Tuesday, April 15, 2025

Canadian car trips to U.S. plunge 32% as Trump threats strain ties

By Bloomberg News
Published: April 10, 2025

Canadian travellers are keeping their distance from the U.S., a country that was once their top destination, as tensions between the two nations grow.

The number of Canadian-resident return trips by automobile from the U.S. plunged 31.9 per cent in March from a year ago, Statistics Canada said Thursday. That’s the third straight monthly decline and followed a 23 per cent drop a month earlier.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s attacks on Canada’s economy and sovereignty have spurred a swell of national pride and anger at the U.S., prompting boycotts of American products and public pushback from prominent Canadians including actor Mike Myers.

U.S. tariffs on imports of Canadian steel, aluminum and vehicles have threatened industries and jobs that rely heavily on trade with American businesses and consumers. The Canadian economy would likely fall into a recession if broader tariffs were to come in to place.

(Statistics Canada)

The U.S. has long been the most popular destination for international trips among Canadians, many of whom take winter refuge in warmer places including Arizona and Florida. Canada consistently posts a services trade deficit with the U.S., mainly because of travel.

The number of Canadian-resident return trips by air from the U.S. also fell, decreasing 13.5 per cent in March from the same month a year ago. On the other hand, return trips by Canadians from foreign countries other than the U.S. rose 9.1 per cent.

Major airlines have already adjusted routes amid softer U.S. bookings. Earlier this month, the Canadian government also issued a new warning for travelers entering the U.S., saying that they should expect scrutiny at the border.

Canadians made up the biggest group of tourists in the U.S. Last year, Canadian visitors generated US$20.5 billion in spending in the U.S., according to the U.S. Travel Association. A 10 per cent reduction in Canadian travel could mean 2 million fewer visits, $2.1 billion in lost spending and 14,000 job losses, the group said.

With assistance from Mario Baker Ramirez.

Randy Thanthong-Knight, Bloomberg News

©2025 Bloomberg L.P.

Avoid U.S. or take burner devices, Canadian executives tell staff

By Bloomberg News
April 15, 2025

Some major public institutions in Canada, including a pension management firm and a leading hospital, are advising staff against travelling to the U.S., marking a greater erosion in the country’s longstanding trust with its neighbour.

The Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, one of Canada’s top pediatric research hospitals, is recommending its staff avoid U.S. trips. “Due to the escalation of issues and volatility in the U.S., CHEO strongly encourages individuals to refrain from travel to that country at this time,” Chief Executive Officer Vera Etches said in a memo seen by Bloomberg News.

A spokesperson for the hospital confirmed the memo had been sent.

Alberta Investment Management Corp., a public pension fund that manages about $180 billion (US$130 billion), asked employees to stop non-essential business trips to the U.S., B r. loomberg reported earlier Monday. Aimco staff can no longer travel on business to attend U.S. conferences or speaking engagements, but they can still make trips for board or investor meetings, according to people familiar with the matter.

CHEO and Ontario’s University of Waterloo have also given advice to employees on how to minimize the information that can be accessed by border agents. If travel is necessary, CHEO staff should log out of hospital applications, ensure laptops don’t include sensitive patient information and change passwords after any inspection, Etches’ memo said.

“Be aware that U.S. customs officers have the right to inspect electronic devices upon entering the U.S. This includes full access to anything on the device, including all social media accounts,” her memo stated. Staff were advised to leave their current devices at home and take a “burner phone” — typically a device with little to no personal data on it.

Members of the University of Waterloo’s arts faculty who travel will be offered “clean” laptops that allow users to access resources securely without information remaining on the laptop, according to excerpts of an April 2 memo seen by Bloomberg that didn’t specifically mention the U.S.

The Canadian government, following the lead of other countries, recently expanded its travel advice to warn residents they should “expect scrutiny” at the U.S. border — including potential searches of mobile phones and other electronic devices.

“The guidance issued from our Arts Faculty Computing Office is consistent with our efforts to improve support for safeguarding Canadian research and applies to all travel, globally,” a spokesperson for the University of Waterloo said in an email.

A French scientist was denied entry into the U.S. apparently because the person had expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration’s research policy, the French government said in March. The U.S. denied that, saying the scientist was carrying an electronic device that contained confidential information from a U.S. laboratory.

With assistance from Layan Odeh, Paula Sambo and Melissa Shin.

Thomas Seal, Bloomberg News

©2025 Bloomberg L.P.

Canada to spare automakers, other sectors from some tariffs on U.S. imports

By The Canadian Press
April 15, 2025

Canada will allow some relief to domestically-based automakers and manufacturers in specific sectors from counter-tariffs provided they meet certain conditions, the finance ministry said on Tuesday.

Canada has slapped a range of counter-tariffs on the U.S. in response to President Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminum, cars and auto parts. Some industry groups and companies have said the counter-measures could be detrimental.

The impact of the trade war between the U.S. and Canada is already evident, with some Canadian companies shedding jobs and some forecasting drops in sales and profits.

Canada-based auto manufacturers will be allowed to import a certain number of U.S.-assembled, free-trade-compliant vehicles if they continue to produce vehicles locally and complete planned investments, the finance ministry said.

“Our counter-tariffs won’t apply if they (automakers) continue to produce, continue to employ, continue to invest in Canada,” said Prime Minister Mark Carney at an election event on Tuesday.

“If they don’t, they will get 25 per cent tariffs on what they are importing into Canada,” he said.

The finance ministry, in its statement, also said the government would provide six-month relief for goods imported from the U.S. that are used in Canadian manufacturing, processing and food and beverage packaging.

This relief will also be extended to companies that import from the U.S. to support public health, healthcare, public safety, and national security objectives.

Reporting by David Ljunggren and Promit Mukherjee; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Rod Nickel

Honda not considering production shift away from Canada: minister, premier

By The Canadian Press
Updated: April 15, 2025

TORONTO — Government officials are pushing back against a report that Honda is considering shifting some Canadian production to the United States in response to tariffs, calling it inaccurate and unconfirmed.READ MORE: Ford says ‘we’re gonna keep Honda here’

Japan’s Nikkei financial newspaper reported Tuesday that Honda is looking to shift enough Canadian CR-V and Civic production to the U.S. so that it can meet 90 per cent of U.S. sales with vehicles produced there, up from its current level of about 70 per cent.

Federal Industry Minister Anita Anand refuted the claim in a social media post.

“I am in close contact with the company, and Honda has communicated that no such production decisions affecting Canadian operations have been made, and are not being considered at this time.”

Anand said she would be meeting with the CEO of Honda Canada, later today for further clarity. The company itself has not yet responded to requests for comment.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said earlier that the head of Honda Canada has told him the report is inaccurate. Ford and his office say Honda told them the company does want to increase production in the U.S., but not at the expense of Canadian production.

Honda’s operations in Alliston, Ont., has about 4,200 employees and produced around 375,000 vehicles in Canada in 2023.

Ford’s office says Honda has assured the province that the Canadian facility continues to operate at full capacity and there are no job impacts on the horizon.

Prime Minister Mark Carney said at a campaign stop that U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff are an attempt to “pull apart” the integration of North America’s auto industry.

“We are seeing some of the impacts in the short term of that with layoffs for some of our automakers, potential shifts in production.”

The U.S. imposed 25 per cent tariffs on all imported vehicles on April 3 including ones produced in Canada despite the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade deal, significantly raising costs for all importers.

Carney said he doesn’t think the Trump administration is taking into account how integrated the industry is and that it will likely have to make permanent the currently temporary tariff exemption on auto parts from Canada.

In an effort to lessen the hit to the auto sector in Canada, the federal government on Tuesday announced that producers that maintain their production levels in Canada would be able to import a certain number of U.S. assembled vehicles into Canada free of tariff counter-measures.

The move comes as Mazda confirmed it was halting production of Canada-bound CX-50 vehicles at its Alabama plant because they’re subject to Canada’s counter-tariffs.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre condemned Donald Trump’s “unfair targeting of Canada” while saying that Canada’s counter-tariffs should remain in place.

Speaking outside a Montreal hospital, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said that Canada should block auto companies such as Honda from removing infrastructure from Canada that public money helped pay for.

He also said Canada should implement rules preventing automakers from selling vehicles in Canada if they don’t have a manufacturing presence here.

“There’s over 40 million Canadians. We have a growing population because of our immigration policies. So this is a desirable market for auto companies to sell. If you’re going to sell a car in Canada, you have to have a footprint in Canada. Meaning you have make cars here or you have jobs here,” Singh said.

Last year, Honda announced a $15-billion commitment to its Canadian operations to create an electric vehicle supply chain in Ontario. The plans, supported by up to $5 billion in public funds, include building an electric vehicle battery plant next to its existing Alliston plant.

By Ian Bickis

With files from Allison Jones, Liam Casey, Kyle Duggan, Nick Murray and David Baxter.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 15, 2025.

Federal Election 2025

Conservative support hits 14-year election day high but Liberals still in the lead: Nanos

Liberals maintain 5% lead.

By Phil Hahn
April 15, 2025
CTV/BNNBLOOMBERG

Poilievre proposes policies to tackle sophisticated scams

Carney announces $15K per Canadian mid-career training initiative

Federal leaders to campaign in Quebec ahead of debate

CTVNews.ca will have exclusive polling data each morning throughout the federal election campaign. Check back each morning to see the latest from a three-day rolling sample by Nanos Research - CTV News and the Globe and Mail’s official pollster.

The Liberals have a five-point lead over the Conservatives on Day 24 of the 36-day federal election campaign.

A three-day rolling sample by Nanos Research ending April 14 has the Liberals at 44 per cent over the Conservatives who are at 39 per cent nationally.

“Conservative support hits a 14 year election day high – but it is not enough," said Nik Nanos, chief data scientist at Nanos Research and the official pollster for CTV News and the Globe and Mail.

“The interesting dynamic is that for the Conservatives, 39 per cent is not enough to win the election. One should not be surprised that the Conservatives feel buoyant and in a winning mood. The last time support for the Conservatives was at this level was in May 2011 when Stephen Harper formed a majority government.”

(Nanos Research)

The New Democratic Party is at 9, followed by the Bloc Quebecois (six per cent), Green Party of Canada (one per cent) and the People’s Party of Canada (two per cent).

“In essence, the Poilievre Conservatives are outperforming every Conservative configuration since Harper’s majority win,” said Nanos, “but faced with a consolidation of votes around the two frontrunning parties comes up short.”
Regional support

Regionally, Liberal support remains strongest in Ontario, Atlantic Canada and Quebec and in B.C.; while Conservative support is the strongest in the Prairies.

In seat-rich Ontario the Liberals are at 51 per cent versus the Conservatives who are up a few points at 40 per cent. The NDP are at seven per cent.

In the Prairies, the Conservatives continue to dominate with 60 per cent of those surveyed backing them, versus 26 per cent for the Liberals; and in a tight race in B.C., the Conservatives have lost their lead at 39 per cent with the Liberals now at 41 per cent.Full coverage of federal election 2025

The Liberals continue their strong lead in Quebec and are at 44 per cent, compared with the Conservatives at 22. The Bloc Quebecois are in second place at 24 per cent.

The Liberal lead in the Atlantic has now increased to 60 per cent of those surveyed backing them, versus 33 per cent for the Conservatives, who have lost several points. The NDP are far behind in the region at six per cent.

Who is preferred prime minister?

When it comes to whom Canadians prefer as prime minister, Carney has a comfortable lead with a 16-point advantage, with 49 per cent choosing him over Poilievre, who sits at 33 per cent

(Nanos Research)

By gender and age

A gender breakdown of Nanos tracking shows women continue to be far more likely to vote Liberal than men. Fifty-five per cent of women surveyed said they would support the Liberals, compared with 27 per cent who’d vote Conservative. Eleven per cent of women back the NDP.

Meanwhile, the number of men who said they would vote Liberal is at 33 per cent, compared with 51 for the Conservatives. Only seven per cent of men surveyed would vote NDP.

Conservatives’ lead among voters under 35 is shrinking with just a one per cent advantage over Liberals in that age range, while the Liberals continue to do significantly better among older voters. Fifty-one per cent of those aged 55 and up said they would back the Liberals, versus 34 for the Conservatives.

For those 35 to 54, Conservatives are at 45 per cent, versus 41 per cent for the Liberals.

Methodology

CTV-Globe and Mail/Nanos Research tracking survey, April 12 to 14, 2025, n=1,285, accurate 2.7 percentage points plus or minus, 19 times out of 20.

Phil Hahn

You Can’t LNG Your Way Out of a Trade Deficit

By Tsvetana Paraskova - Apr 11, 2025

Some traditional U.S. energy buyers, such as Japan, South Korea, and the EU, have signaled that they may be willing to buy more American oil, LNG, or coal.
Higher energy imports from the trade partners could dent some of the U.S. trade deficits, but they will by no means fix or erase these.
Commitments and contracts to buy more U.S. energy will not necessarily spare any buyer from tariffs.

U.S. President Donald Trump insists that American buyers boost purchases of U.S. energy goods to reduce their large trade surpluses with America.

Some traditional U.S. energy buyers, such as Japan, South Korea, and the EU, have signaled that they may be willing to buy more American oil, LNG, or coal to appease the President who has fixated on fixing the massive trade deficits America runs with most countries.

Higher energy imports from the trade partners could dent some of the U.S. trade deficits, but they will by no means fix or erase these.

For most countries, energy is the only viable increase in imports from the United States. Japan, South Korea, and the EU, for example, have expressed readiness to boost their LNG or oil imports from America.

They did so immediately after President Trump’s inauguration. Nonetheless, tariffs followed. They are now paused, but the threat of more rounds of tariffs across the board is still very much present—just look at the whiplash trading and carnage on Wall Street.

Even if buyers commit to significantly boosting their imports of U.S. oil and gas, the deficits will remain. On the other hand, U.S. exporters cannot provide the energy commodities needed to significantly reduce America’s trade deficits.

A case in point is President Trump’s idea that the European Union should pledge to buy $350 billion worth of energy from the United States if it wants tariff relief.

The European Union is ready to commit to buying more liquefied natural gas from the United States if that would appease President Trump and make him reconsider tariffs, the EU’s energy commissioner Dan Jørgensen said this week.

However, $350 billion worth of LNG is roughly equal to some 40 million tons of the super-chilled fuel. That’s more than half of the EU’s total LNG imports last year of some 75 million tons, much of which came from America anyway, per the bloc’s statistics agency, Eurostat.

Commitments and contracts to buy more U.S. energy will not necessarily spare any buyer from tariffs. Taiwan, traditionally strongly supported by the U.S. in its quest to shake off Chinese influence and continue to be a democracy, saw this firsthand.

Taiwan was slapped with a 32% tariff, which has been halted for 90 days, although it had just made some big commitments to invest in the U.S., including in U.S. energy projects. Last month, Taiwan’s state-held oil and gas company CPC Corporation signed a letter of intent to invest in the $44-billion Alaska LNG export project and buy LNG from it as part of a move to bolster its gas supply and energy security.

Unfortunately for Taiwan, in any negotiations with deficit-fixated President Trump, the value of its exports to the U.S. – predominantly semiconductors – vastly outstrips the value of the goods it imports from America.

Taiwan wasn’t spared from one of the highest now-suspended tariffs despite being the only early committed investor in the huge Alaska LNG project, while Japan and South Korea are hesitating.

This doesn’t give much assurance to other energy buyers that their commitments would satisfy President Trump.

And even if Japan, for example, were to dramatically raise its oil exports from the U.S. to account for 10% of all its crude imports, up from 1.6% last year at WTI at $60 per barrel, the volumes would be worth about $4.8 billion, Reuters columnist Clyde Russell estimates. But Japan’s trade surplus with the U.S. was more than 14 times higher than this—at $68 billion in 2024, he notes.

Moreover, Japan already imports U.S. LNG, representing nearly 10% of all its LNG purchases. It isn't easy to increase this amount due to Japan’s long-term supply deals with other LNG exporters and the simple logistics and availability of U.S. LNG exports.

U.S. trade partners will now look to negotiate their way out of hefty tariffs during the 90-day pause. They can only hope for reasonable talks and deals, and that the U.S. and the world will avoid recession in the escalating U.S.-China trade war that could crush global energy demand and the U.S. ability to sustain its oil production at current levels.

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com

Why Falling Oil Prices Are Not Always Good News

JUST ASK ALBERTA

By Robert Rapier - Apr 11, 2025

The United States' shift to a net oil exporter means that falling oil prices now negatively impact trade and can signal economic trouble, unlike in the past when lower prices meant savings on imports.
Current drops in oil prices are often due to anticipated recession rather than an abundance of cheap energy, indicating a potential economic downturn and impacting energy sector investments.
The energy sector is a significant driver of the US economy, and sharp declines in oil prices can lead to job losses, reduced tax revenues, and broader economic consequences despite potential benefits for some sectors.

Not long ago, falling oil prices were widely celebrated in the United States. Cheaper gasoline meant more disposable income for consumers, lower transportation costs for businesses, and a boost to sectors that rely on oil as an input. But in 2025, that simplistic view no longer holds up. The economic equation has changed—dramatically.

From Net Importer to Net Exporter

In 2005, the U.S. was importing a staggering 12.5 million barrels of oil and finished products per day. At that time, a drop in oil prices translated into major savings on our import bill. The net benefits to the economy were clear. But in 2025, the picture is reversed. Thanks to the fracking boom, the U.S. is a net exporter of about 2.3 million barrels per day of oil and refined products. When oil prices fall, the U.S. now loses more on exports than it saves on imports.

That means falling oil prices today actually worsen the U.S. trade deficit—the very thing that tariffs are supposedly being used to fix. There’s irony in the fact that some of the loudest advocates for tariffs—arguing they’ll fix our trade imbalance—are also cheering falling oil prices. They’re cheering a trend that undercuts our export strength and broadens the deficit.

Look at the Signal, Not Just the Price

It’s also critical to consider why oil prices are falling. Prices drop when supply increases, demand decreases, or markets anticipate economic trouble. In 2020, oil prices famously collapsed—briefly even turning negative—not because the economy was booming, but because the COVID-19 pandemic had triggered a global shutdown. That price crash was a harbinger of deep economic pain.

Fast forward to today: oil prices are falling again, not because we’re swimming in cheap energy, but because market sentiment is shifting toward the possibility of a recession. This isn’t good news—it’s a flashing warning sign.

If economic conditions deteriorate further, investments in energy infrastructure and new production will slow. The same people chanting “drill, baby, drill” may find themselves wondering why rigs are being idled, capital expenditures are being slashed, and jobs are being cut. When prices fall below profitability thresholds, producers pull back—and that has ripple effects across the broader economy.

Energy Is a Pillar of the U.S. Economy

While consumers do benefit from lower gas prices at the pump, it’s important to understand that the energy sector is now a major driver of the U.S. economy. It supports millions of jobs, anchors the economies of entire states, and is a major contributor to GDP. When oil prices fall sharply, tax revenues decline, employment shrinks, and corporate earnings in the sector suffer.

Yes, certain sectors—like transportation and some manufacturers—may benefit from lower input costs. But the net impact on the U.S. economy is no longer straightforwardly positive.

A Nuanced Picture

So, the next time someone claims that falling oil prices are “good for the economy,” consider the fuller picture. In 2005, maybe that was true. In 2025, it’s a lot more complicated.

We should be cautious about using yesterday’s playbook to understand today’s economy. The energy world has changed and so has America’s place in it. A drop in oil prices may still provide relief at the gas pump—but as a signal of what’s happening across the broader economy, it’s a red flag we ignore at our peril.

By Robert Rapier

Energy Crisis Grips Samoa

By Felicity Bradstock - Apr 12, 2025

Samoa declared a 30-day state of emergency due to widespread and prolonged power outages.
The crisis was caused by generator failures, cable faults, storm damage, and increased demand, exposing the grid's vulnerability.
The nation urgently needs investment in renewable energy and transmission infrastructure to achieve its 70% renewable target by 2031 and prevent future crises.

The South Pacific Island of Samoa has been facing an energy crisis as it plunged into darkness this month. Samoa continues to be highly dependent on fossil fuel imports to meet most of its energy needs, including power generation. Much of its power infrastructure is susceptible to severe weather and other challenges, which puts the country at risk of blackouts during cyclones. However, the recent energy emergency has demonstrated that the nation’s power infrastructure is even more vulnerable than previously thought, suggesting the need for greater investment in new transmission infrastructure and the rollout of more renewable energy capacity.

Samoa, or the Samoan Islands, is an archipelago in Polynesia, with a population of less than 220,000. In recent weeks, it has fallen into an energy crisis, with the country’s Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mata’afa declaring a 30-day state of emergency at the beginning of April due to continued power outages across the islands. The power cuts have caused significant disruption to daily life and businesses, hitting the economy hard. Meanwhile, the withdrawal of aid for several Pacific Islands under the U.S. Trump administration will likely further hinder the region’s economic growth.

The government is racing to find alternative energy sources, with five temporary power generators expected to help provide short-term relief. The blackouts, which have significantly affected Samoa’s main island of Upolu, where the capital Apia is located, are affecting tourism, one of the islands’ main sources of income. While some major resorts have backup generators, smaller businesses have been left to suffer. In addition, hospitals, and schools have had to survive with intermittent power for several weeks.

Fiame said last week that the crisis could reduce the country’s gross domestic product by up to 16 percent this year because of the “severe disruptions” to public services and economic activity. Over 90 percent of businesses in Samoa have experienced regular outages, with 70 percent reporting disruptions several times a week, according to a March Samoa Chamber of Commerce and Industry survey. This has led to significant losses in revenue.

Samoans have grown used to the blackouts associated with severe weather events, but are less accustomed to the prolonged power outages that they have experienced in recent weeks. The crisis has been caused by several technical issues, which include the failure of key generators at the Fiaga power station on Upolu Island, a fault in a primary underground transmission cable, and widespread damage from a recent storm, coupled with the significant increase in power demand over the past two years. The government’s power provider the Electric Power Corporation (EPC) has been forced to carry out power rationing measures on Upolu since 26th March following the failure of three key generators.

While Upolu‘s power is expected to be recovered by the end of April, the country may face more blackouts over the coming months, with permanent generators not expected to be available until August. Meanwhile, those working in the power sector are racing to repair the broken cable lines. There have been significant spillover effects from the blackouts, with some of Samoa’s major manufacturers battling to fix key machinery that was damaged by power surges or unexpected outages.

The Samoan community spokesperson Tupa'imatuna FotuoSamoa Jackson said that more needs to be done to establish a reliable energy network in Samoa. “There is a significant impact on business … continued disruptions can have long-term impacts for many in our community,” explained Jackson. “While it’s welcome news that there is consideration for relief, such as importing generators, you need to think broader, not just relying on hydropower but incentivising other means of power generation nationally.”

The government of Samoa aims to achieve a 70 percent renewable energy share by 2031, as outlined in its Low Emissions Development Strategy 2021-2030. However, it is not clear whether Samoa will be able to achieve this goal given the current speed of renewable energy deployment.

In 2019, Samoa carried out two small hydro projects aimed at supplying 20 percent of the Island’s energy demand. One plant was built on Upolu and the other on Savai’i. The project was paused during the Covid-19 pandemic but, according to the EPC, the plants are expected to provide enough renewable energy to power Samoa wholly with green sources within the next seven years. The project has been supported by funding from donors, including the New Zealand Government, the European Union, and the Asian Development Bank.

While there are high hopes for the future of renewable energy in Samoa, the country’s current situation is less optimistic. Samoa is facing an energy emergency with no quick fix available. While temporary diesel generators are expected to provide short-term relief, greater funding is required to strengthen the country’s energy infrastructure and make it less vulnerable to severe weather and other challenges.

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

Iraq and Turkey Boost Cooperation With Landmark 2.4 Million Bpd Pipeline

By Cyril Widdershoven - Apr 14, 2025

The Iraqi Oil Ministry has announced a new subsea oil pipeline deal with Italian offshore contractor Micoperi and Turkish firm Esta.
This pipeline, with a capacity of 2.4 million bpd, will support increased exports from Iraq’s southern ports.
Turkiye is looking to expand cooperation with Iraq in electricity exports too.

Is the Iraq-Türkiye Cooperation Set to Skyrocket?

Iraq’s struggling oil and gas sectors may be on the verge of a breakthrough as cooperation between Baghdad and Ankara intensifies. According to Turkish media, Türkiye is advancing plans to expand its energy collaboration with Iraq significantly. Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Alparslan Bayraktar, recently announced that proposals are underway to construct new oil and natural gas pipelines stretching from Basra to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

In tandem, Ankara and Baghdad are exploring increased volumes of natural gas trade and enhanced electricity cooperation. Despite Iraq's ramping domestic gas production and pushing toward a zero-flaring strategy, the country remains reliant on imported gas—especially in light of potential reductions in Iranian supplies critical for its power sector. Bayraktar revealed that both countries have reached a preliminary agreement involving crude oil and gas pipelines, interim Turkish gas deliveries to Iraq, and a cross-border electricity transmission line.

Meanwhile, the two nations are progressing on the ambitious “Development Road” project—a significant logistics initiative to connect Asia and Europe. This infrastructure corridor will run through Iraq and link directly to Türkiye, with Ankara pledging a $17.9 billion investment. Türkiye’s strategic objective is clear: Strengthen its role as a regional hub by integrating ports, railways, energy, and logistics into one cohesive infrastructure strategy.

The Development Road, stretching from Basra in southern Iraq to Haditha in the north and connecting to Silopi in southeastern Türkiye, offers significant mutual benefits. The route bypasses the politically sensitive Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) areas, ensuring more stable energy transport. From Silopi, resources would be piped to Ceyhan, Türkiye’s central oil and gas export terminal. Türkiye aims to incorporate additional barrels from Basra to increase pipeline capacity. The Basra-Haditha pipeline agreement signed in January 2025 envisions a 2.25 million barrels per day (bpd) capacity, marking a significant step forward in regional energy flows.

Bayraktar also noted that Türkiye’s current gas infrastructure could deliver around 5 billion cubic meters to Iraq. Initially, this supply will focus on meeting Iraq’s power sector demands, but longer-term plans include reversing the flow to bring Iraqi natural gas to Türkiye and beyond. To facilitate this, discussions are underway on building a supplementary gas pipeline from Silopi to Ceyhan.

Energy isn’t the only area of expanding cooperation. Ankara has also announced plans to double electricity exports to Iraq, backed by constructing a new transmission line. This comes at a critical time for Iraq, which has faced mounting energy shortfalls following the lifting of U.S. sanctions that had previously allowed the import of Iranian electricity.

While both countries appear aligned on their strategic goals, several challenges persist. Chief among them is the unresolved dispute over the Iraq–Türkiye Pipeline (ITP), which has halted Iraqi oil exports to Türkiye for over two years due to diplomatic and financial disagreements. The ongoing dispute between Baghdad and the KRG over revenue sharing and control of oil resources adds further complexity. International oil and gas companies operating in the KRG region also withhold cooperation until outstanding fiscal and contractual issues are addressed.

Since March 2023, exports via the ITP have been suspended following a Paris arbitration court ruling in favor of Baghdad. The court found that Türkiye had breached a 1973 agreement by permitting the KRG to export oil independently in 2014. This ruling has intensified calls for a reassessment of Turkish-Kurdish relations. KRG President Nechirvan Barzani recently met with Turkish Defense Minister Ya?ar Güler during the Antalya Diplomacy Forum to discuss PKK-related tensions and regional developments. There are indications that the KRG may support efforts to dismantle PKK bases in Iraq in exchange for broader economic cooperation with Türkiye.

Meanwhile, Iraq is actively working to boost its export infrastructure. The Iraqi Oil Ministry has announced a new subsea oil pipeline deal with Italian offshore contractor Micoperi and Turkish firm Esta. This pipeline, with a capacity of 2.4 million bpd, will support increased exports from Iraq’s southern ports.

However, Iraq faces significant headwinds. Trump-era tariffs, global recession fears, and rising OPEC+ production exert downward pressure on oil prices. These developments come at a precarious time for Iraq’s rentier economy, which relies on hydrocarbons for over 90% of its revenue.

By Cyril Widdershoven for Oilprice.com

Here’s What’s In The New Rough Draft U.S.-Iran Nuclear Deal

By Simon Watkins - Apr 14, 2025

High-level negotiations between U.S. and Iranian officials in Muscat focused on a new nuclear deal.
The deal includes several new provisions, such as indefinite weapons inspections in Iran and access to financial records of companies linked to the IRGC.
Iran is pushing for more sanctions relief and guarantees regarding Israel’s military presence in the region.

The temperature in downtown Muscat over the weekend was 35 degrees Celsius, but for the swarms of high-level officials from the U.S. and Iran buzzing around busily discussing a new ‘nuclear deal’ it probably felt a lot hotter than that. On the one side was the delegation from the U.S. who found themselves in direct talks with their Iranian counterparts largely because their President threatened military action against the Islamic Republic if they did not attend. Washington’s core aim is to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons and to prevent Israel from launching a massive attack on the country which could ignite a war across the Middle East. On the other side were the Iranian negotiators whose presence attested to the depth of their country’s economic malaise, leaving the government facing increased public discontent and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) unable effectively spread Iran’s version of Islam around the world. Tehran’s core aim is to avoid being gain sanctions relief to rebuild its economy and influence via the IRGC and its proxies, and to avoid a huge military assault by Israel, backed by the U.S. So, what was discussed and what will happen next?

“The deal on the table was – and remains – the same in essence as the deal [U.S. President Donald] Trump wanted to put in place after he withdrew the U.S. from the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or colloquially ‘the nuclear deal’] in May 2018,” a senior source who works closely with the European Union’s (E.U.) security complex exclusively told OilPrice.com over the weekend. “However, the new rough draft includes two additional points which [Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin] Netanyahu managed to get DT [Donald Trump] agreeing to: first, the indefinite presence of weapons inspectors in Iran, and second, complete access to the banking and financial records of Iranian banks and 47 companies registered in 16 countries that are the most closely associated with the IRGC and related operations,” he added. Over and above these two key new additions, three ‘core concepts’ that underpinned the original 2015 JCPOA remain in the new rough draft. As analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order, the first was the safety and security of U.S. troops from Iranian or Iranian-sponsored attacks around the globe; the second was the safety and security of Israel; and the third is that Iran will never seek to manufacture, acquire, deploy or use any nuclear weapons. Twelve specific clauses were geared towards these aims and remain broadly in place, although some have been toughened up, and one has been dropped (‘to withdraw all forces under Iran’s command throughout the entirety of Syria’). Two – dealing with activities connected to various of Iran’s proxies have been incorporated into other clauses.

The first was to declare to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) a full account of the prior military dimensions of its nuclear programme and permanently and verifiably abandon such work in perpetuity. The second is to stop enrichment and never pursue plutonium reprocessing, including closing its heavy water reactor. The third is to provide the IAEA with unqualified access to all sites throughout the entire country. The fourth is to end its proliferation of ballistic missiles and halt further launching or development of nuclear-capable missile systems. The fifth is to release all U.S. citizens as well as citizens of U.S. partners and allies. The sixth is to end support to Middle East terrorist groups. The seventh is to respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi government and permit the disarming, demobilisation and reintegration of Shia militias. The eighth is to cease regular military support and support from the IRGC and related entities for terrorists and militant partners around the world. And the ninth is to end its threatening behaviour against its neighbours, including its threats to destroy Israel.

For its part, Tehran’s negotiators also began discussions over the weekend in Oman with elements discussed not just with Trump’s team back in 2018 but also those which had been discussed with the team of Barack Obama that put together the original JCPOA in 2015. It is interesting to note here that Trump’s original template for a harder line nuclear deal with Iran after the U.S.’s withdrawal from its in 2018 was virtually identical to this original tough version that former President Obama wanted to implement, as also detailed in full in my latest book. At those points – and now – Iran wanted three main items considered. First, compensation by the U.S. for the damage done by sanctions to its economy. Second, immediate access to all of Iran’s frozen deposits in Europe, the Far East and everywhere else. Third, guarantees that Israel does not continue to increase its intelligence and military presence in the region to threaten the security of Iran. “The first of these can be negotiated around easily enough by stressing that any substantive sanctions relief given from the U.S. to Iran once a new deal has been agreed will ultimately compensate for monies lost as a result of previous sanctions,” the E.U. source told OilPrice.com over the weekend. “The third one too should be easy enough to get around, as the U.S. can say it will do its best to ensure that Israel abides by the spirit of any new agreement, although ultimately it cannot dictate Israeli foreign policy on any country,” he added. “The second condition is more difficult, as Europe is not included in these talks [in Oman], which was a tactical mistake by the U.S., I think,” he underlined.

The reason for this is that the European members of the P5-plus-1 Group that signed the 2015 JCPOA on 14 July – France, UK, ‘plus’ Germany (the other signatories being the U.S., Russia and China) – are the only ones capable of implementing the additional ‘snapback sanctions’ on Iran ahead of their expiry date of 18 October this year. These comprise a comprehensive range of UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions on Iran that were lifted from the Iranian economy when the 2015 JCPOA was signed. These would include multiple new financial sanctions on companies and individuals and increased surveillance by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). The FATF has 40 active criteria and mechanisms in place to prevent money laundering -- an activity that is vital to the IRGC’s activities across the world. It also has nine criteria and mechanisms in place to do the same for the financing of terrorism and related activities -- again, a core of the IRGC’s role in promoting Iran’s brand of Islam around the globe. The FATF also has swingeing powers to wield against individuals, companies, or countries who transgress any of its standards and is extremely aggressive in using them by degrees, depending on whether the sanctioned entity is on its ‘grey’ or ‘black’ list. “The U.K. and France are tuned in to demand an immediate triggering after the [October] deadline, perhaps because they have more accurate information about the stockpile of Iran’s enriched material, increased number of Russian nuclear scientists sent to Iran between June 2024 and February 2025 and the three top missile experts from Pyongyang who have been in Iran for 140 days or so,” said the E.U. source. “We are told that the progress on weaponisation know-how has been expedited to critical levels,” he underlined.

It is clearly in Iran’s interests to have as many of the current sanctions against it removed. This would allow it time to rebuild its economy and to re-finance the activities of the IRGC and its proxies. However, during every previous round of direct and indirect talks on creating a new JCPOA, the sticking point has been the insistence of the U.S. and its allies for Iran to agree to adhering to the principles of the FATF. The underlying aim here was to erode the foundation of the regime established in the 1979 Islamic Revolution and its ongoing power as exercised through the guardians of that revolution – the IRGC – and Iran knows this. Consequently, said the Iran source, the negotiators from Tehran will push for any measures that threaten this scenario not to be present in any new JCPOA. Failing that, the Iranian team is likely to keep negotiations going until past the 18 October deadline for the snapback of UNSC sanctions by the European signatories of the original nuclear deal. “This may also give them [the IRGC] some breathing space to reorganise and regroup ahead of any new major Israeli attacks against the nuclear facilities,” the E.U. source said. “Typically Iran thinks by delaying the negotiations they may be able to get more concessions from the U.S. -- a tried and tested approach that has failed for the past forty-five years or so,” he concluded.

By Simon Watkins for Oilprice.com

Could Japan’s Nippon Steel Acquire U.S. Steel Under Trump?

By Felicity Bradstock - Apr 11, 2025

President Trump has ordered a review of Nippon Steel's proposed $14.9 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel, which was previously blocked by President Biden.
The review comes amidst trade tensions with Japan and potential new tariffs, adding uncertainty to the deal's outcome.
The decision follows a year of delays and opposition from labor unions, with the deal's fate now pending CFIUS's recommendation and potential court rulings.

After over a year in the making, the takeover of U.S. Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel was thwarted by former President Joe Biden in January due to security concerns. Now, President Donald Trump is considering whether to revitalise the deal, even as he introduces tariffs on Japanese imports.

In December 2023, Nippon Steel announced it planned to acquire U.S. Steel for $14.9 billion as part of its plan to expand its U.S. assets. It was expected to make Nippon the third-largest global steel producer, contributing around 86 million tons per year of global production. The deal was expected to close in the second or third quarter of 2024. Nippon beat the bids of several other steel producers, including ArcelorMittal and Cleveland-Cliffs.

At the time, the United Steelworkers opposed the sale to Nippon, suggesting it was “the same greedy shortsighted attitude that has guided U.S. Steel for far too long.” The union planned to lobby regulators over the purchase, citing national security concerns. The takeover was also met with concern by several politicians, who were worried about issues such as domestic employment.

Following the announcement, Nippon Steel faced staunch opposition from labour unions and politicians and in September 2024, the deal was put on hold for nine months while it was investigated. Concerns centred around the fact that U.S. Steel provides essential commodities to the automotive, construction, and defence industries and the taking over of the firm by a Japanese company could put national security at risk, forcing the U.S. to rely on a foreign country for critical resources.

While United Steelworkers and others opposed the deal, there was also significant support for the purchase to go ahead. Nippon Steel was expected to invest in the modernisation of U.S. Steel’s infrastructure and operations. It would also likely cut production costs, improve operational efficiency and help the company compete more effectively with major international steel firms, such as India’s Tata Steel and China’s Baowu Steel. Also, as Japan is an ally of the United States, many believed the national security concerns were unfounded.

In January this year, former President Biden blocked the Nippon-U.S. Steel deal, citing security concerns and the need to preserve a strong, domestically owned steel industry. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) quickly extended the deadline for Nippon Steel to abandon the acquisition bid from the 2nd February to 18th June 2025.

Nippon Steel responded in disagreement with the decision. The firm’s Vice Chairman, Takahiro Mori, wrote in a New York Journal opinion piece, “Biden’s decision to block our acquisition of US Steel appears to be driven more by electoral politics than genuine national security concerns. Japan is a close ally of the United States, and this raises a fundamental question: Will major companies from allied nations be treated as partners or political pawns when they seek to invest in America?”

The two steel companies launched two joint lawsuits in January, one against Biden and senior administration officials and another accusing USW and Cleveland-Cliffs of using their longstanding alliance to obstruct the deal through regulatory and political channels.

In April, President Trump ordered CFIUS to conduct a review of the proposed acquisition to determine“whether further action in this matter may be appropriate.” CFIUS has been given 45 days to submit a recommendation on whether the deal should go ahead. Late on Monday, the Trump administration and the two firms requested that the appeals court pause their litigation until 5th June to await the CFIUS verdict. Following the presidential action, U.S. Steel’s stock jumped over 16 percent, closing at $44.49 a share on 7th April. Nippon Steel shares rose by nearly 10 percent in Tokyo the following morning.

Nippon Steel released a statement saying, “We have been confident from the outset that an objective, fact-based review of our proposed partnership with U.S. Steel will show that it strengthens American economic and national security.” Meanwhile, a U.S. Steel spokesperson said the company is looking forward “to continuing to work closely with President Trump and his administration to finalise this significant and important investment.”

Trump had previously opposed the deal, but after a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba in February, the U.S. president appeared to be more open to Nippon’s involvement in U.S. steel. However, in a phone call with Trump, Ishiba failed to convince the U.S. president to agree to a tariff exemption for Japan, although the two leaders did agree to further discuss the issue. The imposition of tariffs could harm investment by Japanese firms in the U.S., according to Ishiba, which brings the Nippon-U.S. Steel deal into question. Whether the acquisition will go ahead, after over a year of delays and doubt, will depend on several factors, including the CFIUS recommendation, the appeals court decision, and the final decision on U.S. tariffs on Japan.