choose the next Federal Reserve chief early, fuelling fresh bets on U.S. interest rate cuts.
A weaker dollar makes oil less expensive for holders of other currencies, increasing demand and supporting prices.
Shortly before oil settled on Thursday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the outcome of Israel's war with Iran presented opportunities for peace that his country must not waste, easing concerns of continuing supply risks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Senate parliamentarian's role under scrutiny over as Republicans call for her firing over the ‘Big, Beautiful Bill'
Republicans are calling for the removal of Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough after she ruled that some of the measures outlined in President Donald Trump 's signature 'Big, Beautiful Bill' could not be included on budgetary grounds. MacDonough blocked several measures in the legislation that would have provided tens of billions of dollars in savings, including one that would have shut down state strategies for obtaining federal Medicaid funding and another that would have limited student loan repayment options. MacDonough is the first woman to hold the office since its founding in 1935. The parliamentarian is primarily responsible for advising the upper chamber of Congress on adherence to the law, with the House having its own parliamentarian to perform the same function. They are also charged with providing information to members of Congress and their staff on a strictly nonpartisan and confidential basis. Her actions leave lawmakers scrambling to make cost-cutting compromises over the weekend ahead of their July 4 deadline. Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville raged on X on Thursday evening: 'President Trump's landslide victory was a MANDATE from 77 million Americans. The One Big Beautiful Bill delivers on that mandate. The Parliamentarian is trying to UNDERMINE the President's mandate and should be fired.' Florida Rep. Greg Steube called MacDonough 'an unelected swamp bureaucrat,' complaining that she is not accountable to voters. 'It is time for our elected leaders to take back control,' he continued. ' JD Vance should overrule the Parliamentarian and let the will of the people, not some staffer hiding behind Senate procedure, determine the future of this country.' Appearing on Newsmax's Chris Salcedo Show, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul fumed that MacDonough's authority to determine which provisions in the legislation are matters of policy or budget allowed her excessive discretion and would be best left up to lawmakers. 'I think most Americans would be perplexed to know why an unelected person is making these decisions,' he said. 'These are profound, big decisions.' Summarizing his argument, Paul said: 'Essentially, it's this. When we have reconciliation, there's a question: Is the predominant effect of the portion of the legislation about the budget, or is it about policy? But a lot of things are a tough call, and they can be about both policy and budget, as I think this is. 'This person who has not been elected by anybody can't be unelected, can't be removed from office, and for which the public has no way of expressing displeasure is making these decisions. 'It's a terrible situation, and it's a bizarre sort of situation that we are all beholden. No one has voted for this person.' Unlike Tuberville and Steube, Paul was careful to make clear he did not object to MacDonough personally. MacDonough initially worked in the Senate library, left to earn a law degree from Vermont Law School, and then advanced through the Justice Department before being appointed to her present position by then-Speaker Harry Reid in 2012. She was retained by Republican Mitch McConnell when he became majority leader in 2015. She steered the Senate through Trump's first and historic second impeachment trials during his first term and had her office ransacked by Capitol rioters on January 6 2021. But she has also frustrated Democratic ambitions, notably blocking Joe Biden 's administration from including a minimum wage hike in his Covid-19 relief bill in the pandemic and dropping immigration provisions from the party's climate legislation. The House and Senate parliamentarians make recommendations, but they can be overruled; the final decision lies with the presiding officer overseeing the proceedings. Michael Thorning, director of structural democracy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, told the Associated Press he believed Republicans are unlikely to challenge MacDonough and that both sides regard her as 'very much an honest broker.' 'The Senate relies on her,' he said. 'Sometimes, those decisions cut your way, and sometimes, they don't. I also think members recognize that once you start treating the parliamentarian's advice as just something that could be easily dismissed, then the rules start to matter less.'
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
EU ready for trade deal with US but ‘all options on the table', says von der Leyen
The European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, has said the EU is ready for a trade deal with Donald Trump, but 'all options remain on the table'. Von der Leyen said she was analysing the latest US negotiating document received on Thursday. 'Our message today is clear, we are ready for a deal,' she told reporters, after briefing EU leaders at a summit in Brussels. 'At the same time, we are preparing for the possibility that no satisfactory agreement is reached … and we will defend the European interest as needed. In short, all options remain on the table.' The commission is responsible for trade on behalf of the EU's 27 member states, but wanted a steer on how to approach the economically critical talks with the White House. Trump has threatened to impose 50% tariffs on all EU goods from 9 July unless the two sides reach a deal. Most EU goods already face a 10% tariff, with levies of 25% on cars and car parts and 50% on steel and aluminium. Von der Leyen also floated a 'beginning of redesigning' the World Trade Organization amid concern the global trading system is being undermined by trade wars and bilateral deals. She said the Asia Pacific CPTPP bloc, which also includes the UK, was interested in 'structured collaboration' with the EU, which wanted the same. 'We can think about this as a beginning of redesigning the WTO … to show the world that free trade with a large number of countries is possible on a rules-based foundation,' she said. As Trump's deadline draws near, differences are emerging between Germany and France over how to handle the US talks. The German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said a quick and simple trade deal was better than 'slow and complicated'. The new centre-right chancellor is under heavy pressure from German carmakers and other exporters, some of whom argue that an asymmetric deal – ie higher US tariffs on European goods – may be better than no deal. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, argued that accepting an unequal trading relationship would be damaging to Europe's long-term competitiveness. One EU diplomat rejected the suggestion member states were divided, but said: 'If we accept 10%, how long will it last?', suggesting Trump could launch a new front in the trade war, or that it could affect negotiations with other trading partners. 'Many member states realise this is not only one game. Maybe it will affect the way India approaches us, or China.' Ireland's prime minister, Micheál Martin, said: 'Getting a deal is important for certainty so that we know the landscape ahead of us and that industry knows the landscape ahead of it, so that we can protect jobs, which is our number one priority.' Striking a more outspoken note, Spain's prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, said Trump's tariff threat was 'doubly unfair', because his country runs a trade deficit with the US. He was responding after Trump said Spain would 'pay twice as much', after Sánchez refused to commit to the 5% Nato spending target. Diplomats are increasingly pessimistic about negotiating away the 10% baseline tariffs. As this reality sinks in, two approaches are emerging: a quick deal that would mean certainty for business, or retaliation to press for something better. 'Do we go into aggressive retaliation mode or are we less vocal and do a quick deal,' said one source. The US has shown little obvious interest in the EU's offer of a 'zero-for-zero' free-trade zone on industrial goods, while continuing to attack the bloc's tech regulation and VAT rules. Earlier this week, von der Leyen reiterated that changes to the EU's Digital Markets Act – regulations affecting US tech companies – was off the table. 'Of course we discuss tariff lines, we discuss non-tariff barriers like standards and norms … but where it is the sovereign decision-making process in the European Union and its member states that is affected this is too far.' Belgium's prime minister, Bart De Wever, said tariffs should be avoided at all costs. 'So we will not allow ourselves to be provoked, we will remain calm, we will negotiate and we hope to reach an agreement. If this is not the case, we will naturally adopt countermeasures, but these will be appropriate countermeasures,' he said. The EU has suspended levies on €21bn (£18bn) US goods until mid-July to allow more time for negotiations. The bloc is consulting on further retaliatory tariffs targeting €95bn of US goods, although the final total is likely to be smaller, if approved. The EU previously dropped plans to target American bourbon, after protests from France and Ireland, who feared retaliation against French cognac and Irish whiskey. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Merz criticised the EU's approach as too complicated at an industry conference in Berlin on Monday. He also suggested the EU should concentrate on negotiating in five sectors including the automotive and steel industries, which have been already been hit with tariffs, and pharmaceuticals, which remain in Trump's crosshairs. Peter Leibinger, the president of the German Federation of Industries (BDI), said at the same conference that he [Merz] needed to 'carry the pain' being felt by German manufacturers to the Brussels bubble. The BDI said the tariffs would cost the German economy approximately 0.3 percentage points of growth, depressing an economy 'where industrial production remains significantly below the pre-crisis level of 2019'. The EU's chief trade negotiator, Maroš Šefčovič, said: 'The car industry of Europe, it's clearly bleeding. And really to have tariffs at the level of 27.5%, which is a scary state, it is clearly unsustainable.' Carmakers face a 25% tariff, in addition to the 2.5% that pre-dated Trump's second term. Šefčovič said his 'one wish' was unity in the EU's approach. He was 'ready to fight tooth and nail' for the EU's interests, telling German business leaders to 'talk to us, criticise us, but support us'. He also revealed he was seeking an insurance clause in any deal: 'I think it would be clearly desirable … that we would have some kind of stand still clause, which would kind of prevent a surprise with sudden spikes [in tariffs] and volatility.'
Sky News
38 minutes ago
- Sky News
UN data on Gaza deaths 'disinformation', claims head of controversial aid group
The chief of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has called figures by the United Nations on people killed at aid hubs "disinformation". The UN said at least 410 Palestinians have been killed seeking food since Israel lifted an 11-week aid blockade on 19 May, while the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry said at least 549 people have been killed. Johnnie Moore, executive director of GHF, told Sky News that there is a "disinformation campaign" that is "meant to shut down our efforts" in the Gaza Strip, fuelled by "some figures" coming out every day. Mr Moore, an evangelical preacher who served as a White House adviser in the first Trump administration, said his aid group has delivered more than 44 million meals to Gazans since it began operations in May. The controversial group, backed by Israel and the United States, has been rejected by the UN and other aid groups, which have refused to cooperate with the GHF. The aid agencies claim Israel is weaponising food, and the new distribution system using the GHF will be ineffective and lead to further displacement of Palestinians. They also argue the GHF will fail to meet local needs and violate humanitarian principles that prohibit a warring party from controlling humanitarian assistance. The GHF is distributing food packages, which they say can feed 5.5 people for 3.5 days, in four locations, with the majority in the far south of Gaza. Thousands of Palestinians walk for hours to reach the aid hubs and have to move through Israeli military zones, where witnesses say the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) regularly open fire with heavy barrages to control the crowds. Both figures from the UN and the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry say hundreds of people have been killed or wounded. "We're not contesting at all that there have been casualties in the Gaza Strip. I mean, there's no ceasefire. This is an active conflict," Mr Moore said. "I think people may not understand as clearly what it means to operate a humanitarian operation on this scale, in an environment this complex, in a piece of land as small as the Gaza Strip, and may not appreciate that almost anything that happens in the Gaza Strip is going to take place in proximity to something." GHF chief was 'really political, really punchy' in Sky News interview Data and forensics correspondent @chesh It was really political, really punchy, and I think the heart of the matter here is that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is too political. The principle of aid, when applied traditionally, is that it has to be applied neutrally and that is what used to happen. Trucks would go into Gaza, and the UN would distribute that food. Israel, for a long time, said that's not working and they blame Hamas for that. At a briefing by the Israeli prime minister's office yesterday, they were saying that Hamas was still looting those aid vehicles, and it was coming out with a plan to stop that. It didn't provide evidence for that. When we asked for evidence, they said we shouldn't swallow Hamas disinformation. That's a word that's been used. That's very, very political. This is a different model of doing things. And that is the concern: that rather than just handing it over to a neutral body, this is too close to Israel, it's too close to the US, and is backed financially by the US. What does that actually imply? Well, if you're choosing where those sites are, it means people are going to move down there if you're not putting them in certain places. The number of distribution sites has dwindled. It's attenuated. And so, actually, if there are only a few and if there are any in the south of Gaza, that encourages people to move there, that might fit a political goal as well as a humanitarian one. Mr Moore said that the GHF was not denying that there had been "those incidents", but said the GHF was able to talk to the "professional military", the IDF, which would conduct an investigation, while Hamas was "intentionally harming people for he purpose of defaming what we're doing". He said the GHF, "an independent organisation operating with the blessing of the US government", was "achieving its aims" by feeding Gazans. It comes after the US State Department announced on Thursday that it had approved $30m in funding for the GHF as it called on other countries to also support the controversial group delivering aid in Gaza. 2:22 A spokesperson from the UN office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs told Sky News that they are "open to any practical solutions that address the crisis on the ground" and are "happy" to talk to the GHF. The spokeswoman added that the aid distribution in Gaza was not "currently a dignified process and that the format doesn't follow humanitarian principles". She said that people have to walk for miles, and that there is no scalability, with aid not reaching everyone in need.
