Global Risk Insights

About the Author Global Risk Insights

Red tape, revolution, conflict, cronyism – all of these political factors make doing business in the global arena a challenge for even the best prepared companies. The world’s rapidly changing political environment poses significant obstacles, but also great opportunities for today’s business community. Understanding the nexus between politics and business has never been more important. Global Risk Insights provides expert political risk analysis for businesses and investors. Our goal is to help individuals and corporations analyze and understand how global political events are impacting economic & business climates. GRI provides this analysis so our readers can make better informed decisions about their economic activities in every corner of the world. From Washington, DC to Cairo to Beijing, our contributors are global in reach, local in expertise and have experience across the public and private sectors. Our contributors include current and former members of the US intelligence community, the financial sector, NGOs, and the Obama administration. GRI has been widely referenced by leading publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, Business Insider and many more. GRI contributors have been featured speakers at global energy conferences, Reuters Trading Africa forums and the London School of Economics Political Risk Society. We have also produced custom reports, including one for the Kuwaiti Minister of Finance.

How Long Will The US Crude Oil Export Ban Last?


By Ante Batovic,

As low oil prices continue to put pressure on US producers, the Obama Administration is in no hurry to abolish the 40 year-old oil export ban.

Ever since the US re-established its reputation as a major oil producer, a debate around the oil export ban has been in the focus of Washington’s political life and the oil industry is finally seeing results from years of lobbying to lift the 40-year old ban.

The measure was originally imposed in 1975 as a consequence of the Arab-led embargo on oil exports to the US in 1973. However, given the vast quantities of shale oil the US has begun producing in recent years, it appears that the ban has become an obsolete relic of a time when America was a hostage of its reliance on imported oil.

As a result of intense lobbying, the Republican-controlled Congress will likely pass a bill to repeal the export ban in the next few weeks. Nevertheless, the move will most certainly run aground in the Senate and the White House.

Both Democrats and Republicans have good arguments in support of their positions. The Republican Party has been a long-standing supporter of the oil industry – in particular the upstream industry that was a direct beneficiary of the shale boom.

The massive rise of production, supported by high prices in the late 2000s, presented an excellent opportunity for the US oil explorers to seek new markets and fight the unrestrained market battle outside North America. In geopolitical terms, oil exports would also allow the US to support its allies worldwide, further break OPEC’s global monopoly, and conduct a less restrained foreign policy towards its adversaries, Russia and Iran in particular.


Source: EIA

The opposite camp, led by the Democrats in Congress and the White House and strongly supported by the downstream refinery sector that for years reaped the benefits of the high production margins, makes a case that unlimited exports would directly affect US consumers by increasing petrol prices, and undermine a valuable strategic asset that gives the United States energy independence and security.

Moreover, many argue that the Department of Commerce already has the authority to regulate crude oil exports depending on US strategic interests, that the export of refined products is unrestricted, and that the ban has, in fact, already been relaxed by allowing the export of the ultra light crude-condensate.

At the moment, it seems that those in favor of maintaining a ban are winning the battle. A recent EIA report concluded that unlimited exports would not have a significant impact on either crude oil or petrol prices as both are affected more by global supply and demand swings, rather than the export ban itself.

Similarly, the global oil glut, along with the vanishing gap between the Brent and the US Western Texas Intermediate (WTI) benchmarks, has knocked out the key argument in favour of oil exports – that US crude is no longer competitive on international markets.


In fact, according to a recent Bank of America forecast, WTI prices might actually overtake Brent in 2016 since US production is starting to dwindle under pressure from low prices and global oversupply.

As a result, US refineries may have to start importing light crude in order to compensate for the low output from US shale resources, while Canadian and Mexican refineries might lose incentive to buy oil from US producers and instead turn towards more competitively priced international markets awash with cheap oil. Such a scenario could create a dangerous situation where remaining US producers would be squeezed not only by bellow-breakeven production prices, but also by competition from abroad, creating a double threat for the US shale industry.

Given this environment and current low prices, the crude oil export debate will not become a burning issue for the Obama administration. The question will continue to stir the political debate in Washington, but for now, the ban will most likely stand firmly in place.