Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Bessent Twice Said "No" — and Twice Continued: Will There Be a Third Time?

The U.S. Treasury Secretary has again stated that the waiver allowing purchases of Russian oil at sea will not be extended. However, he said the same thing before the previous extension — and signed it anyway.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 25, 2026 · 2 min read

Bessent Twice Said "No" — and Twice Continued: Will There Be a Third Time?
Міністр фінансів США Скотт Бессент (фото - EPA)

On Friday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with Associated Press that there would be no third extension of sanctions exemptions for Russian and Iranian oil. His formulation regarding Iran is categorical: "completely ruled out." But to understand the weight of these words, it's worth knowing what he said two weeks ago — and then signed an extension anyway.

Timeline of the reversal

The U.S. first issued a permit to purchase Russian oil at sea in March — after oil exceeded $100 per barrel following Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz in response to strikes by the U.S. and Israel. The first permit expired on April 11.

On Wednesday, April 23, Bessent publicly stated at the White House: there would be no extension — neither for Russia nor for Iran. Two days later, the Treasury Department issued a second permit — until May 16 at 12:01 p.m. Washington time.

"This is a shameful decision and a 180-degree reversal — two days after Bessent promised not to extend sanctions exemptions for Russia"

Senators Shaheen, Schumer and Warren — in a joint statement

Why they extended it anyway

Bessent provided his explanation after signing — at Senate hearings and in an interview with AP. According to him, during spring meetings of the IMF and World Bank, representatives of more than ten of the poorest and most energy-dependent countries approached him with requests for assistance. The permit, according to the minister, was specifically addressed to them — not Moscow.

Bessent dismisses the argument about benefits for Russia: saying that Russian oil sells at a discount, and a general decline in global prices negates Kremlin's additional revenues. However, Financial Times calculated that Moscow earns up to $150 million per day in additional budget revenues — and called Russia the "main winner" of the Middle East conflict.

What's next

  • The second permit is valid until May 16: any oil loaded onto a tanker by Friday can be sold without sanctions.
  • Bessent claims that "oil from the first wave has already been largely picked up" — meaning the economic need for a third permit has disappeared.
  • Iranian oil is a separate category: the U.S. has announced a de facto blockade and expects production to halt "within two or three days."
  • Democrats in the Senate have already called the previous extension a gift to Putin and are demanding explanations.

The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, the oil market is under pressure, and the second permit expires on May 16. If by then prices jump above $100 again, and another ten governments come to Bessent with the same request — will his "no" carry more weight than last time?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026