US extends oil service firms' Venezuela waiver

Market: Crude oil
07/11/24

The outgoing administration of US president Joe Biden extended authorization for oilfield services companies Halliburton, SLB, Baker Hughes and Weatherford to continue working in Venezuela until 9 May 2025.

The waiver allows the service companies to pay their staff and maintain limited operations, but it prevents them from drilling new wells or otherwise contributing to state-owned PdV's production and exports.

The Biden administration reimposed sanctions on Venezuela's oil sector in April, after a six-month reprieve. The sole exemption is a waiver for Chevron allowing it to import oil into the US from its joint venture with state-owned PdV. US crude imports from Venezuela averaged 212,000 b/d in January-August, US Energy Information Administration data show. Chevron's Venezuela output has stood at about 200,000 b/d.

Neither president-elect Donald Trump nor his campaign addressed the Venezuela sanctions regime or indicated if they would change it. Republicans in Congress ahead of the election called for the Chevron exemption to be revoked.

The Biden administration separately extended a prohibition for holders of $3.4bn in PdV 2020 bonds guaranteed by 50.1pc in US refiner Citgo's holding company to exercise their claim, this time until 7 March 2025.

The PdV bondholders in theory hold a superior claim to Citgo Holding — a legal entity that directly owns Citgo and, in turn, is owned by Citgo parent company PdVH. A federal court in Delaware recently oversaw an auction of PdVH shares that yielded a $7.3bn bid from a company backed by investors including Elliott Investment Management. Legal wrangling over the bids and the distribution of auction proceeds is likely to keep Citgo ownership unresolved in the near term.

By Haik Gugarats

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

18/06/25

Banks increased fossil fuel financing in 2024: Report

London, 18 June (Argus) — Banks "significantly increased" their fossil fuel financing in 2024, reversing a trend of steadily declining fossil fuel financing since 2021, a report from a group of non-profit organisations found this week. The 65 biggest banks globally committed $869bn in 2024 to "companies conducting business in fossil fuels", the report — Banking on Climate Chaos — found. Those banks committed $429bn last year to companies expanding fossil fuel production and infrastructure. The report assesses lending and underwriting in 2024 from the world's top 65 banks to more than 2,700 fossil fuel companies. Figures are not directly comparable year-on-year, as the previous report, which assessed 2023, covered financing from 60 banks. The 60 biggest banks globally committed $705bn in 2023 to companies with fossil fuel business, last year's report found. Those banks committed $347bn in 2023 to companies with fossil fuel expansion plans. Of the five banks providing the most fossil fuel finance in 2024, four were US banks — JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo. The 65 banks assessed in this year's report have committed $7.9 trillion in fossil fuel financing since 2016, when the Paris climate agreement took effect, the report found. Finance is at the core of climate negotiations like UN Cop summits. Developed countries are typically called upon at such events to provide more public climate finance to developing nations, but the focus is also shifting to private finance, as overseas development finance looks set to drop . But fossil fuel financing banks are increasingly facing the risk of targeted and more complex climate-related litigation, according to a recent report by the London School of Economics' centre for economic transition expertise (Cetex). Climate litigation is not currently adequately accounted for in financial risk assessment, with case filing and decisions negatively impacting carbon financiers, it said. "While early climate cases primarily targeted governments and big-emitting ‘carbon majors', cases against other firms have proliferated quickly," Cetex said. The report also showed that, based on a review of disclosures from 20 banks supervised by the European Central Bank, many banks across Europe recognise litigation risks as material in the context of climate and environmental factors but tend to not be specific about the risks incurred. By Georgia Gratton and Caroline Varin Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

AWRP tanker insurance to jump in Mideast Gulf

18/06/25

News

18/06/25

AWRP tanker insurance to jump in Mideast Gulf

London, 18 June (Argus) — Additional War Risk Premiums (AWRP) in the Mideast Gulf could be set to rise sharply in the coming days in the wake of the Iran-Israel conflict, potentially pushing up freight rates, sources indicated to Argus , as the number of underwriters willing to commit at current levels appears to be shrinking. Offers from underwriters in line with last-done levels are becoming increasingly scarce, sources told Argus , with a number of underwriters now offering at significantly higher premiums. The situation is extremely fluid and even the higher offer levels are expected to climb in the coming days, sources said. One source suggested that tomorrow would be a trigger point to revise AWRP rates upwards for all oil and gas cargoes seeking Mideast Gulf cover and the new level would require "a massive uplift". AWRP cover protects a vessel against any physical loss or damage incurred from war related activities such as missile, drone or mine attacks, as well as capture, seizure or detainment. Although vessels are still able to secure AWRP in line with the standard 0.125pc for the Mideast Gulf before the conflict, participants have indicated that some offers are now at or above 0.2-0.4pc of the insured value of the vessel — hull and machinery value. Offers vary widely depending on the specifics of the vessel or providing insurer but several sources have indicated that some offers are at least 50pc higher than early last week. One source stressed that protection and indemnity (P&I) clubs have not yet made a definitive statement on insurance but there is increased alertness. P&I clubs provide marine protection and indemnity insurance for about 90pc of the world's oceangoing tonnage and are key determiners of the overall policies around marine insurance. AWRP in the Black Sea for a Russian crude cargo on a Suezmax tanker peaked at 1.5pc of the insured value of the ship according to Argus assessments, (around $800,000) in 2022 and 2023 as a result of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Argus estimated that the insured value of a very large crude carrier (VLCC) at around $90mn, and a 0.4pc AWRP would equate to around $360,000. A shipowner could receive up to 50pc of this back as part of a no claims bonus but it remains a substantial extra cost faced by crude exporters from the Mideast Gulf. The Mideast Gulf to Asia-Pacific VLCC rate already jumped to the equivalent of $2.14/bl for Murban crude ($16.35/t or WS70) on 17 June from $1.34/bl ($10.28/t or WS44) on 12 June before the first missile strike on Iran. VLCC tankers carrying crude from the Mideast Gulf is the single largest crude trade in the world and since the start of the current conflict between Israel and Iran the cost of freight has bounced almost to a 2025-high from close to a 2025-low. A higher AWRP would most likely be passed on to charterers, leading to further gains in the spot freight market. There is also the likelihood that some insurers could cease offering cover citing inherent risks. But, higher AWRPs are also an opportunity for insurers to generate higher revenues, albeit with significant risks. By John Ollett, George-Maher Bonnett, and Rithika Krishna Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Karoon updates guidance on new Brazil oil blocks

18/06/25

News

18/06/25

Karoon updates guidance on new Brazil oil blocks

Sydney, 18 June (Argus) — Brazil-focused Australian oil firm Karoon Energy has updated its 2025 guidance after winning access to six of 33 oil and natural gas exploration blocks awarded by Brasilia. The Melbourne-based company secured 100pc interests in the Santos basin blocks offshore Brazil which will be formally granted in October-December, Karoon said. The firm's 2025 capital expenditure guidance has increased to $120-140mn from a previous $105-125mn to incorporate bid bonuses and a financial guarantees owing. "The terms of the bid included a bonus payment of approximately $14.8mn in total plus a minimum work program of $20.2mn, to be undertaken within seven years of the formal award of the blocks. The bids did not include well commitments on any of the blocks," chief executive Julian Fowles said on 18 June. Two of the blocks include the Piracuca discovery, which Karoon said could be tied back to its proposed Neon development, while four deepwater blocks represent a strategic move for Karoon to consolidate its position in the area. State-controlled Petrobras and Spanish-Chinese joint venture Repsol-Sinopec returned the shallow-water Piracuca field to domestic oil regulator ANP in 2017, after determining the acreage was not commercially viable. By Tom Major Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US Supreme Court asked to rule on tariffs

17/06/25

News

17/06/25

US Supreme Court asked to rule on tariffs

Washington, 17 June (Argus) — Plaintiffs in one of the legal cases challenging President Donald Trump's authority to impose tariffs are asking the Supreme Court to hear their arguments even before US federal appeals courts rule on their petition. The legal case brought by the plaintiffs — toy companies Learning Resources and hand2hand — resulted in a ruling by the US District Court for the District of Columbia in late May that Trump did not have the authority to impose tariffs by citing a 1978 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). That case is currently on appeal at the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. The plaintiffs today urged the Supreme Court to take the case and schedule oral arguments at the start of its fall term in October, or possibly in a special September sitting. The plaintiffs argued the Supreme Court will eventually have to rule on the case given the unprecedented use of IEEPA by the Trump White House to impose tariffs, so special consideration should be given to the case even before appeals courts rule on it. The Supreme Court is under no obligation to fast-track the case. The schedule for legal challenges to Trump's authority is clashing with his claims to be negotiating multiple deals with foreign trade partners. Trump cited the IEEPA to impose, then rescind, tariffs of 10-25pc on energy and other imports from Canada and Mexico in February-March. He used the same law to impose 20pc tariffs on China in February-March, and to impose 10pc tariffs on nearly every US trading partner in April. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has stayed the toy companies' case until the resolution of a separate, broader legal challenge to Trump's tariff authority. In that case, the US Court of International Trade ruled in late May that Trump's use of IEEPA was illegal and ordered the administration to remove all tariffs it imposed under that rubric and to refund all import duties it collected. The trade court's ruling is under review at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which scheduled an oral argument on 31 July to hear from plaintiffs — a group of US companies and several US states — and from the Trump administration. The trade court's ruling in late May was unexpected, as it "actually ruled on the merits of the case, as opposed to just granting or denying an injunction," according to Alec Phillips, chief political economist with investment bank Goldman Sachs' research arm. "The question now is, will the Federal Circuit uphold the ruling, and will ultimately the Supreme Court uphold the ruling?" The Trump administration argued that the legal challenges to its tariff authority could undermine its ability to negotiate with foreign trade partners. The administration has so far produced two limited trade agreements, with the UK and China, despite promising in early April to unveil "90 deals in 90 days". Trump on Monday described ongoing trade negotiations as an easy process. "We're dealing with really, if you think about it, probably 175 countries, and most of them can just be sent a letter saying, 'It'll be an honor to trade with you, and here's what you're going to have to pay to do'", Trump said. But on the same day he pushed back on calls from Canada and the EU to negotiate trade deals, arguing that their approach is too complex. "You get too complex on the deals and they never get done," Trump said. The legal challenges to Trump's authority under IEEPA will not affect the tariffs he imposed on foreign steel, aluminum, cars and auto parts. US trade statistics point to a significant tariff burden in place in April, the latest month for which data are available.The effective US tariff rate on all imports — the amount of duties collected divided by the total value of imports — rose to 7.1pc in April from 2.4pc in January. Trump has dismissed concerns about the impact of tariffs on consumer prices, noting on Monday that "we're making a lot of money. You know, we took in $88bn in tariffs." Treasury Department revenue data show that the US has collected $98bn in customs revenue for the year through 13 June, up from $63bn in the same period last year. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Trump wants Iran's ‘unconditional surrender’: Update

17/06/25

News

17/06/25

Trump wants Iran's ‘unconditional surrender’: Update

Updates with details throughout Washington, 17 June (Argus) — US president Donald Trump is taking an increasingly bellicose tone toward Iran following Israel's devastating military strikes, while the White House national security council is discussing Washington's next steps in a conflict that could engulf the world's largest oil producing region. Trump, in a social media post today, called for Iran's "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER" — without specifying what that would entail. He claimed that "we now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran", seemingly linking the US to the Israeli attack. And he said that Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, "is an easy target", but added: "We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now." The White House, meanwhile, began to spread a narrative that suggested that the US could join in Israeli strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, even if Tehran does not directly attack US interests or personnel in the region. Trump "has shown remarkable restraint in keeping our military's focus on protecting our troops and protecting our citizens," vice president JD Vance posted on social platform X, adding that Trump "may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment". Trump cut short his visit to the G7 leaders summit in Canada to return to Washington Monday night. The US administration has come under intense lobbying from the isolationist wing of politicians loyal to Trump, who have called publicly for him not to commit US military personnel and resources to attack Iran. Senate Democrats, in turn, began to circulate legislation demanding that Trump ask for authorization from Congress before using military force against Iran. Trump blasted former Fox News anchorman Tucker Carlson as "kooky" for arguing vociferously against US participation in any attack in Iran. Trump, at the same time, criticized French president Emmanuel Macron for suggesting that Trump's early exit from the G7 summit was meant to work toward a ceasefire in the Middle East. "People are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy," Vance said. "But I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue." Trump, in stump speeches during the presidential campaign and since reclaiming the White House, has frequently denounced his predecessors for entangling the US in wars in the Middle East. In a speech in Riyadh last month, Trump offered "peaceful engagement" to Tehran and criticized his predecessors as "the interventionists (who) were intervening in complex societies they did not understand". Since Israel first launched its attack on Iran on 13 June, the US has warned Tehran not to target US forces in retaliation. Iran has taken no such step and has called on Trump to restrain Israel from further attacks to allow US-Iran nuclear diplomacy to resume. Iran in recent years has relied on its proxy networks in Iraq, Syria and Yemen to launch attacks on US forces. The degree of Tehran's remaining control over those proxy groups is uncertain. Iran also has not tried to block vessel traffic through the strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway that in 2023 accounted for 27pc of global maritime oil trade. Targeting vessel traffic in Hormuz would mark an irreversible escalation in the conflict, with damaging consequences for Iran as well as the global oil trade. Iran's Mideast Gulf neighbors, which have invested in better relations with Tehran in recent years, are watching the prospect with concern. "The UAE stands for dialogue, de-escalation and diplomacy," Abu Dhabi's state-owned Adnoc chief executive Sultan al-Jaber said at an energy forum in Washington today. "We call on parties to show restraint, and we reaffirm our belief in peace over provocation." US energy secretary Chris Wright was scheduled to speak at the same forum, hosted by think tank the Atlantic Council, but he abruptly cancelled his appearance to participate in the White House discussions on Iran. The US is rushing military, naval and air assets to the Middle East, saying the buildup is aimed at enabling Israel to protect itself from Iranian missile strikes. While Israel has targeted the majority of Iranian nuclear sites, it likely will be unable to destroy Iran's Fordow nuclear enrichment facility on its own. Fordow suffered only minor damage in recent days, and Israel appears to believe that leaving the plant operational would mean a failure of a key military goal, said retired general Frank McKenzie, who served as the commander of Middle East-based US forces in 2019-2022. "I'm certain they're going to get around to Fordow as it may be, trying to get us into the conflict," McKenzie said on Monday. "But I don't see how we get in unless we're attacked, and the Iranians have been very careful about not doing that up until now." By Haik Gugarats and Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more