エキスパートへのお問い合わせ
これらの最新情報の配信はいつでも停止できます。お客様の個人情報は、当社のプライバシーポリシーに従い管理されます。
Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

Australia’s Jan-Mar oil, gas search spending increases

  • : Crude oil, Natural gas
  • 24/06/04

Australia's oil and gas exploration expenditure during January-March rose compared with the previous year and quarter, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), after recovering to its strongest level since the Covid-19 pandemic in the previous quarter.

  • Spending for the latest quarter was A$379mn ($253mn), 48pc higher than the revised figure of A$256mn for October-December.
  • This followed higher spending in Western Australia (WA) and Queensland states, while Northern Territory (NT) receipts were slightly down on a year earlier.
  • State governments have funded further exploration drilling, including Queensland that allocated A$21mn for its Frontier Gas Exploration Grant programme on 10 May to be shared by four firms operating in the onshore Bowen basin.
  • Woodside Energy reported global exploration and evaluation (E&A) expenses of $54mn for January-March, up from $52mn a year earlier, while fellow Australian independent Santos spent $59mn compared with $58mn over the same period.
  • The Queensland-based 9mn t/yr Australia Pacific LNG project reported E&A spending up by 30pc on the previous quarter to A$26mn for January-March, while July 2023-March 2024 capital expenditure was up by 90pc on the previous year to A$57mn.
  • Offshore spending comprised 37pc of the total for the quarter, up by 31pc from the previous quarter and 36pc against January-March 2023.

By Tom Major

Australia oil, gas exploration spending (A$mn)
OffshoreOnshoreTotalQueenslandWANT
Jan-Mar '2414223737910917530
Oct-Dec '23801762567412415
Jan-Mar '23851502354811031
q-o-q % ±7835484741100
y-o-y % ±67586112759-3
Source: ABS

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.

26/02/22

Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports

Trump threatens 15pc tariff on all US imports

Washington, 21 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump on Saturday said he will slap a 15pc tariff on all US imports, less than 24 hours after his administration unveiled a 10pc global import tax meant to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday. Trump, in a social media post, said that he "will be, effective immediately, raising the 10pc Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15pc level". Trump cited "a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued" on Friday as a justification for his decision. The White House has yet to release an official record of any decision to implement Trump's 15pc tariff threat. Trump on Friday had to rescind executive orders he signed in the past year that imposed tariffs by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal. Trump, in a separate proclamation on Friday, invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February. Trump's decision on Friday exempted energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports from new import taxes. The 10pc tax, which was to be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — exempted imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Why 10pc or 15pc? It is not clear why Trump announced on Saturday that he would raise the Section 122 tariff to the maximally allowed 15pc, or why his administration initially chose a lower rate, at 10pc. The Trump administration had signaled since mid-January that it would opt for a 10pc tariff under Section 122 authority if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariff. The Trump administration said it was planning to use the 150-day duration of the Section 122 tariffs to rapidly put in place other tariffs targeting specific industries and countries under existing, previously used trade authorities. While Trump said that his Section 122 tariff authority is "legally tested", no other president has invoked this power, and US courts have not weighed on its merits before. But Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision that struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, cited Section 122 five times in his separate opinion issued on Friday. Kavanaugh argued that since Congress delegated to the executive branch broad tariff authority to impose tariffs under Section 122 and multiple other laws, there was no reason to dispute Trump's authority to impose tariffs by invoking economic emergencies. Trump on Saturday called Kavanaugh "my new hero", together with two other justices who voted to uphold Trump's tariffs. Trump continued to lob insults at conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs, calling them "fools" and "lapdogs" of "radical left Democrats". More court action likely Despite criticism of the court's decision, Trump and his top officials have tried to put a positive spin on the ruling by arguing that he will instead impose "stronger" tariffs and raise even more revenue. But his Section 122 tariffs likely will face challenges in courts. The Supreme Court's majority opinion hinged on the finding that Congress did not explicitly authorize Trump to impose taxes, in the form of tariffs, under the legal authority he has cited. Chief justice John Roberts and two of the justices Trump appointed during his first term, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, also referenced the "major questions" doctrine to justify their decision, meaning that Congress, not the White House, should decide on matters of major economic significance. Trump has left little doubt that he plans to bypass Congress in rolling out new tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said on Friday. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. In the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority has shrunk to one, several Republican members have expressed support for the Supreme Court's decision. Trump on Saturday blasted one of those lawmakers, Jeff Hurd (R-Colorado), for "a lack of support, in particular for the unbelievably successful TARIFFS imposed on Foreign Countries and Companies". Trump endorsed Hurd's opponent in the upcoming Republican primary. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA

26/02/21
26/02/21

New Trump tariffs to exempt energy, metals, USMCA

Washington, 20 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump will enact a 10pc tax on all US imports from 24 February to replace the emergency tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court on Friday, but the new tariffs will exempt energy, critical minerals, fertilizers and certain agricultural imports. The new 10pc tax, which will be in effect for 150 days — until 24 July — will also exempt imports eligible for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Trump's proclamation of the new tariff invokes Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows imposing tariffs of up to 15pc to address a balance of payments issue. The Section 122 tariffs will also exempt "natural resources and fertilizers that cannot be grown, mined, or otherwise produced in the US", according to a White House fact sheet. Trump's proclamation also exempts beef, oranges and tomatoes from the 10pc tariff. The new tariff will not apply to steel, aluminum, cars, auto parts and any other products subject to sectoral tariffs Trump's administration has imposed in the past year or plans to tax in the future. Trump directed the US Trade Representative's office (USTR) to immediately launch "Section 301" investigations to justify future tariffs directed at specific, yet unnamed countries. A Section 301 investigation would target a specific country on the grounds that it is discriminating against US exports. China almost certainly would be subject to import taxes under this rubric. USTR launched a Section 301 investigation against China last October, citing its lack of compliance with the 2020 US-China deal. The Supreme Court earlier on Friday threw out most of the tariffs Trump has imposed on nearly all US trading partners, finding his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs under the pretext of economic emergencies exceeded his powers under a decades-old law. Uncertainty ahead The announcement of exemptions for USMCA, energy and other products addresses concerns raised by US importers in the wake of the Supreme Court rulings. The exemption regime is the same established under the emergency tariffs Trump applied since last year. But Trump's choice of the legal avenue for reverse-engineering the now invalid emergency tariffs points to more uncertainty ahead. The administration can impose those tariffs only for a period of 150 days, according to law. Any extensions would require explicit authorization from Congress. "Is the 150 day limit an actual limit? We'll see," Georgetown University law professor Kathleen Claussen said on Friday. No president has previously invoked Section 122 to impose tariffs, and "it's hard to see what would stop him from trying to" unilaterally extend it by a further 150 days, she said during a webinar hosted by WITA - The International Trade Membership Association. The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted on separate resolutions challenging the tariffs Trump has imposed on imports from Canada and Brazil, but they have not passed any tariff legislation. "Congress and the administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks" with respect to tariffs, House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said. But Trump likely would have trouble finding enough votes on Capitol Hill to support his tariffs. "The president must refrain from any further unilateral action on tariffs," House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said. No clarity on refunds Trump on Friday also signed an executive order formally rescinding all his previous tariffs that were imposed by invoking the economic emergency authority that the Supreme Court found to be illegal, including those on Brazil and those threatened against countries doing business with Iran. The US will immediately stop collecting duties imposed under the emergency tariffs. But the order makes no mention of any mechanism to refund the previously collected emergency tariff revenues. Trump said earlier today he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund an estimated $175bn in emergency tariffs. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US high court strikes down Trump's tariffs: Update

26/02/20
26/02/20

US high court strikes down Trump's tariffs: Update

Updates with details throughout Washington, 20 February (Argus) — The US Supreme Court has thrown out most of the tariffs President Donald Trump has imposed on nearly all US trading partners, finding his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs exceeded his powers under a decades-old law. The Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling released on Friday will block Trump's ability to use tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to extract concessions from trading partners and punish countries that reject his demands. The Constitution "did not vest any part of the taxing power in the executive branch," chief justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, backed by two other conservative justices and all three liberal justices. Trump, speaking hours after the court announced its ruling, raged against the justices who overturned his tariffs. "I'm ashamed of certain members of the court for not having the courage to do what's right for our country," Trump said. "It's an embarrassment to the families" of justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, he said. Trump appointed both justices during his first term. The majority opinion noted that "the Framers gave 'Congress alone' the power to impose tariffs during peacetime." Trump "must 'point to clear congressional authorization' to justify his extraordinary assertion of that power," the majority opinion said, adding that "He cannot." Trump scoffed at the opinion. "The court said that I'm not allowed to charge even one dollar under IEEPA", he said and suggested that the six justices were "swayed by foreign interests". What is affected? The Supreme Court decision affects Trump's tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China, where he cited an economic emergency created by the three countries' alleged inaction to stop the flow of fentanyl drugs into the US. The Supreme Court ruling also strikes down Trump's most extensive action — imposing tariffs of at least 10pc on nearly every US trading partner to address the "economic emergency" of persistent US trade deficits. The Supreme Court's decision also will affect the tariffs Trump imposed on imports from Brazil, US government lawyers informed the Court of International Trade last month. Trump cited Brazil's alleged suppression of freedom of speech as a reason to impose tariffs. The decision will not affect tariffs on US imports of steel, aluminum, cars and auto parts, which Trump imposed by citing well-tested legal trade authorities. Next steps Trump said he will sign an executive order later on Friday to impose a 10pc broad tariff on all US trading partners, in place of the struck down IEEPA tariffs. Trump said that action will invoke Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows imposing tariffs of up to 15pc to address a balance of payments issue. But that legal avenue comes with limitations. The administration can impose those tariffs only for a period of 150 days. Any extensions would require explicit authorization from Congress. The Republican-led US Congress has not challenged Trump's tariff authority to date, although lawmakers have increasingly voiced concerns about the effect of tariffs on prices. The House of Representatives and the Senate have voted on separate resolutions challenging the tariffs Trump has imposed on imports from Canada and Brazil, but they have not passed any tariff legislation. "Congress and the administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks" with respect to tariffs, House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said. But Trump likely would have trouble finding enough votes on Capitol Hill to support his tariffs. "The president must refrain from any further unilateral action on tariffs," House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said. Trump said he does not plan to work with Congress on tariffs. "I have the right to do tariffs," he said. "We have a right to do pretty much what we want to do." The Trump administration will also quickly begin the legal process for replicating the IEEPA tariffs with "Section 202" and "Section 301" tariffs, US trade representative Jamieson Greer said, speaking alongside Trump. A "Section 232" authority allows the Commerce Department or US Trade Representative's office to determine whether imports of a product need to be curbed on national security grounds. A Section 301 investigation would target a specific country on the grounds that it is discriminating against US exports. In both cases, the process for imposing tariffs can take months. It also requires public consultation and allows carveouts for the affected US importers. The use of Section 232 and 301 authorities is "a little more complicated" than IEEPA, and "those will also be challenged", Trump's former trade representative Bob Lighthizer told participants at the Argus Americas Crude Summit in Houston on 4 February. Trump's administration will have its work cut out for it in deciding how, and whether, to refund an estimated $175bn in tariffs collected using IEEPA tariffs. Trump in his remarks suggested that the refund process could take years. Hundreds of companies, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum, have already filed lawsuits seeking to recover the tariffs. The effective US tariff rate was around 13pc as of late 2025, up from 2.6pc a year earlier, according to research published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on 12 February. US companies and consumers paid about 90pc of the tariff burden, with only a fraction absorbed by foreign producers, the Fed researchers found. Foreign governments did not immediately react to the US court's tariff decision. "We take note of the ruling," the EU said. "We remain in close contact with the US administration as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling." By Haik Gugarats and Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US tariff refund fight to take 'years': Trump: Update

26/02/20
26/02/20

US tariff refund fight to take 'years': Trump: Update

Adds remarks from President Donald Trump Washington, 20 February (Argus) — President Donald Trump said he is expecting a years-long court fight over whether his administration must refund an estimated $175bn in tariffs the US Supreme Court said on Friday were imposed unlawfully. The Supreme Court, in its 6-3 ruling striking down the tariffs, did not say what should happen to the billions of dollars in tariff revenue that the Trump administration has already collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Trump said ambiguity in the court's ruling over how to handle tariff refunds would mean it would be subject to years of litigation. "What happens to all the money that we took in? It wasn't discussed," Trump said to reporters after the decision. "We'll end up being in court for the next five years." Trump's remarks on Friday in defense of his use of tariffs — and his vow to collect even "more money" by deploying other tariff authorities — suggest that importers seeking to claim tariff refunds could be in for lengthy court battles. The tariff refund process is likely to be a "mess", as the US may be required to refund "billions of dollars" to importers, associate justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a dissent to the Supreme Court's ruling invalidating the IEEPA tariffs. US government attorneys have previously conceded during litigation over the tariffs that importers that have sued would be entitled to refunds. But neither the Trump administration, nor the Supreme Court's ruling, have said how refunds will work for the vast numbers of other parties that have paid the IEEPA tariffs. "There's a whole specialized body of trade law," attorney Neal Katyal said during oral arguments in the tariff case at the Supreme Court, where he was representing importers. "It's a very complicated thing. There's got to be an administrative protest." Hundreds of companies, including refiners Valero and Marathon Petroleum, already have filed lawsuits seeking to recover the tariffs. The court ruling on Friday will have no effect on more traditional tariffs that Trump has imposed on steel, aluminum, auto parts and cars. Complicating any potential refund process in the near-term is the fact that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency responsible for collecting and processing federal tariffs, has been partly shut down since 14 February because of a funding impasse. Earlier this year, CBP updated an electronic refund process that replaced checks, but the agency has yet to say how it will handle IEEPA tariffs. Trump began imposing tariffs under IEEPA last year, an authority he delighted in using. The US had collected $133bn in tariffs under IEEPA as of December, an amount that since then has likely risen to $175bn, according to economists at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School. Losing that revenue — and future tariff revenue — will cut off funds anticipated to total $2 trillion over the next decade. "The country will now be about $2 trillion deeper in the hole," Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget president Maya MacGuineas said. "This is very bad news." US retailers, automakers and other merchants have previously said they were absorbing the cost of some of the tariffs in anticipation of a potential ruling striking them down, while also raising prices to cover their additional costs. But it is unlikely that merchants receiving refunds will directly pass those savings along to customers that already paid inflated prices. "They're not going to go to consumers, right?" former US trade representative Robert Lighthizer told participants at the Argus Americas Crude Summit in Houston, Texas on 4 February. They "are going to go to the middleman." Democrats are already using the outstanding issue of tariff refunds to attack Trump and his Republican allies ahead of the midterm congressional elections in November. They say across-the-board tariffs have driven up the price of everyday goods, undermined alliances with key trading partners and allowed Trump to enrich himself. "Every dollar unlawfully taken must be refunded immediately — with interest," California governor Gavin Newsom (D) said. "Cough up!" By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US-Canada trade war far from over despite ruling

26/02/20
26/02/20

US-Canada trade war far from over despite ruling

Calgary, 20 February (Argus) — Major Canadian industries remain under "punishing" US trade terms, even after the US Supreme Court ruling that throws out most tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump in the past year, according to government and industry groups. Trump does not have the power to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), according to the Supreme Court's decision released on Friday, a blow to his strategy for extracting concessions from trading partners. The US-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) trade agreement has shielded over 98pc of Canada's goods from tariffs, according to Canada's Trade Commissioner Service. But in addition to the now-defunct US tariffs issued last year, Trump used Section 232 of the 1962 US Trade Expansion Act to impose 50pc tariffs on steel and aluminum, 25pc tariffs on automobiles and automotive parts while also increasing tariffs on softwood lumber and derivative products to 45pc. Canadian autoworker union Unifor said the Supreme Court's decision should not be mistaken for a victory. "The ruling does not end the US trade war against Canada," Unifor president Lana Payne said on Friday. Following the ruling on Friday, Trump vowed to replace the tariffs with harsher measures through other means. "Canada should prepare for new, blunter mechanisms to be used to reassert trade pressure, potentially with broader and more disruptive effects," said Canadian Chamber of Commerce president Candace Laing. "This is certainly not the last chapter of this never-ending story." A joint review of USMCA is scheduled for July, where the three countries will either agree to extend the agreement for a new 16-year term, or let it expire in 2036. Canadian prime minister Mark Carney on 28 January said Canada has finished its own internal review of the deal. Canada wants to create growth on both sides of the border but is simultaneously pursuing more trade with "reliable" partners, according to Canada's minister responsible for Canada-US Trade Domonic LeBlanc. Canada's exports to non-US countries hit a record C$21bn in December , up by a staggering 30pc from the same month of 2024. While each trade partner is still relatively small compared to the US, growing exports to the UK, EU and China have partially absorbed some of the declines to the US. Canadian exports to the US tallied C$556bn across 2025, down by 6pc from the C$590bn in full-year 2024. Imports from the US came in at C$474bn in 2025, down 3pc from the C$489bn in 2024. The resulting trade surplus was C$82bn, down 19pc from the C$101bn in 2024. By Brett Holmes Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Argus Refinery Gate Values: A crucial piece of the crude supply chain puzzle

Argus Refinery Gate Values: A crucial piece of the crude supply chain puzzle

Unlock the true value of your crude or choose the best crude for your refinery

Argus Refinery Gate Values

Argus Refinery Gate Values

RGVs help you to unlock the true value of crude across the crude supply chain

Argus Asia Crack Spread Forward Curves

Independent market valuation tool to support investment and trading decisions across Asia’s oil markets.

Argus Carbon

Carbon price benchmarks, policy and project news, and deep analysis, on a daily basis.

Argus Low Carbon Hydrogen Strategy Report

Part Three: Americas. An in-depth analysis of the key sectors, countries and policies enabling hydrogen growth. 
Generic Hero Banner

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