US imposes fresh sanctions targeting Iran oil trade, Hezbollah
A network of companies run by Iraqi-British national Salim Ahmed Said has been buying and shipping billions of dollars worth of Iranian oil disguised as, or blended with, Iraqi oil since at least 2020, the department said.
"Treasury will continue to target Tehran's revenue sources and intensify economic pressure to disrupt the regime's access to the financial resources that fuel its destabilizing activities,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said.
The U.S. has imposed waves of sanctions on Iran's oil exports over its nuclear program and funding of militant groups across the Middle East.
Reuters reported late last year that a fuel oil smuggling network that generates at least $1 billion a year for Iran and its proxies has flourished in Iraq since 2022.
Thursday's sanctions came after the U.S. carried out strikes on June 22 on three Iranian nuclear sites, including its most deeply buried enrichment plant Fordow. The Pentagon said on Wednesday the strikes had degraded Iran's nuclear program by up to two years, despite a far more cautious initial assessment that had leaked to the public.
The U.S. and Iran are expected to hold talks about its nuclear program next week in Oslo, Axios reported.
Said's companies and vessels blend Iranian oil with Iraqi oil, which is then sold to Western buyers via Iraq or the United Arab Emirates as purely Iraqi oil using forged documentation to avoid sanctions, Treasury said.
Said controls UAE-based company VS Tankers though he avoids formal association with it, Treasury said. Formerly known as Al-Iraqia Shipping Services & Oil Trading (AISSOT), VS Tankers has smuggled oil for the benefit of the Iranian government and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is designated by Washington as a terrorist organization, it said.
The sanctions block U.S. assets of those designated and prevent Americans from doing business with them.
VS Tankers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Iran's mission in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The U.S. also sanctioned several vessels that are accused of engaging in the covert delivery of Iranian oil, intensifying pressure on Iran's 'shadow fleet,' it said.
The Treasury Department also issued sanctions against several senior officials and one entity associated with the Hezbollah-controlled financial institution Al-Qard Al-Hassan.
The officials, the department said, conducted millions of dollars in transactions that ultimately benefited, but obscured, Hezbollah.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
-Elon-Musk-looks-on-during-a-news-conference-with-US-President-Donald-Trump-in-the-Oval-Offic.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
What are the challenges to launching Musk's new ‘America Party'?
Just over a month since he departed the White House, Elon Musk claims to have formed a new political party — but even the world's richest person could face some insurmountable challenges with this new venture, experts warn. Despite leading the Department of Government Efficiency in Donald Trump 's administration for four months, Musk has publicly split from the president as of late, most recently criticizing the 'big, beautiful bill.' On Saturday, the tech billionaire announced on X, the platform he owns, that he was forming a 'new political party' - the America Party. Musk has detailed how this new party would infiltrate the country's long-standing two-party system. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' he explained. 'Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.' Fellow billionaire Mark Cuban and Trump's former White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci have encouraged the idea. But history and institutional barriers suggest it would be unlikely that the 'America Party' would succeed, experts say. 'Third-party movements in the US have generally arisen out of some sort of set of deep-seated grievances,' Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University, told CNN. 'It was not just some wealthy person who's decided they wanted to start a third party.' The Democratic and Republican parties aren't the only ones to exist — but history shows alternative party candidates fail to gain traction in presidential elections. Even prominent Independent Senator Bernie Sanders caucuses with Democrats. Jill Stein, for example, served as the Green Party's presidential candidate in 2012, 2016, and 2024. In 2024, she earned 628,129 votes, but no electoral votes. Then there's Ross Perot, who ran as an independent in 1992 and 1996. During his first run, he garnered 19 percent of the popular vote — but still didn't earn an electoral vote. 'Perot did amazingly well … but he didn't come in first in any state, and the way the electoral college works, that means he's got nothing,' Hans Noel, a professor at Georgetown University researching political parties and ideology, told the Washington Post. The most successful third-party candidate in U.S. history was none other than a former president: Theodore Roosevelt. After serving in office as a Republican, he ran again in 1912 as a Progressive Party candidate, garnering 88 electoral votes. He lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. More recently, in 1968 George Wallace, who ran as an American Independent candidate, earned 45 electoral votes; Republican Richard Nixon won 301. Following Musk's announcement, some also pointed to more recent examples of third-party runs, like the 'No Labels' party, which failed to find a centrist candidate to take on Donald Trump or Joe Biden in the 2024 presidential race. Republican strategist Melik Abdul responded to Musk's tweet: "'No Labels' was designed to do the very thing you're suggesting. It, too, was a dud.' Abdul added: 'You have the resources to buy influence but lack the charisma and political gravitas to lead a [movement].' But Musk's resources alone may not be enough to secure a new political party due to donation limits. 'One very wealthy individual cannot capitalize a new national political party, the way he might start a business, because of federal contribution limits,' former FEC chair Lee Goodman told CNN. 'The prospect of a wealthy founder seed funding a national party to participate in federal elections around the country is not feasible in the current regulatory system.' Musk may have spent more than $250 million helping Trump get elected during the last cycle. But different rules apply to political parties, Bradley Smith, another former FEC chair, told the outlet: 'You can fund super PACs all you want. But you can't fund a political party, as a strange part of American law.' Abdul's remark that Musk lacks charisma may also serve as a barrier to building a new party. Recent indicators suggest he's not too popular. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent took a dig at Musk's new party announcement, telling CNN's Dana Bash on Sunday: "The principles of DOGE were very popular. I think if you looked at the polling, Elon was not." A Quinnipiac Poll taken last month shows just 30 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the tech billionaire while 57 percent have an unfavorable opinion of him. Among Republicans 62 percent viewed Musk favorably. Some predicted the billionaire could split the GOP vote. "Third parties do not tend to have a long lifetime in American politics. Often, they are bugbears to one particular party, and this might be the case with Musk's proposed America Party," Dafydd Townley, who teaches at the University of Portsmouth, told Newsweek. "If anything, the new party would likely split the Republican vote, potentially resulting in a Democrat-dominated House of Representatives, at least in the short term, due to the winner-takes-all electoral system." If anything's certain, the rocket-building Musk doesn't shy away from a challenge. He appears confident in fighting what appears to be an uphill battle. In response to an X user posting about how he could 'break the two-party stranglehold,' Musk replied: 'Not hard tbh.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Scott Bessent spars with CNN host over whether Trump's tariffs count as trade deals
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reignited his feud with Elon Musk on Sunday during an interview with CNN, where the Cabinet secretary also quibbled with a host over whether the president had made the '90 deals in 90 days' he had promised the American public. Bessent's comments come as the administration is set to hit many U.S. trading partners this month with 'reciprocal' tariffs following the end of a 90-day pause. During that period, the White House discussed the types of trade agreements Donald Trump and his team were set to negotiate with China, the U.K., Canada, and dozens of other countries, which the president has accused of engaging in unfair trade practices. The majority of those deals did not materialize, except for a handful of exceptions. Many issues continue to divide U.S. and Chinese officials, but some export controls instituted by Beijing were lifted after an agreement was inked in late June. On Sunday, Bessent echoed a familiar line from the administration: the insistence that the tariffs Trump was imposing in the absence of formal agreements with foreign governments constituted the 'deals' promised by the White House. 'The president has a reputation, a self-described dealmaker, so why haven't we seen the kind of deals that he promised in the last 90 days?' asked CNN's Dana Bash. "Again, he didn't promise this,' countered Bessent. In reality, it was Trump's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, who set this goal during a Fox Business interview. 'And when we send out the 100 letters to these countries, that will set their tariff rate. So we're going to have 100 done in the next few days,' he continued. Bash responded: 'But that's not a deal. That's a threat.' 'No, that's the level,' said the Treasury secretary. 'That's the deal.' 'President Trump's going to be sending letters to some of our trading partners saying that if you don't move things along, then on August 1st, you will boomerang back to your April 2nd tariff level.' The White House initially announced a slate of 'Liberation Day' tariffs in early April, setting individualized tariff rates for dozens of U.S. trading partners, including some as high as 50 percent. Markets immediately engaged in a sell-off, prompting panic and a reversal by the president. But the end of Trump's 90-day pause is fast approaching, with the official deadline on Wednesday, July 9. So far, administration officials have not indicated that another pause is likely. Administration officials are currently negotiating with the EU, which is among the U.S. trading partners still seeking to avert a massive tariff hike. Before the president was re-elected, the average tariff on goods from the EU imported to the U.S. was just 2 percent. Trump has threatened to mark up tariffs as high as 50 percent. Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Germany's Berenberg bank, said the most likely outcome of the trade talks is that 'the US will agree to deals in which it takes back its worst threats of 'retaliatory' tariffs well beyond 10 percent'. Bessent's support of tariffs was one of several issues that led to his conflict with Elon Musk, the Tesla CEO and former DOGE overlord who joined the administration as a temporary appointee in January. The two argued frequently and even had one physical confrontation, according to news reports, and emerged as sharp personal rivals in addition to being political foes. On Sunday, the Treasury secretary made it clear that there was no love lost between the two men after Musk, who left the administration in May, publicly blew up at the president in a series of Twitter posts about a legislative package Trump had endorsed — the 'big, beautiful bill.' Musk was, and still is, a furious critic of the bill's deficit spending, which is projected to add trillions to the national debt over 10 years, and threatened last week to fund primary challenges against Republicans who voted for the legislation. His threats did not work, and it passed with only a few Republicans dissenting. 'The principles of DOGE were very popular. I think, if you looked at the polling, Elon was not,' Bessent told CNN.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Property wars break out on lavish island after man 'cuts down his neighbor's tree to give himself an ocean view'
A property feud has erupted on a wealthy Massachusetts island after a brazen neighbor allegedly chopped down someone's 50-year-old trees to carve out an 'ocean view' for himself. Patricia Belford, 80, has accused Jonathan Jacoby, 55, of breaking onto her Nantucket property and cutting down 16 trees without her permission in February. According to a $1.4 million lawsuit, Jacoby removed decades-old cherry, cedar and Leyland Cypress trees from the home 'with the specific purpose of improving the ocean view from his own property' - which he is trying to sell. Belford and Jacoby are next-door neighbors sharing a property line, but most of the trees taken down were far from that border, Belford says. Jacoby has been accused of doing the unauthorized landscaping to make his stunning 4,491-square-foot beach compound at 3 Tautemo Way more appealing to potential buyers. In its Zillow description, the contemporary home, listed at just under $10 million, has 'sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean' and Hummock Pond. Hummock Pond, a salt-water pond on the southwestern part of Nantucket, and Cisco Beach are just fractions of a mile away from Tautemo Way. And the only things inhibiting those 'sweeping views' of the nearby bodies of water were apparently the trees the Belfords planted in the 1970s. When the trees were slashed, Matt Erisman, the property manager of Belford's $4.2 million home, notified the Nantucket Police Department (NPD), prompting an investigation. Belford herself does not live at the property, located at 1 Tautemo Way, but in an assisted living facility, according to the Nantucket Current. Jacoby's former landscaper, Krasimir Kirilov, voluntarily told investigators Jacoby was responsible. In a police statement submitted as lawsuit evidence, Kirilov said Jacoby reached out to him for help cleaning up landscaping work he was going to do on his own. Once he realized the work was not on Jacoby's property, Kirilov refused the offer. 'The NPD concluded that Jacoby entered the property knowingly and willfully and cut the trees for his own personal benefit,' the lawsuit reads about the ongoing investigation. Nantucket Police Lieutenant Angus MacVicar told the Nantucket Current there are pending charges against Jacoby. Belford, who is suing on behalf of her family's trust, argued the trees added not only privacy, but value to her home - with a nursey estimating they each could cost thousands of dollars. 'Based on the number of trees removed, the replacement cost alone exceeds $486,000,' the document, filed on June 23, states. 'This does not account for the historic value, loss of screening, increased noise, reduction in overall property value. 'Jacoby's actions were not only economically damaging but also emotionally devastating for Belford.' Nantucket has become a hot spot for wealthy vacationers looking for a beach getaway. The average home price on the ritzy Massachusetts island was roughly $4.5 million as of May 2025, according to Only about 14,200 people live on Nantucket year-round - compared to the more than 80,000 that swarm the island for the summer, according to US Census data. It is unclear if Jacoby lives in Nantucket fulltime, and his lawyer did respond to the Current's request for comment. 'The way I feel is that I am confident once all of the facts and evidence have been presented, that justice will be served,' Erisman told the outlet. 'However, much of what has been taken from the Belfords is irreplaceable, and it's sickening.'
