Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

U.S. issues 30‑day license for sale of Russian oil — temporary market easing and consequences for Ukraine

OFAC allowed the sale of Russian oil that has been "stuck" at sea until April 11. We explain why this will reduce price pressure in the short term, but will not change the structure of Moscow's energy revenues, and what threat this poses to the Ukrainian fuel market.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

March 13, 2026 · 2 min read

U.S. issues 30‑day license for sale of Russian oil — temporary market easing and consequences for Ukraine
Скотт Бессент (Фото: EPA / FRANCIS CHUNG POOL)

What happened

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a 30‑day license to purchase and ship Russian oil and petroleum products that are already in maritime transit. The license is valid until April 11, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote on the social network X.

"This narrowly tailored, short‑term measure applies only to oil that is already in transit and will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government, which receives most of its energy revenues from taxes collected at the point of extraction."

— Scott Bessent, U.S. Treasury Secretary

According to CNBC, as of March 12 roughly 124 million barrels of Russian oil were identified at sea — a volume equivalent to approximately five to six days of global supply.

Why this was done

The stated motive is stabilizing global energy markets amid an escalation of hostilities in the region around Iran. In the short term, additional volumes on the market ease some of the price shock, which also affects fuel availability in Ukraine.

What this means for Russia and the sanctions

OFAC permits the sale of oil that was previously sanctioned only when it is already at sea; other restrictions remain in place — including the ban on selling Russian oil to Iran, as noted in the announcement. According to the U.S. administration, Moscow’s main revenues are generated at the extraction stage, not from resale at sea, so the decision is not expected to become a quick source of large state income.

Impact on Ukraine

For Ukrainian consumers the main issue is fuel prices and supply stability. The explanation is simple: a one‑off release of oil into the market may slightly slow price increases, but 124 million barrels amount to just a few days of global demand, so the effect will be temporary and limited. Analysts also point to the risks of sanctions evasion through complex logistics chains — therefore a transparent system for monitoring sales and coordination with partners is important.

Context and what to expect

The OFAC decision is a typical example of a short‑term policy adjustment under market pressure. It relieves some immediate strain but does not change the long‑term architecture of sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The key now is oversight of license compliance and diplomatic coordination so that temporary measures do not become loopholes for increasing Moscow’s hidden revenues.

For Ukraine this means possible short‑term easing of price pressure on fuel, but without systemic changes to sanctions policy and oversight the effect will not be lasting. The question remains open: will partners be able to turn temporary permissions into clear rules for a transparent market, on which our energy stability will depend?

Sources: OFAC (U.S. Treasury), post on X by Treasury Secretary S. Bessent, CNBC, LIGA.net materials on the impact on the Ukrainian fuel market.

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