Oil Prices Rise Amid North American Supply Disruptions and OPEC+ Uncertainty
Oil prices edged up on Wednesday as the possibility of supply disruptions prompted by North America production losses provided some support amid expectations OPEC+ producers will stick to agreed output reductions.
Brent crude rose 54 cents, or 0.8 percent, to $64.63 a barrel. U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) rose 64 cents, or 0.9%, to $61.45 a barrel.
There were several factors contributing to the rise in prices. A major development was the U.S. decision to halt Chevron from exporting Venezuelan crude oil. While Chevron can continue operations in Venezuela, it is now prohibited from exporting oil out of the country or expanding its activities. This move limits supply options for U.S. refiners seeking crude and adds pressure to the global market, which is already facing constraints.
And in Canada, wildfires in Alberta led to brief shutdowns of oil and gas production facilities. The fires have forced evacuations from parts of oil operations and are helping to reduce output and tighten supply. The threat from the wildfires underscores the current exposure of the country's energy infrastructure to natural disaster.
Behind all this, oil traders are navigating the swirling forces of the organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allied producer countries, collectively referred to as OPEC+. The group is supposed to meet this week. No immediate decision is expected at Wednesday's full-group meeting, though the broader coalition may hold another meeting on Saturday in a smaller format of just eight member nations to decide whether to boost production next month.
OPEC+ will be under pressure to step up supply, industry analysts say. The demand picture is looking up, particularly with the summer driving season around the corner for several countries. Meanwhile, non-OPEC+ production has been stagnant in the first half of the year. Added to the Canadian supply risk, the cry for more production is rising.
But some analysts are skeptical. Market analysts say the group is likely to raise production in July but may reconsider as the year goes on as the outlook for the world economy darkens and potential new supplies enter the market.
There is also the unknown impact of geopolitics. Continuing strains between the U.S. and Iran have been keeping sentiment in check. If nuclear negotiations between the two countries falter, sanctions on Iranian oil exports would remain in a position to restrict global supply further.
With all of these factors in consideration, oil markets continue to be volatile.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
2 hours ago
- Business Times
There's a ticking time bomb in Trump's ‘big, beautiful Bill'
THIRTY years ago, when I was a rookie reporter, a veteran writer offered me sage advice: whenever presented with a government or corporate document that is more than 100 pages long, hunt for hidden bombs. Donald Trump's thousand-page (plus) 'big, beautiful Bill' is a case in point. Since the House of Representatives passed it last week, this fiscal act has been (rightly) lambasted for many reasons: it favours the rich over the poor; cruelly cuts social safety nets; and recklessly expands the debt. Even Elon Musk is upset. But what investors should also fret about, if they care about the state of Treasuries or are a non-American entity holding US assets, is a clause buried in the bowels of this behemoth called section 899. This would enable the US Treasury to impose penalties on 'applicable persons' from 'discriminatory foreign countries' by increasing US federal income tax and withholding rates by up to 20 percentage points on their US investments, on a variable scale. It might thus be viewed as a novel 'revenge tax' (as some lawyers call it) that Trump could use to bully friends and foes alike in trade negotiations. So, at best, all this undermines prior efforts to build a collaborative global tax system via groups such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, with its undertaxed profits rules. At worst, it makes Trump look like a feudal European king intent on using tax as a capricious tool to extract foreign tribute. Either way, it undermines the idea that America is a place of consistent investment laws – and has shocked lawyers in countries such as Canada. 'Section 899 is toxic (and) a potential game-changer for foreign investment,' Larson Gross, a tax advisory group, told clients this week. Or as Neil Bass, a Canadian lawyer wrote in his own missive: 'The US just declared a tax war and it's targeting allies.' George Saravelos, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, writes in a client note: 'Section 899 challenges the open nature of US capital markets by explicitly using taxation on foreign holdings of US assets as leverage to further US economic goals.' BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up So will this actually become law? The only honest answer (as with so much of Trump policy-making) is 'no one knows'. Trump's bark, after all, is often worse than his bite, and the courts sometimes rein him in, as seen with tariffs this week. Known unknowns In any case, there are a host of known unknowns around section 899. The Senate might insist that this clause is watered down or removed. Or if the surcharge stays intact, there may be provisions to let affected non-American investors and companies offset this against domestic tax bills. No one exactly knows how a 'discriminatory foreign country' will be defined (although the Treasury is supposed to regularly report on that). Nor is it entirely clear what investors and companies might be hit. At first glance, the Bill only affects non-US investors and companies already subject to US tax. But, as I recently noted, the White House recently warned in an executive order that it might overturn a crucial 1984 ruling that exempted Chinese investors, among others, from a prior 30 per cent withholding tax on assets such as US Treasuries. If so, those flows might be hit by section 899 too, as analysts such as Michael McNair suggest. Another reason for uncertainty is splits among Trump's own advisers. I am told that some love the idea of imposing revenge taxes on foreigners, since it will play well with the Maga base – and a think-tank allied with vice-president JD Vance reckons that such taxes could raise US$2 trillion revenue in the next decade. And figures such as Howard Lutnick, commerce secretary, are keen to find new weapons to wield in their trade negotiations with the EU and Canada. As the law firm Davis Polk points out, the fact that those two regions – along with the UK – impose digital services taxes could make them easy targets for section 899 measures. But Scott Bessent, Treasury secretary, is likely to be wary of invoking section 899 since he does not want to scare global investors away from Treasuries. After all, he needs to sell oodles of US government bonds to fund the ever-expanding debt – and there are already hints of some capital flight. Undermining global trust Either way, the key point is that the mere presence of section 899 in this Bill – whatever ultimately happens – is likely to further undermine global trust, given that it shows that the Trump team is at least entertaining the idea of turning trade wars into capital wars, in the future. No wonder investment groups ranging from Canadian pension funds to mighty Asian institutions tell me that they are stealthily diversifying away from US assets. Or that Federal Reserve officials recently fretted about the likely damage to America's economy if its 'safe haven' investment status is undermined. As legislative bombs go, this is self-defeating. The Senate should kick it away. FINANCIAL TIMES
CNA
3 hours ago
- CNA
Oil prices head for weekly drop as OPEC+ may discuss larger output hike for July
LONDON :Oil prices were flat on Friday and heading for a second consecutive weekly loss, as investors weigh a potentially larger OPEC+ output hike for July, and uncertainty spreads around U.S. tariff policy after the latest courtroom twist. Brent crude futures fell by 9 cents, or 0.14 per cent, to $64.06 a barrel by 1201 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude fell by 15 cents, or 0.25 per cent, to $60.79 a barrel. The Brent July futures contract is due to expire on Friday. The more liquid August contract was trading 19 cents lower, or 0.3 per cent, at $63.16 per barrel. At these levels, the front-month benchmark contracts were headed for weekly losses of a little over 1 per cent. Price moves dipped into negative territory after Reuters reported that OPEC+ may discuss an increase in July output larger than the 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) that the group had made for May and June. "The oil price would probably only come under greater pressure if the oil-producing countries were to increase their production even more than in previous months or give indications that there will be similarly high production increases in the following months," Commerzbank analysts said earlier on Friday in a note, published before the news. The potential hike comes as the global surplus has widened to 2.2 million bpd, likely necessitating a price adjustment to prompt a supply-side response and restore balance, said JPMorgan analysts in a note, adding they expect prices to remain within the current range before easing into the high $50s by year-end. U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs were expected to remain in effect after a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated them on Thursday, reversing a trade court's decision a day earlier to put an immediate block on the sweeping duties. Oil prices were down more than 1 per cent on Thursday. The appeals court's decision pushed Brent to the bottom of its recent tight range, Investec's head of commodities Callum Macpherson said. "The narrow $63-67 per barrel range that has confined Brent for much of this month might be hard to sustain given the uncertainties facing oil markets," Macpherson said.
CNA
5 hours ago
- CNA
Oil set for slight weekly decline as market eyes another OPEC+ output hike
LONDON :Oil prices were stable on Friday, but on track for a second consecutive weekly decline, pressured by expectations of another OPEC+ output hike and uncertainty about U.S. tariffs after the latest legal twist kept them in place. Brent crude futures gained 23 cents, or 0.36 per cent, to $64.38 a barrel by 0949 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude rose by 32 cents, or 0.53 per cent, to $61.26 a barrel. The Brent July futures contract is due to expire on Friday. The more liquid August contract was trading 30 cents higher, or 0.47 per cent, at $63.65 per barrel. The two front-month contracts were headed for a marginal weekly decrease of roughly 0.5 per cent. Investors have priced in another hike by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies, a group known as OPEC+, ahead of a meeting between eight of its members on Saturday. "The stage is set for another bumper production increase," Westpac's head of commodity and carbon research, Robert Rennie, said in a note, potentially more than the 411,000 barrels-per-day hike decided on at the previous two meetings. Commerzbank analysts said that the oil price had fallen after media reports that some delegates had already indicated that they would probably decide on a further significant increase in production. "The actual announcement is therefore likely to have only a limited effect," they said in a note. The potential hike comes as the global surplus has widened to 2.2 million bpd, likely necessitating a price adjustment to prompt a supply-side response and restore balance, said JPMorgan analysts in a note. In the U.S., Trump's tariffs were to remain in effect after a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated them on Thursday, reversing a trade court's decision on Wednesday to put an immediate block on the most sweeping of the duties. The block pushed oil prices down more than 1 per cent on Thursday as traders weighed its effects. Analysts said uncertainty would remain as the tariff battles worked through the courts.
