Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

"Why NOPEC, the U.S. bill to crush the OPEC cartel, matters" - Reuters at FXEmpire

Recommended Posts

Why NOPEC, the U.S. bill to crush the OPEC cartel, matters

By Timothy Gardner WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A U.S. Senate committee is expected to pass a bill on Thursday that could open members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its partners to antitrust lawsuits for orchestrating supply cuts that raise global crude prices.




By Timothy Gardner

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A U.S. Senate committee is expected to pass a bill on Thursday that could open members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its partners to antitrust lawsuits for orchestrating supply cuts that raise global crude prices.

The No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels (NOPEC) bill is intended to protect U.S. consumers and businesses from engineered spikes in the cost of gasoline and heating oil, but some analysts warn that implementing it could also have some dangerous unintended consequences.

Here are some details about the bill.


The bipartisan NOPEC bill would change U.S. antitrust law to revoke the sovereign immunity that has long protected OPEC and its national oil companies from lawsuits.

If signed into law, the U.S. attorney general would gain the ability to sue the oil cartel or its members, such as Saudi Arabia, in federal court. Other producers like Russia, which works with OPEC in wider group known as OPEC+ to withhold output, could also be sued.

It is unclear exactly how a federal court could enforce judicial antitrust decisions against a foreign nation. But several attempts at NOPEC over more than two decades have worried OPEC’s de facto leader Saudi Arabia, leading Riyadh to lobby hard every time a version of the bill has come up.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to pass the most recent version of the bill on Thursday.

To become law, the bill would then have to pass the full Senate and House and be signed by the president.

The White House has not indicated whether President Joe Biden supports the bill, and it is not clear whether the bill has enough support in Congress to get that far.


Previous versions of the NOPEC bill have failed amid resistance by oil industry groups like the American Petroleum Institute.

But anger has risen lately in the U.S. Congress about soaring gasoline prices that have helped fuel inflation to the highest level in decades, raising the chances of its success this time.

OPEC producers have rebuffed requests by the United States and allies to open the oil taps by more than gradual amounts as global consumers emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine keep oil prices boiling.

Russia, which typically has produced about 10% of the world’s oil, could see crude output drop as much as 17% this year as Moscow struggles with Western sanctions.


Some analysts said that rushing a bill through could lead to unintended blowback, including the possibility that other countries could take similar action on the United States for withholding agricultural output to support domestic farming, for example.

“It’s always a bad idea to make policy when you are angry,” said Mark Finley, a fellow in energy and global oil at Rice University’s Baker Institute and former analyst and manager at the Central Intelligence Agency.

OPEC nations could also strike back in other ways.

In 2019, for example, Saudi Arabia threatened to sell its oil in currencies other than the dollar if Washington passed a version of the NOPEC bill. Doing so would undermine the dollar’s status as the world’s main reserve currency, reduce Washington’s clout in global trade, and weaken its ability to enforce sanctions on nation states.

The kingdom could also decide to buy at least some weapons from countries other than the United States, hitting a lucrative business for U.S. defense contractors.

In addition, the kingdom and other oil producers could limit U.S. investments in their countries or simply raise their prices for oil sold into the United States – undermining the basic aim of the bill.

The United States and its allies are already facing big challenges securing reliable energy supplies, said Paul Sullivan, a Middle East analyst and non-resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Center. “The last thing we need to do is to throw a grenade into this.”


The top U.S. oil lobby group, the American Petroleum Institute, has also come out against the NOPEC bill, saying it could hurt domestic oil and gas producers.

One industry concern is that NOPEC legislation could ultimately lead to overproduction by OPEC, bringing prices so low that U.S. energy companies have difficulty boosting output. Saudi Arabia and other OPEC countries have some of the world’s cheapest and easiest reserves to produce.

A wave of oil from OPEC producers, even at a time of concerns about Russian supply, “could chill drilling activity in the U.S. oil patch, potentially putting both domestic energy security and domestic economic recovery at risk,” said ClearView Energy Partners, a nonpartisan research group in a note to clients.

(Reporting by Timothy Gardner; editing by Richard Valdmanis and Marguerita Choy)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

U.S. Senate Passes NOPEC Antitrust Bill

By Charles Kennedy - May 05, 2022, 11:32 AM CDT

  • U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act.
  • The NOPEC bill has been on and off the table for decades.
  • It is unclear whether the bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Joe Biden.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has approved the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act (NOPEC) bill, Reuters reports, paving the way–if signed into law by the president–for a lawsuit against OPEC for antitrust behavior and market manipulation. 

The Thursday vote saw the U.S. Senate panel come out in favor of NOPEC, which has been on and off the table for decades, failing to get past Congressional committees until recently, when gasoline prices in the U.S. have maintained all-time highs. 

It is still unclear whether the bill, approved by the Senate panel, will move on to the Senate or to U.S. President Joe Biden. It is also unclear whether Biden would sign this legislation into law. 

Opposition to NOPEC by major trade groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute (API) has intensified in recent weeks and months. They fear it could backfire on America’s oil and gas industry and U.S. interests. 

The vote comes at a tense time for U.S-Saudi relations, with Saudi Arabia making it very publicly known–through interviews and op-eds–that it is unhappy with the lack of support offered by the Biden Administration for Saudi defense against Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, despite the threat Houthi attacks pose to Saudi oil facilities. 

On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal published a story headlined “U.S. Saudi Relations Finally Start to Thaw”, but a NOPEC vote that would make it possible for the United States to sue OPEC is likely to have a detrimental effect on that alleged thaw.  

Also on Wednesday, news reports emerged that CIA director Bill Burns had met in secret with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman in April to try to “patch” things up. 

By Charles Kennedy for

More Top Reads From

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the real question is how do you enforce it  since sovereigns are immune to suits. Smells like grand standing to me. Just as the Texas Legislature has no right to waive sovereign immunity for South Dakota except by Interstate compact approved by Congress, Congress cannot waive sovereign immunity  for a foreign  government except by Treaty that both sign and ratify.

 From 1989 to 1992, the subcommittee had several meetings, hearings, and markups to discuss essentially the same issue. Back then, we were reacting to the Atascadero and Shu decisions which indicated that existing Federal law did not constitute an appropriate abrogation of State sovereign immunity against suits for intellectual property infringements. To achieve an appropriate abrogation, we considered in the past the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act, the Patent Remedy Act, and the Trademark Remedy Clarification Act. We are now, once again, faced with judicial holdings that States are immune from suit for intellectual property infringements due to deficiencies in relevant Federal laws.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0