Oil rises as US-EU deal lifts trade optimism
Brent crude futures inched up 22 cents, or 0.32%, to $68.66 a barrel by 0035 GMT while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude was at $65.38 a barrel, up 22 cents, or 0.34%.
The U.S.-European Union trade deal and a possible extension in U.S.-China tariff pause are supporting global financial markets and oil prices, IG markets analyst Tony Sycamore said.
The United States and the European Union struck a framework trade agreement on Sunday that will impose a 15% import tariff on most EU goods, half the threatened rate. The deal averted a bigger trade war between two allies that account for almost one-third of global trade and could crimp fuel demand.
Also, senior U.S. and Chinese negotiators will meet in Stockholm on Monday aiming to extend a truce keeping sharply higher tariffs at bay ahead of the August 12 deadline.
Oil prices settled on Friday at their lowest in three weeks as global trade concerns and expectations of more oil supply from Venezuela weighed.
Venezuela's state-run oil company PDVSA is getting ready to resume work at its joint ventures under terms similar to Biden-era licenses, once U.S. President Donald Trump reinstates authorisations for its partners to operate and export oil under swaps, company sources said.
Though prices were up slightly on Monday, the prospect of OPEC+ further easing supply curbs limited the gains.
A market monitoring panel of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies is set to meet at 1200 GMT on Monday. It is unlikely to recommend altering existing plans by eight members to raise oil output by 548,000 barrels per day in August, four OPEC+ delegates said last week. Another source said it was too early to say.
The producer group is keen to recover market share while summer demand is helping to absorb the extra barrels.
JP Morgan analysts said global oil demand rose by 600,000 bpd in July on year, while global oil stocks rose 1.6 million bpd.
In the Middle East, Yemen's Houthis said on Sunday they would target any ships belonging to companies that do business with Israeli ports, regardless of their nationalities, as part of what they called the fourth phase of their military operations against Israel over the Gaza conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Good, mad and ugly: the US economy's performance under Trump
According to Donald Trump's White House, the US economy is booming, inflation is dead and jobs are surging. A blizzard of economic reports has cast a pall on such claims in recent days. This week's data on Trump's early economic record was mixed – good, mad and ugly – with jobs numbers so weak he reached for the catchphrase he once used to build himself into a reality TV star: you're fired. The picture is chaotic, with robust headline growth in the world's largest economy, wild swings in trade, and a remarkable slowdown in the labor market. For six months, Trump has staged an extraordinary campaign to overhaul the global economy and extract concessions from Washington's allies and rivals by threatening and imposing steep tariffs on their US exports. But the unpredictable, erratic rollout of this strategy has already had bizarre consequences. On the surface, at least, this week's deluge of data opened with good news: the US economy returned to growth in the second quarter, with gross domestic product (GDP) – a broad measure of economic health – expanding at a rate not seen since last summer. But this followed an unexpected contraction in the first quarter, and underlined some more concerning figures, such as a 15.6% drop in private domestic investment. Businesses have been struggling to keep up with the hour-by-hour jerks and jolts on sweeping economies policies. Yes, there was good growth in the last quarter but in the first six months, the US economy grew at a mediocre 1.2%. The Wall Street Journal called it 'the weirdest GDP report ever'. Delve a bit deeper, and you start to see how the US economy is grappling with a series of extraordinary forces as Trump hammers out his trade strategy. Firms spent much of the first quarter waiting for the president to reveal his plans for tariffs: which countries would be targeted, at what rates, and when. They stockpiled, triggering an unprecedented surge in imports that pushed growth into the red. In the second quarter, however, as Trump started to ramp up his economic attacks, imports tumbled at an equally astonishing pace. Net exports – how much a country exports more than it imports – boosted GDP. This is Trump's least favorite chart. Despite his many public demands, threats and attacks, the Federal Reserve has not yet cut interest rates this year. Why? Jerome Powell, the central bank's chair, has repeatedly argued it should wait and see the impact of the president's trade strategy before moving. Fed officials are worried that inflation – despite Trump's claims that it has collapsed on his watch – has actually remained stubborn, and might rise as a result of his tariffs. This has gone down extremely poorly in the White House, where officials are counting down the weeks until Powell's term as chair ends next May. Data released on Friday fundamentally changed the way US policymakers and politicians think about the economy. Until then, many inside the Fed thought everything was broadly ticking over nicely – and Trump administration officials claimed they were overseeing a boom in activity. But July's employment report revealed far fewer jobs were created that month than economists had expected, and revised down estimates for May and June by an astonishing 258,000. Job creation has stalled. 'Look, this jobs report isn't ideal,' Stephen Miran, chairman of the White House council of economic advisers, told CNN, before suggesting that fading uncertainty around trade and fiscal policy would lead to significant improvement. 'It's all going to get much, much better from here,' he added.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Republicans slam Trump's firing of Bureau of Labor Statistics chief
Senior Republican lawmakers are condemning the decision of their party leader, Donald Trump, to fire the leading US labor market statistician after a report that showed the national economy added just 73,000 jobs – far fewer than expected – in July. The disappointing figures – coupled with a downward revision of the two previous months amounting to 258,000 fewer jobs and data showing that economic output and consumer spending slowed in the first half of the year – point to an overall economic deterioration in the US. Trump defended his decision to fire US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner Erika McEntarfer. Without evidence to back his claims, the president wrote on social media that were numbers were 'RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad' and the US economy was, in fact, 'BOOMING' on his watch. But the firing of McEntarfer, who had been confirmed to her role in January 2024 during Joe Biden's presidency, has alarmed members of Trump's own party. 'If the president is firing the statistician because he doesn't like the numbers but they are accurate, then that's a problem,' said Wyoming Republican senator Cynthia Lummis. 'It's not the statistician's fault if the numbers are accurate and that they're not what the president had hoped for.' Lummis added that if the numbers are unreliable, the public should be told – but firing McEntarfer was 'kind of impetuous'. North Carolina senator Thom Tillis, a Republican, said: 'If she was just fired because the president or whoever decided to fire the director just … because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up.' Kentucky senator Rand Paul, another Republican, questioned whether McEntarfer's firing was an effective way of improving the numbers. 'We have to look somewhere for objective statistics,' he said. 'When the people providing the statistics are fired, it makes it much harder to make judgments that you know, the statistics won't be politicized.' According to NBC News, Paul said his 'first impression' was that 'you can't really make the numbers different or better by firing the people doing the counting'. Tillis and Paul were both opponents of Trump's recent economic legislative package, which the president dubbed the 'big, beautiful bill'. But Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, a Republican who supported the legislation after winning substantial economic support for her state, remarked that the jobs numbers could not be trusted – and 'that's the problem'. 'And when you fire people, then it makes people trust them even less,' she said. William Beach, a former BLS commissioner appointed by Trump in his first presidency, posted on X that McEntarfer's firing was 'totally groundless'. He added that the dismissal set a dangerous precedent and undermined the BLS's statistical mission. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Beach also co-signed a letter by 'the Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' that went further, accusing Trump of seeking to blame someone for bad news and calling the rationale for McEntarfer's firing 'without merit'. The letter asserted that the dismissal 'undermines the credibility of federal economic statistics that are a cornerstone of intelligent economic decision-making by businesses, families and policymakers'. The letter pointed out that the jobs tabulation process 'is decentralized by design to avoid opportunities for interference', adding that US official statistics 'are the gold standard globally'. 'When leaders of other nations have politicized economic data, it has destroyed public trust in all official statistics and in government science,' the letter said. Democrats have also hit out at Trump's decision. Vermont senator Bernie Sanders described it as 'the sign of an authoritarian type', and he said the decision would make it harder for the American people 'to believe the information that comes out of the government'. Paul Schroeder, executive director of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, described the president's allegation against McEntarfer as 'very damaging and outrageous'. He said: 'Not only does it undermine the integrity of federal economic statistics, but it also politicizes data which need to remain independent and trustworthy. This action is a grave error by the administration and one that will have ramifications for years to come.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Report: 'Trump accounts' for newborns could grow to $1.9M
Babies born this year could become millionaires before they turn 30, thanks to the 'Trump accounts' established when President Donald Trump signed the 'big, beautiful bill' into law earlier this month. Fox Business reported Wednesday that the one-time government investment of $1,000 per child could grow to as much as $1.9 million by the time that individual turns 28 if the account if fully funded and left untouched. The Treasury assessment found that if a maximum contribution is made each year on the child's birthday through age 17 the account could grow to between $191,500 and $676,400. The money can't be used until the individual turns 18. A child's Social Security number has to be provided in order for parents to sign up. The current law applies to children born between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2028. Democrats have raised concerns about the program due to a comment uttered Wednesday by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. 'In a way, it is a back door for privatizing Social Security,' Bessent said at an event hosted by Breitbart News. 'If, all of a sudden, these accounts grow and you have in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for your retirement, that's a game-changer, too,' he added. On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer gave a floor speech on the matter. 'Yesterday, the Trump administration did something they rarely do – they told the truth. It wasn't Donald Trump, but it was one of his minions. They told the truth,' the New York Democrat said. 'The Trump administration, in this case, was talking about wanting to privatize Social Security.'
