Showing posts with label Petroleum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Petroleum. Show all posts

Thursday, May 29, 2025

Subsidiarity Economics 2025. The Times more or less locally, Part 6. “Rarely has an economic policy been repudiated as soundly, and as quickly, as President Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs.”

Rarely has an economic policy been repudiated as soundly, and as quickly, as President Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs.

The Wall Street Journal, May 13, 2025.

May 14, 2025

Wyoming Delegation Not Supportive Of Trump's Idea Of Tax Hike For The Rich

So Barrasso and Lummis separate from Trump on this?

Neither one of them are actually Trump supporters in terms of their personal beliefs, but have adopted his views for political survival in Wyoming, which is fanatically pro Trump.  Everyone is well aware that the budget is in a crisis stage and at some point soon the US needs to have a balanced budget. That can only be done through raising taxes, and they know it.

Additionally, taxing the wealthy will not hurt the economy, and everyone knows that.  Tax rates for the wealthy were much higher in prior decades with no ill effect on the economy.

A matter of critical interest.

Wyoming Is The Second Most Expensive State For Beer Lovers

And one Wyomingites just won't believe

Reaction To Trump Tariffs Helps Push Wyoming Oil Prices To Four-Year Low

This is an absolute fact, but if you follow the story on Facebook, a lot of Wyomingites just won't believe it. That would mean Trump is hurting the local economy, and they can't accept that. . . at least not yet.

Oil is at $62.02/bbl this morning.

May 15, 2025

Given the magnitude of the tariffs, even at the reduced levels announced this week, we aren’t able to absorb all the pressure given the reality of narrow retail margins. 

Walmart CEO Doug McMillon.

Oil is at $61.60/bbl.

May 17, 2025

Thanks to Republican mishandling of the economy, specifically increasing debt, Moody's downgraded the economy from Aaa to Aa1.

The GOP can't seem to grasp that you actually have to pay for the government.

New Jersey transit engineers are on strike.

Trump's "Big Beautiful Budget Bill", which would add $4T in debt, failed 16-21 in the House Budget Committee.

The irony is that those voting against it want more spending cuts, but only increased taxes will address this developing crisis.

Let's put this in bold, as people just don't seem to grasp it.

THE UNITED STATES CAN'T "CUT" ITS WAY OUT OF ITS BUDGET CRISIS.  IT MUST RAISE TAXES.

Cont:

It's really time to stop calling Trump a businessman:

He's a real estate developer. Clearly he's otherwise a business illiterate.

May 19, 2025

The Trump deficit expanding budget bill made it out of committee on a 17-16 vote with those who were to vote no, voting present.

This bill will be a disaster for already an already irresponsible Federal government.  Taxes need to be raised on income, particularly upper incomes to make the budget balance and this insanity cease.

May 22, 2025

The House of Representatives passed by a margin of one a funding bill that will swell the deficit disastrously while making cuts in Medicaid and food stamp while adding to border security.  Taxes will be cut, when they should be raised, and will irrationally be eliminated on tips and overtime.

Trump, who speaks oddly at best, has called this his "big beautiful tax bill"

Walmart is cutting 1,500 corporate jobs.

The stock market is crashing because of the bad tax bill. The bond market is flat.

West Texas crude is back down to $60.96.

Cont:

The "tip" exemption appears to be for "cash tips".

FWIW, bar tenders tend to get cash tips, but restaurant workers less and less.  FWIW, cash tips are notoriously underreported anyway, as they're impossible to keep track of.

May 23, 2025

Hageman’s Budget Vote Critical As House Passes One Big Beautiful Act 215-214


The next one is interesting:

Republicans are for state's rights, except when the state exercises the right to do something they don't like.

Likewise, the GOP is for local control, but really isn't.

At Lusk Town Meeting, Locals Say Wind Projects Have Ended Friendships

Developer Of Controversial Casper Gravel Mine Wants To Renew State Leases

Trump:


What does the "thank you for our attention to this matter" intend to do?

May 29, 2025

Federal trade court blocks Trump's emergency tariffs, saying he overstepped authority

That the power wasn't there was obvious.  Now the question is whether the Trump administration will obey the Court.

Last edition:

Subsidiarity Economics 2025. The Times more or less locally, Part 5. The Roller Coaster Edition.

Friday, May 16, 2025

The Cost Meter. A Trade War Index.


April 5, 2025

Petroleum:  $61.78/bbl (Wyoming crude become unecomic at $59.00/bbl).

Coal:  Coal 99.40/ton

Coffee (USd/Lbs) 372.60.

Levis at Penny's:  $55.65.

April 7, 2025

Petroleum:  60.80/bbl.

One of Trump's minions cited this, fwiw, as evidence that inflation isn't kicking in and things are fine.  On the contrary, the price of petroleum is dropping on fears of a recession.  A recession reduces oil consumption.

Indeed, because of the bizarre nature of tariffs, trading prices on some things in general may go down, while the price rises for Americans.

April 8, 2025

From the Wall Street Journal yesterday:

It's about $61/bbl this mooring.

cont: 

$58.10. Below marketability in Wyoming.

April 9, 2025

Oil opening this morning:

56.03

April 10, 2025

Despite the strong relief rally on Wednesday, following President Trump’s 90-day pause of tariff hikes on most countries except China, the U.S. benchmark oil price is now lower than the breakeven for the shale industry to profitably drill a new well.

 OilPrice.com

West Texas is $59.16/bbl.

April 11, 2025

U.S. reached a new record-high of $6.23 per dozen. 

Oil is opening at 60.10/bbl.

May 2, 2025

Oil and Natural Gas.

WTI Crude 58.57 -0.67 -1.13%

Brent Crude 61.49 -0.64 -1.03%

Murban Crude 61.41 -0.93 -1.49%

Natural Gas 3.502 +0.023 +0.66%

A note, below $59.00, US crude doesn't move.

The inflation rate right now is 2.39% with the tariffs about to hit.

May 6, 2025

WTI Crude • 58.28 +1.15 +2.01%

Brent Crude •  61.39 +1.16 +1.93%

Murban Crude • 62.20 +2.24 +3.74%

Natural Gas • 3.594 +0.044 +1.24%

Coal:  98.50/ton

Coffee:  388.45

Levis:  $55.65.

May 16, 2025

WTI Crude 61.95 +0.33 +0.54%

Brent Crude 64.88 +0.35 +0.54%

Natural Gas 3.345 -0.017 -0.51%

Coal:  99.00/ton

Coffee (USd/Lbs) 373.79


Tuesday, May 13, 2025

Subsidiarity Economics 2025. The Times more or less locally, Part 5. The Roller Coaster Edition.

 


April 10, 2025

On April 2, Trump, using bogus emergency powers, imposed an insane tariff regime on nearly every country in the world, save for Russia, based on trade imbalances, showing a juvenile understanding of that topic at best.

This caused markets to crash and the economy to head to what might optimistically have been a recession, and perhaps more realistically a depression.

Yesterday the tariffs were paused for 90 days, save for the ones on China, the latter of which has retaliated with a 104% tariff on US goods.

Earlier tariffs imposed on Canada and Mexico, and a 10% tariff imposed on everyone, remain.

This policy is still disastrous, simply less so than the really steep tariffs that Trump had claimed were permanent, and then which turned out to perhaps not be after foreign holders began to dump US bonds.

And so here we are.  

Congress has the power to end this madness as it has delegated these completely bogus emergency powers to the Red Caesar, but it won't as the national GOP is now some sort of strange Peronist/Authoritarian party dedicated to extremism.  The roller coaster ride isn't over, it's just on some lower bends.  The whims and beliefs of one man now hold the global economy in peril.

Highly relevant to Wyoming:

Despite the strong relief rally on Wednesday, following President Trump’s 90-day pause of tariff hikes on most countries except China, the U.S. benchmark oil price is now lower than the breakeven for the shale industry to profitably drill a new well.

 OilPrice.com

Cont:

Speaker of the House Johnson had to pull the budget bill from consideration due to right wing concerns over the deficit, which are rightly placed.  Apparently as of this morning he has enough votes to advance the bill.

Cont:

After massively rallying late yesterday, stocks are once again dropping this morning.

Cont:

The Dow closed 1,000 points down.

Oil fell to $60.23/bbl. after having gone up a little during the day at first.

The decline is starting to set in, which not only makes it a bear market, but which shows that long term prospects for the economy are fading.

April 11, 2025

China raised its tariffs on US goods to 125%.

April 13, 2025

The Trump administration is now excluding certain electronics like smartphones and laptops from reciprocal tariffs.

April 14, 2025

The weekend shows made it clear that the reprieve on electronics tariffs is temporary, and more directed ones will be coming.

Regarding the weekend shows:

A Disturbing Trifecta

On a US industry that may in fact feel quick relief in their sector from the tariffs, a headline from the Tribune:

GULF SHRIMPERS CHEER ON TRUMP’S TARIFFS SEAFOOD INDUSTRY 

Cheap imports cause US industry to lose 50% of market value

April 17, 2025

Wyoming hospital districts face ‘painful’ funding drop with property tax cut: The state’s 15 hospital districts are among hundreds of entities that will see tax revenue declines. It’s a blow to an already fragile sector, health care representatives say.

It’s Not Known If The 6-10 UW Students Who Had Visas Revoked Are Still On Campus

April 19, 2025

Mack Trucks is laying off between 250 and 350 workers at its Lehigh Valley Operations center in Pennsylvania, citing economic uncertainty caused by Trump’s tariffs.

President Trump’s tariff war isn’t going well, with market ructions and evidence of a slowing economy. So it was probably inevitable that Mr. Trump would demand that the Federal Reserve ride to his rescue by cutting interest rates…The problem for Mr. Trump is that Mr. Powell spoke the truth. Tariffs are a tax, which means higher prices for tariffed goods.

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board.

April 22, 2025

Donald Trump started the day be rebuking businessmen who lack faith in his actions on the econmy.

By the end of the day, the economy rebuked him.

Few think administration’s negotiations with trade partners will yield results soon enough to ease the strain

 

Stocks End Sharply Lower. The Dow Is on Pace for Worst April Since 1932.

The Wall Street Journal and Barrons.

Most AmeriCorps staff members were placed on leave.

cont:

Trump has been attacking Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, who was appointed by Trump in his first legitimate administration.  It's now being theorized that this is so that Trump will have a scapegoat for crashing the economy, which is occurring. The statute of limitations on blaming Biden has basically expired.

cont: 

The Institute of International Finance (IIF) reported today that Trump’s policies mean the U.S. economy may fall into a Recession and shrink by 0.8% in Q3 and 0.3% in Q4 2025 with inflation rising to 4.6% by the end of the year.

The result would be stagflation.

April 23, 2025

After threatening Jerome Powell for a few days, Trump backed off.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday that the ongoing tariffs war against China is unsustainable and he expects a “de-escalation” in the trade war.

Trump suggested he was going to cut China's tariffs substantially. China has not reached out to negotiate.

Classic Trump cycle.  Do something stupid. . . something bad happens. . . claims problem is solved and things will be fine. . . reverses decision.

April 24, 2025

Elon Musk is going back to Tesla, which has taken a hammering since Musk became the chief doggy of DOGE, for the most part.  He apparently will still have some association with the kennel, according to his statement, but my guess is that will end pretty quickly.

Whether Tesla will also end, given its economic slide, is another question. With Musk barking at liberals, and Tesla's being sort of a liberal status symbol at one time, it may simply decline into oblivion.

Texas, which has been following Trump in all things Trumplike, just created its own DOGE.

April 29, 2025

Amazon announced that it is adding the price of tariffs to the cost of items.

D'uh.

Interestingly, it's going to post the price of the tariffs on the items it lists.

Carline Levitt, on behalf of the administration, declared "This is a hostile and political act by Amazon", expressing a view which apparently shows that the Administration is either completely dim on how pricing works, or seeking scapegoats for a policy that it nows is going to hit in May and be massively unpopular.  It'd rather you not know, apparently, although people will soon figure that out anyhow.

April 30, 2025

Trump called Bezos and Amazon backed off.

UPS is laying off 20,000 drivers in anticipation of reduced Amazon shipments.

The economy shrank last quarter. Trump blamed President Biden.

May 1, 2025

Here's the current price of oil:

WTI Crude 56.88

Brent Crude 59.75

This is way below the Wyoming price marketability figure.  If this holds, this will result in the crash of Wyoming oil.

Trump's economic propogandists keep pointing to the price of oil going down, which it has been, as proof of his tariffs working. They are working to depress the price of oil, but because the price of oil is an economic indicator.  When it goes down, it means there's an anticipated or actual low demand, usually.  Production gluts are also a cause, but that's not the cause here.

Prices went down on everything, I"d note, during the Great Depression, once it was really rolling.

This is bad news, for Wyoming in particular.

DOGE cuts to AmeriCorps ‘a devastating blow to the state of Wyoming’: “What I struggle with most is that this is somehow an act of efficiency,” one stakeholder told WyoFile, adding that $40 is returned for every federal dollar invested in service in Wyoming.

In the 100 Day Cabinet meeting in which Trump's loyal retainers heaped praise upon him, the Dear Leader noted sacrifice in that maybe children this Christmas shall get only two dolls, instead of 30.

Let them eat cake. 

May 3, 2025

There is no question that trade can be an act of war. It has led to bad things — the attitudes that it has brought out. In the United States, we should be looking to trade with the rest of the world. And we should do what we do best and they should do what they do best. That’s what we did originally. We were good at producing tobacco and cotton 250 years ago and we traded it. We want a prosperous world but eight countries with nuclear weapons, including a few that I would call quite unstable, I do not think it’s a great idea where a few countries say ‘hahaha we won,” and other countries are envious.

Warren Buffet today.

May 5, 2025

And now we're going to hit foreign movies with a 100% tariff, apparently.

May 6, 2025

Governor sees ‘opportunity’ for Wyoming in Trump tariff war. Economist sees ‘disaster.’: State's trona and soda ash industry is particularly vulnerable to losing global buyers, while Gordon sees potential bright spots for mineral commodities, as well as new manufacturing.

May 7, 2025

If the large increase in tariffs that have been announced are sustained, they are likely to generate a rise in inflation, a slow down in economic growth and an increase in unemployment.

Jerome Powell.

May 8, 2025

The US and the UK have apparently reached a trade deal, although the details are murky.

May 12, 2025

The US and China have agreed to cut tariffs for 90 days.

This is causing a stock market rally, but the roller coaster nature of this is once again notable.

John Barrasso was on Meet The Press yesterday and cited gas prices as evidence of Trump's economic wisdom, when in fact its ironically the opposite.

May 13, 2025

A 90 day pause in the trade war with China was agreed upon with each side dropping their tariffs by 115%.

The price of oil climbed to $62.48/bbl.

The order associated with this:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2483), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby determine and order:

Section 1.  Background.  In Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025 (Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Practices that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits), I declared a national emergency arising from conditions reflected in large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits, and imposed additional ad valorem duties that I deemed necessary and appropriate to deal with that unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security and economy of the United States.  Section 4(b) of Executive Order 14257 provided that “[s]hould any trading partner retaliate against the United States in response to this action through import duties on U.S. exports or other measures, I may further modify the [Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States] to increase or expand in scope the duties imposed under this order to ensure the efficacy of this action.”

In Executive Order 14259 of April 8, 2025 (Amendment to Reciprocal Tariffs and Updated Duties as Applied to Low-Value Imports From the People’s Republic of China), and Executive Order 14266 of April 9, 2025 (Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates To Reflect Trading Partner Retaliation and Alignment), pursuant to section 4(b) of Executive Order 14257, I ordered modifications of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) to raise the applicablead valorem duty rate for imports from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) established in Executive Order 14257, in recognition of the fact that the State Council Tariff Commission of the PRC announced that it would retaliate against the United States in response to Executive Order 14257 and Executive Order 14259.

Section 4(c) of Executive Order 14257 provided that, “[s]hould any trading partner take significant steps to remedy non-reciprocal trade arrangements and align sufficiently with the United States on economic and national security matters, I may further modify the HTSUS to decrease or limit in scope the duties imposed under this order.”  Since I signed Executive Order 14266, the United States has entered into discussions with the PRC to address the lack of trade reciprocity in our economic relationship and our resulting national and economic security concerns.  Conducting these discussions is a significant step by the PRC toward remedying non-reciprocal trade arrangements and addressing the concerns of the United States relating to economic and national security matters.

Pursuant to section 4(c) of Executive Order 14257, I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate to address the national emergency declared in that order by modifying the HTSUS to suspend for a period of 90 days application of the additional ad valorem duties imposed on the PRC listed in Annex I to Executive Order 14257, as amended by Executive Order 14259 and Executive Order 14266, and clarified in the Presidential Memorandum of April 11, 2025 (Clarification of Exceptions Under Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025, as Amended), and to instead impose on articles of the PRC an additional ad valorem rate of duty as set forth herein, pursuant to the terms of, and except as otherwise provided in, Executive Order 14257, as modified by this order. 

Sec. 2.  Suspension of Country-Specific Ad Valorem Rate of Duty.  Effective with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 14, 2025, all articles imported into the customs territory of the United States from the PRC, including Hong Kong and Macau, shall be, consistent with law, subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 10 percent subject to all applicable exceptions set forth in Executive Order 14257 and the Presidential Memorandum of April 11, 2025.  This ad valorem rate of duty of 10 percent reflects (i) the modification of the application of the additional ad valorem rate of duty on articles of China (including articles of Hong Kong and Macau) set forth in Executive Order 14257, by suspending 24 percentage points of that rate for an initial period of 90 days, and the retention of the remaining ad valorem rate of 10 percent on those articles pursuant to the terms of said order; and (ii) the removal of the modified additional ad valorem rates of duty on those articles imposed by Executive Order 14259 and Executive Order 14266.

Sec. 3.  Tariff Modifications.  In recognition of the intentions of the PRC to facilitate addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 14257, the HTSUS shall be modified as follows:

Effective with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 14, 2025: 

(a)  heading 9903.01.25 of the HTSUS shall be amended by deleting the article description and by inserting “Articles the product of any country, except for products described in headings 9903.01.26–9903.01.33, and except as provided for in heading 9903.01.34, as provided for in subdivision (v) of U.S. note 2 to this subchapter . . . . . . ” in lieu thereof;

(b)  heading 9903.01.63 of the HTSUS shall be amended by deleting “125%” each place that it appears and by inserting “34%” in lieu thereof;

(c)  subdivision (v)(xiii)(10) of U.S. note 2 to subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS shall be amended by deleting “125%”, and by inserting “34%” in lieu thereof; and

(d)  heading 9903.01.63 and subdivision (v)(xiii)(10) of U.S. note 2 to subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS are hereby suspended for a period of 90 days beginning at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 14, 2025.

Sec. 4.  De Minimis Tariff Decrease.  To ensure that the reduction in duties pursuant to section 2 of this order is made fully effective and the purpose of Executive Order 14257, as amended, is not undermined, I also deem it necessary and appropriate to:

(a)  decrease the ad valorem rate of duty set forth in section 2(c)(i) of Executive Order 14256 of April 2, 2025 (Further Amendment to Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China as Applied to Low-Value Imports), as modified by Executive Order 14259 and Executive Order 14266, from 120 percent to 54 percent;

(b)  retain in effect the per postal item containing goods duty of 100 dollars in section 2(c)(ii) of Executive Order 14256, as modified by Executive Order 14259 and Executive Order 14266, that has been in effect since 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 2, 2025, unless and until otherwise modified by a subsequent executive action, notwithstanding the increase contemplated effective June 1, 2025, pursuant to Executive Order 14256, as modified by Executive Order 14259 and Executive Order 14266; and

(c)  modify the HTSUS, effective with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 14, 2025, as follows:

(i)   subdivision (w) of U.S. note 2 to subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS shall be amended by deleting “120 percent”, and by inserting “54 percent” in lieu thereof; and

(ii)  subdivision (w) of U.S. note 2 to subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS shall be amended by deleting “, and before 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on June 1, 2025.  For merchandise entered for consumption on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on June 1, 2025, the applicable specific duty rate is $200 per postal item containing such goods.”

Sec. 5.  Implementation.  The Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the United States Trade Representative, as applicable, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Senior Counselor to the President for Trade and Manufacturing, and the Chair of the United States International Trade Commission, are directed to take all necessary actions to implement and effectuate this order, consistent with applicable law, including through temporary suspension or amendment of regulations or notices in the Federal Register and adopting rules and regulations, and are authorized to take such actions, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA, as may be necessary to implement this order.  Each executive department and agency shall take all appropriate measures within its authority to implement this order.

Sec. 6.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Commerce.

                               DONALD J. TRUMP

Trump issued an odd order attempting to address the price of prescription drugs.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  The United States has less than five percent of the world’s population and yet funds around three quarters of global pharmaceutical profits.  This egregious imbalance is orchestrated through a purposeful scheme in which drug manufacturers deeply discount their products to access foreign markets, and subsidize that decrease through enormously high prices in the United States.

The United States has for too long turned its back on Americans, who unwittingly sponsor both drug manufacturers and other countries.  These entities today rely on price markups on American consumers, generous public subsidies for research and development primarily through the National Institutes of Health, and robust public financing of prescription drug consumption through Federal and State healthcare programs.  Drug manufacturers, rather than seeking to equalize evident price discrimination, agree to other countries’ demands for low prices, and simultaneously fight against the ability for public and private payers in the United States to negotiate the best prices for patients.  The inflated prices in the United States fuel global innovation while foreign health systems get a free ride.

This abuse of Americans’ generosity, who deserve low-cost pharmaceuticals on the same terms as other developed nations, must end.  Americans will no longer be forced to pay almost three times more for the exact same medicines, often made in the exact same factories.  As the largest purchaser of pharmaceuticals, Americans should get the best deal.

Sec. 2.  Policy.  Americans should not be forced to subsidize low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States.  Americans must therefore have access to the most-favored-nation price for these products. 

My Administration will take immediate steps to end global freeloading and, should drug manufacturers fail to offer American consumers the most-favored-nation lowest price, my Administration will take additional aggressive action.

Sec. 3.  Addressing Foreign Nations Freeloading on American-Financed Innovation.  The Secretary of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative shall take all necessary and appropriate action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in any act, policy, or practice that may be unreasonable or discriminatory or that may impair United States national security and that has the effect of forcing American patients to pay for a disproportionate amount of global pharmaceutical research and development, including by suppressing the price of pharmaceutical products below fair market value in foreign countries.

Sec. 4.  Enabling Direct-to-Consumer Sales to American Patients at the Most-Favored-Nation Price.  To the extent consistent with law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) shall facilitate direct-to-consumer purchasing programs for pharmaceutical manufacturers that sell their products to American patients at the most-favored-nation price.

Sec. 5.  Establishing Most-Favored-Nation Pricing.  (a)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and other relevant executive department and agency (agency) officials, communicate most-favored-nation price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to bring prices for American patients in line with comparably developed nations.

(b)  If, following the action described in subsection (a) of this section, significant progress towards most-favored-nation pricing for American patients is not delivered, to the extent consistent with law:

(i)    the Secretary shall propose a rulemaking plan to impose most-favored-nation pricing; 

(ii)   the Secretary shall consider certification to the Congress that importation under section 804(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) will pose no additional risk to the public’s health and safety and result in a significant reduction in the cost of prescription drugs to the American consumer; and if the Secretary so certifies, then the Commissioner of Food and Drugs shall take action under section 804(j)(2)(B) of the FDCA to describe circumstances under which waivers will be consistently granted to import prescription drugs on a case-by-case basis from developed nations with low-cost prescription drugs;  

(iii)  following the report issued under section 13 of Executive Order 14273 of April 15, 2025 (Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting Americans First), the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission shall, to the extent consistent with law, undertake enforcement action against any anti-competitive practices identified within such report, including through use of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as appropriate;

(iv)   the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other relevant agencies as necessary, shall review and consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fueling the global price discrimination;

(v)    the Commissioner of Food and Drugs shall review and potentially modify or revoke approvals granted for drugs, for those drugs that maybe be unsafe, ineffective, or improperly marketed; and

(vi)   the heads of agencies shall take all action available, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, to address global freeloading and price discrimination against American patients.

Sec. 6.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii.) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The Department of Health and Human Services shall provide funding for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

                               DONALD J. TRUMP

Related threads:

The Cost Meter. A Trade War Index.

Labels: 

Last edition:

Subsidiarity Economics 2025. The Times more or less locally, Part 4. The Mutually Assured Tariff Destruction and Wacky Math Edition.

Friday, April 18, 2025

Wednesday, April 9, 2025

"Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241" vs Reality.

This isn't going to do anything, but it throws a bone to Western populist voters who seriously believe that there's some sort of conspiracy against coal.

It's also captioned in Trump-Moron-O-Speech, but that's another matter.

Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241

Executive Orders

April 8, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. In order to secure America’s economic prosperity and national security, lower the cost of living, and provide for increases in electrical demand from emerging technologies, we must increase domestic energy production, including coal. Coal is abundant and cost effective, and can be used in any weather condition. Moreover, the industry has historically employed hundreds of thousands of Americans. America’s coal resources are vast, with a current estimated value in the trillions of dollars, and are more than capable of substantially contributing to American energy independence with excess to export to support allies and our economic competitiveness. Our Nation’s beautiful clean coal resources will be critical to meeting the rise in electricity demand due to the resurgence of domestic manufacturing and the construction of artificial intelligence data processing centers. We must encourage and support our Nation’s coal industry to increase our energy supply, lower electricity costs, stabilize our grid, create high-paying jobs, support burgeoning industries, and assist our allies.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States that coal is essential to our national and economic security. It is a national priority to support the domestic coal industry by removing Federal regulatory barriers that undermine coal production, encouraging the utilization of coal to meet growing domestic energy demands, increasing American coal exports, and ensuring that Federal policy does not discriminate against coal production or coal-fired electricity generation.

Sec. 3. Strengthening Our National Energy Security. The Chair of the National Energy Dominance Council (NEDC) shall designate coal as a “mineral” as defined in section 2 of Executive Order 14241 of March 20, 2025 (Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production), thereby entitling coal to all the benefits of a “mineral” under that order. Further, Executive Order 14241 is hereby amended by deleting the reference to “4332(d)(1)(B)” in section 6(d) of that order and replacing it with a reference to “4532(d)(1)(B)”.

Sec. 4. Assessing Coal Resources and Accessibility on Federal Lands. (a) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of Energy shall submit a consolidated report to the President through the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy that identifies coal resources and reserves on Federal lands, assesses impediments to mining such coal resources, and proposes policies to address such impediments and ultimately enable the mining of such coal resources by either private or public actors.

(b) The Secretary of Energy shall include in the report described in subsection (a) of this section an analysis of the impact that the availability of the coal resources identified could have on electricity costs and grid reliability.

Sec. 5. Lifting Barriers to Coal Mining on Federal Lands. (a) The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall prioritize coal leasing and related activities, consistent with applicable law, as the primary land use for the public lands with coal resources identified in the report described in section 4(a) of this order and expedite coal leasing in these areas, including by utilizing such emergency authorities as are available to them and identifying opportunities to provide for expedited environmental reviews, consistent with applicable law.

(b) The Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the authorities in the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended and supplemented (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands of 1947, as amended (30 U.S.C. 351-359), and the Multiple Mineral Development Act of 1954 (30 U.S.C. 521-531 et seq.), shall acknowledge the end of the Jewell Moratorium by ordering the publication of a notice in the Federal Register terminating the “Environmental Impact Statement Analyzing the Potential Environmental Effects from Maintaining Secretary Jewell’s Coal Leasing Moratorium”, and process royalty rate reduction applications from Federal coal lessees in as expeditious a manner as permitted by applicable law.

Sec. 6. Supporting American Coal as an Energy Source. (a) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall identify any guidance, regulations, programs, and policies within their respective executive department or agency that seek to transition the Nation away from coal production and electricity generation.

(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall consider revising or rescinding Federal actions identified in subsection (a) of this section consistent with applicable law.

(c) Agencies that are empowered to make loans, loan guarantees, grants, equity investments, or to conclude offtake agreements, both domestically and abroad, shall, to the extent permitted by law, take steps to rescind any policies or regulations seeking to or that actually discourage investment in coal production and coal-fired electricity generation, such as the 2021 U.S. Treasury Fossil Fuel Energy Guidance for Multilateral Development Banks rescinded by the Department of the Treasury and similar policies or regulations.

(d) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Energy, the Chief Executive Officer of the International Development Finance Corporation, the President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, and the heads of all other agencies that have discretionary programs that provide, facilitate, or advocate for financing of energy projects shall review their charters, regulations, guidance, policies, international agreements, analytical models and internal bureaucratic processes to ensure that such materials do not discourage the agency from financing coal mining projects and electricity generation projects. Consistent with law, and subject to the applicable agency head’s discretion, where appropriate, any identified preferences against coal use shall immediately be eliminated except as explicitly provided for in statute.

Sec. 7. Supporting American Coal Exports. The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, the United States Trade Representative, the Assistant to the President for National Security, and the heads of other relevant agencies, shall take all necessary and appropriate actions to promote and identify export opportunities for coal and coal technologies and facilitate international offtake agreements for United States coal.

Sec. 8. Expanding Use of Categorical Exclusions for Coal Under the National Environmental Policy Act. Within 30 days of the date of this order, each agency shall identify to the Council on Environmental Quality any existing and potential categorical exclusions pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, increased reliance on and adoption of which by other agencies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4336c could further the production and export of coal.

Sec. 9. Steel Dominance. (a) The Secretary of Energy, pursuant to the authority under the Energy Act of 2020 (the “Act”), shall determine whether coal used in the production of steel meets the definition of a “critical material” under the Act and, if so, shall take steps to place it on the Department of Energy Critical Materials List.

(b) The Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the authority under the Act, shall determine whether metallurgical coal used in the production of steel meets the criteria to be designated as a “critical mineral” under the Act and, if so, shall take steps to place coal on the Department of the Interior Critical Minerals List.

Sec. 10. Powering Artificial Intelligence Data Centers. (a) For the purposes of this order, “artificial intelligence” or “AI” has the meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).

(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Energy shall identify regions where coal-powered infrastructure is available and suitable for supporting AI data centers; assess the market, legal, and technological potential for expanding coal-based infrastructure to power data centers to meet the electricity needs of AI and high-performance computing operations; and submit a consolidated summary report with their findings and proposals to the Chair of the NEDC, the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto.

Sec. 11. Acceleration of Coal Technology. (a) The Secretary of Energy shall take all necessary actions, consistent with applicable law, to accelerate the development, deployment, and commercialization of coal technologies including, but not limited to, utilizing all available funding mechanisms to support the expansion of coal technology, including technologies that utilize coal and coal byproducts such as building materials, battery materials, carbon fiber, synthetic graphite, and printing materials, as well as updating coal feedstock for power generation and steelmaking.

(b) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Energy shall submit a detailed action plan to the President through the Chair of the NEDC outlining the funding mechanisms, programs, and policy actions taken to accelerate coal technology deployment.

Sec. 12. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

I don't usually repost an entire thread, but it's warranted here.  What's really going on with coal:

Coal: Understanding the time line of an industry










Whale oil chandelier, photo from the Library of Congress.  Up until the Will entry, I'd never even considered there being such a thing as a whale oil chandelier.











And then things began to change.

It really started with navies in some ways, although some might argue that it started with hydroelectric.  We'll start with navies.

Navies had been powered by sail up until the mid 19th Century but already by the time of the American Civil War that was changing.  The U.S. Navy may have had its grandest ships under sail during that war, but coal fired wheels were being introduced even then.   And the scary smoke belching squat "monitors"  that signaled the end of the age of sail were coal (and perhaps wood) burning beasts.  Slow, hardly seaworthy, but iron clad.  It was pretty clear by 1865 that the age of militarized wind was ending.

And indeed the Naval reformation that occurred after the American Civil War is incredibly stunning.  Everything about navies soon changed.  By the 1890s every major navy in the world was building ships that look odd to our eyes, but which still look familiar .  Big guns on big ships powered by coal replaced sailing vessels, and the general purpose yeoman sailor was replaced by the specialist.  At about this time, in fact, the U.S. Navy started to switching from a navy drawing its recruits mostly from port towns, and which was in fact an integrated navy, to one which was segregated which drew its recruits from the interior of the country.  A wood and sail navy required men who had grown up near, or even on ships, and who knew the ins and outs of sail. That was a multi ethnic, polyglot group of men who in some way resembled the men in every port town around the world more than they did the men in the interior of their own countries.  It's  no accident that the first Congressional Medal of Honor to go to a foreign born serviceman went to a sailor, in action during the American Civil War fighting a naval battle in. . . . .Japan.

















Their smoke was visible all the way over the edge of the horizon.

This is something that people who are more familiar with ships of the World War Two era don't instantly recall about earlier steel ships, but coal fires smoke and hence coal fired boilers likewise smoke, or rather the coal fires smoke



The next danger was rarer, but not so rare as to not be a serious problem.  Spontaneous combustion.

Coal has a well known propensity to self heat and to make it worse, the better the coal grade the bigger the problem.  Exposed to air and moisture coal begins to engage in an exothermic reaction and can relatively easily self heat to the point where it ignites.  Moreover, as it self heats and heads towards ignition it drives off highly flammable hydrocarbon gases. Indeed, heating coal intentionally in a controlled environment is a means of producing those gases and has sometimes been thought of as a method of producing them, although its never proven to be an efficient means of doing so.

Coal is so prone to spontaneous combustion that coal self ignition is a natural phenomenon.  It simply happens where coal gets exposed to sufficient oxygen and moisture. Anyone who has ever spent any time in an open pit coal mine has seen coal simply burning on its own, as I have.

There are ways to combat this, of course, but the problem is uniquely acute for ships.  Ships must store coal in large bunkers and must taken on a lot of coal at certain points.  Ships are wet by their very nature. So any coal burning ship has, at some point, a lot of coal with just enough oxygen and moisture to create a problem.

This proved to be a real problem for ships and of course there were extreme catastrophic occurrences, the most famous of which is the explosion of the USS Maine.  The Maine is an extreme example of what could occur, but any coal burning ship could experience what the Maine did.  Basically, in the case of the USS Maine, the coal self ignited and the coal bunkers had sufficient liberated gas to create a massive explosion.  Not quite as dangerous, but still a huge problem, a simple self ignition of the coal without an explosion was a disaster, quite obviously, of the first rate requiring sailors to put the coal fire out under extreme danger.


Coal's detriments on ships would have had to be accepted, and indeed they were, but for the existence of alternatives.  Indeed, coal survived as a naval fuel for an appreciably longer time than a person might actually suppose, so impressive were its advantages in general.  Measures were taken in ship design to try to combat the dangers, such as having the coal bunkers placed near outside ship's hulls such that the coolness of the water would translate to them, and placing sailors bunks along the bunker's walls so that the sailors could tell if heat was building, but the dangers were real and known. Also known was that there was an alternative, oil.

By the turn of the century naval designers were aware that oil could be used to heat boilers just as coal could, and they began to study it in earnest.  Indeed, not only could it be used, but it had numerous advantages.

Unlike coal, petroleum oil for ships fuel did not result in much smoke.  It resulted in some, but not anything like that which coal put out.  The smoke from a single ship was much less visible and suffice it to say the smoke from a fleet of ships was greatly reduced.  Again, there was smoke, but not smoke like that put out by coal fired boilers.  Indeed, it was so much reduced that to a large degree detection of ships over the horizon by the naked eye was approaching becoming a think of the past.

And petroleum does not spontaneously self ignite.  A big vat of petroleum can sit around forever and never touch itself off.  This does not mean, of course, that its free from danger.  It isn't.  But some of the dangers it poses were already posed by coal, but in lesser degrees.  Petroleum burns more freely than coal by quite some measure and once it ignites putting it out is extremely difficult.  Sparks, other fires, etc., all pose increased dangers for petroleum over bunkered coal, but they existed to some degree for bunkered coal already.

And petroleum is more efficient and easier to use for ships.  Coal was basically stoked by hand, a dirty laborious job.  But petroleum wasn't.  Petroleum burning boilers were fueled by what amounts to a plumbing system involving a greater level of technical know how but less physical labor.  And oil had double the thermal content of coal making it a far more efficient fuel which required less refueling.  And on refueling, ships fueled with oil can be refueled at sea.  Ships fueled with coal cannot be.  Indeed, the maintenance of coaling stations in the remote parts of the globe was a critical factor in naval planning prior to the introduction of oil.

Which isn't to say that there weren't some unique problems associated with petroleum for ship.

For one thing, the fact that it spreads out when leaked and can more easily ignite meant that petroleum added a unique and added horror for a stricken ship.  Coal fired ships that were simply damaged and sinking were unlikely to cause a horrific sea top fire.  Petroleum ships are very likely to do that.  And the risk of a munitions caused explosion is increased with petroleum fueled ships.  A torpedo into a coal bunker might blow a coal fired ship to bits with an explosion or might just sink it.  With a petroleum fueled ship the risk of an explosion in such a situation is increased as is the risk that oil on the water will catch on fire or otherwise kill survivors.

A huge factor, however, was supply.

By odd coincidence all of the major naval powers, save for Japan, had more than adequate domestic supplies of coal.  Some had very good supplies of coal, such as the United States, United Kingdom and Imperial Germany, within their own borders.  Japan nearly did in that it obtained it from territories it controlled on the Asian mainland, although that did make its supply more tenuous. At any rate all of the big naval powers of the pre World War One world had coal supplies that htey controlled.  That's a big war fighting consideration.  Of the naval powers of that era, in contrast, only the United States and Imperial Russia had proven petroleum sources they controlled, and Imperial Russia had proven it self to be a second rate naval power during the Russo Japanese War.

Switching from coal to oil did not occur in the Royal Navy, or any navy, all at once. The decision was made somewhat haltingly and it was an expensive proposition to convert an entire navy to oil.  Britain started to convert prior to World War One but it didn't complete the process until after the war.  Still, its decision to start constructing capitol ships as oil burners in 1912 was a huge step for a nation that had the world's largest navy but which had no domestic oil production at all.  The United States followed suit almost immediately, with its first large ship to be converted to oil, the USS Cheyenne, undergoing that process in 1913.


The USS Cheyenne was illustrative of something else that was going on, however, that being the increased presence of heavy internal combustion engines for various uses.  The USS Cheyenne had been built as a monitor, a type of proto battleship (and had been named the USS Wyoming originally) but after its conversion to oil it would become a submarine tender in a few short years.  Submarines of the era were light vessels and, like a lot of light naval fighting ships ,they were diesels.  Marine diesel engines were replacing boilers completely in lighter vessels and of course diesel fuel is a type of oil.

Diesels in that application show that industrial diesel engines had arrived.

By World War Two every navy in the world was an oil burning, not a coal burning, navy.  And it wasn't just navies.  Merchant ships had followed in the navies' wakes.  They were now oil burning too for the most part.  Coal at sea had died.



The demise of coal at sea did not equate, of course, with the universal demise of coal, and this is very important to keep in mind.  Entering into the period of history we've been discussing, roughly 1900 to 1920, coal may have lost its crown at sea, but it remained hugely important, arguably increasingly important, elsewhere.  It continued to be the fuel of heavy transportation, IE., for trains, it continued to heat homes and it fired an ever growing  number of power plants.  Indeed that last application can't be overstated as in this same period the Western world was electrifying.  So whatever position it may have lost on the waves it was likely more than making it up on land.

Still, the trend line had been set.

And it would next show itself with transportation.

At least according to one source written in 1912 coal fueled 9/10s of all locomotive engines at that time.  The other 1/10th would have been fired by wood or, yes,  oil.


















 


Either blistering ignorance, or the worst kind of cynicism and hypocrisy, or both, are at work here.  Long term market trends such as this are really irreversible. This would be much like trying to mandate horse and carriage use after 1903.  You could, but that wouldn't have stopped the automobile.

Indeed, resource reversals really only occur in dire emergencies resulting in extreme shortages.  That's why the Germans and South Africans worked on converting coal to a liquid fuel.  It wasn't cheap, it was necessary.  Trump is creating an artificial crisis right now, but it's unlikely to result in a need for coal.  Natural gas is still there and his trade policies are likely to torpedo a recent effort to export liquified natural gas.  And more than that, the one thing his administration might actually accomplish in this area is a revival of nuclear, which is already going on anyhow. 

One further good, it might be noted, might come of this.  Democratic administrations have been hostile to coal, although they've done little about it, due to its strong association with Global Warming.  That's given leeway in the coalfields to allow for it to be imagined that the century plus decline in coal is the government's fault, when its economic and technology. Trump's stroke of the pen isn't going to revive coal and believing in the myth will be impossible, except for those who simply willfully choose to deny all reality to their detriment.