Latest Market News

Trinidad to sweeten oil and gas tax regime

  • Spanish Market: Crude oil, Fertilizers, Natural gas, Petrochemicals
  • 18/01/17

Trinidad and Tobago is revising its fiscal regime for oil and gas production in a bid to stem a long decline in output.

The government has 27 different types of production licenses and these will be updated and consolidated in the first quarter of 2017, finance minister and acting energy minister Colm Imbert said. "Our oil and gas fiscal regime has been with us for many years."

The government is especially focused on tackling a deepening shortage of natural gas that has suppressed the country's output of LNG and petrochemicals.

The energy sector has been lobbying the government to update its tax regime to make Trinidad more competitive.

"We will to change the way in which our oil and gas fiscal regime works so that we would achieve two objectives - motivate investor companies to get involved in exploration and development, while we maximize our return from the petroleum sector," Imbert said.

Among the modifications is a change in the applicability of a windfall tax on oil production that takes effect when prices exceed $50/bl.

"We are going to address the way in which the supplemental tax kicks in to make it profit-based tax rather than revenue-based, and this should encourage companies to engage in greater exploration and production," Imbert said.

Changes will also be made to production-sharing contracts that allow production to be split between the government and the company, after the company has recovered its expenses.

"We are discussing the new oil and gas fiscal regime with all the players, so they can bring fields into production, and the changes will be unveiled in the first quarter of 2017," Imbert said.

Trinidad's gas production has been falling for the past three years, leading to supply rationing.

Gas production averaged 3.32bn ft³/d in January-November 2016, 13.3pc less than a year earlier.

Crude production has also been falling, averaging 71,071 b/d in January-October 2016, down by 10.6pc year on year, according to the latest energy ministry data.

"The energy industry in Trinidad and Tobago needs clarity about future taxation," Trinidad's energy chamber said in October last year. "The government and the energy industry do not have the luxury of time if it aims to ensure a sustainable future."

The group represents oil, gas and petrochemical companies.

In an unusually blunt statement in September 2016, BP subsidiary bpTT chief executive Norman Christie called for tax changes to "incentivize upstream investments." bpTT is the country's biggest gas producer.

Reaction to the government's plans has been muted so far.

"We are waiting to see what the government is proposing," one company executive told Argus today. "It is good that the government has finally realized that it needs to address the negative state of the energy sector."


Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

02/01/25

EU sulphur shortage persists, limiting sul acid output

EU sulphur shortage persists, limiting sul acid output

London, 2 January (Argus) — Liquid sulphur in Northwest Europe is expected to remain short in 2025, with production limited by lower output from refineries, and demand outstripping supply. Sulphur supply curbed In the past two years sulphur output from European refineries has dropped as a result of poor refining margins and competition from imports from new mega-refineries out of region. Additionally, sanctions on Russian crude oil imports to European refineries have turned the crude slate in the region sweeter. In 2024 refinery maintenance and unexpected outages resulted in lower production of molten sulphur. These were overdue following healthy refining margins in 2023 leading refineries to run at high rates and postponing maintenance, as well as earlier pandemic restrictions also limiting maintenance. Further European refining capacity is at risk in 2025, as Petroineos' Grangemouth refinery in Scotland is expected to be converted to an import terminal, while in Germany, Shell will cease crude processing at its 80,000 t/yr Wesseling refinery. Additionally, BP has indicated plans to permanently shut down a crude unit and a middle distillate desulphurisation unit at its 210,000 t/yr Gelsenkirchen plant. Refineries could still delay some of these closures, provided that refining margins were supportive of this. Sulphur consumption is higher though risks remain Sulphur consumers were running at low rates in Europe over 2023 due to low demand and poor economics as well as high energy prices. By 2024 sulphur demand lifted, and many consumers were unable to source the larger quantity of sulphur. The shortfall of molten sulphur bolstered quarterly contract prices during 2024; in the first quarter prices stood at $103.5-119.5/t cfr, rising 49pc on a mid-point basis to reach $158.5-174.5/t cfr in the fourth quarter. Contract negotiations for the first quarter of 2025 started against a backdrop of a short market and firmer global prices weighed against competitiveness of the region's chemical industry, with consumers seeking a rollover or a smaller increase of $10-15/t cfr against suppliers pushing for a larger $25-30/t rise. In 2025 liquid sulphur is expected to continue to be short in the region, with regular liquid imports. Discussions for an additional sulphur tanker are also expected to lead to more imported product entering the region by the second half of 2025. Yara's sulphur remelter in Finland is expected to start in April 2025, but will have limited impact on the industrial cluster in the Benelux and German regions. Additionally, at least one new commercial sulphur burner is expected in Germany for a 2027 start to operations, with the Mitsui subsidiary Aglobis announcing preliminary agreements with port and logistics operators in Germany's Duisburg area. Sulphuric acid implications The shortage in liquid sulphur has resulted in a new reality sulphuric acid in Northwest Europe, resulting in a wider differential between sulphur-burnt and smelter-based acid, of up to €80/t, on the quarterly contracts. The acid contracts for the first quarter of 2025 are not fully settled, the sulphur burnt contract was heard at a further increase of €15 added to the sulphur Benelux settlement, while an increase of around €10/t was heard for smelter-based acid. Some sulphur-burners have been forced to shut down in the Benelux region, mainly due lack of liquid sulphur. Additionally, there is the risk that some end used may be pushed out of the market due to the increased cost of sourcing sulphur burnt acid. And while some demand may continue to shift to smelter-based acid, not all sulphur burners or downstream industries can easily replace liquid sulphur as a feedstock due to purity or economic implications. By Jasmine Antunes, Maria Mosquera and Lili Minton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Q&A: EU biomethane internal market challenged


02/01/25
02/01/25

Q&A: EU biomethane internal market challenged

London, 2 January (Argus) — The European Commission needs to provide clearer guidance on implementing existing rules for the cross-border trade of biomethane to foster a cohesive internal market as some EU member states are diverging from these standards, Vitol's Davide Rubini and Arthur Romano told Argus. Edited excerpts follow. What are the big changes happening in the regulation space of the European biomethane market that people need to watch out for? While no major new EU legislation is anticipated, the focus remains on the consistent implementation of existing rules, as some countries diverge from these standards. Key challenges include ensuring mass-balanced transport of biomethane within the grid, accurately accounting for cross-border emissions and integrating subsidised biomethane into compliance markets. The European Commission is urged to provide clearer guidance on these issues to foster a cohesive internal market, which is essential for advancing the EU's energy transition and sustainability objectives. Biomethane is a fairly mature energy carrier, yet it faces significant hurdles when it comes to cross-border trade within the EU. Currently, only a small fraction — 2-5pc — of biomethane is consumed outside of its country of production, highlighting the need for better regulatory alignment across member states. Would you be interested in seeing a longer-term target from the EU? The longer the visibility on targets and ambitions, the better it is for planning and investment. As the EU legislative cycle restarts with the new commission, the initial focus might be on the climate law and setting a new target for 2040. However, a review of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) is unlikely for the next 3-4 years. With current targets set for 2030, just five years away, there's insufficient support for long-term investments. The EU's legislative cycle is fixed, so expectations for changes are low. Therefore, it's crucial that member states take initiative and extend their targets beyond 2030, potentially up to 2035, even if not mandated by the EU. Some member states might do so, recognising the need for longer-term targets to encourage the necessary capital expenditure for the energy transition. Do you see different interpretations in mass balancing, GHG accounting and subsidies? Interpretations of the rules around ‘mass-balancing', greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions accounting and the usability of subsidised biomethane [for different fuel blending mandates] vary across EU member states, leading to challenges in creating a cohesive internal market. When it comes to mass-balancing, the challenges arise in trying to apply mass balance rules for liquids, which often have a physically traceable flow, to gas molecules in the interconnected European grid. Once biomethane is injected, physical verification becomes impossible, necessitating different rules than those for liquids moving around in segregated batches. The EU mandates that sustainability verification of biomethane occurs at the production point and requires mechanisms to prevent double counting and verification of biomethane transactions. However, some member states resist adapting these rules for gases, insisting on physical traceability similar to that of liquids. This resistance may stem from protectionist motives or political agendas, but ultimately it results in non-adherence to EU rules and breaches of European legislation. The issue with GHG accounting often stems from member states' differing interpretations of the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Some states, like the Netherlands, argue that mass balance is an administrative method, which the guidelines supposedly exclude. Mass balancing involves rigorous verification by auditors and certifying bodies, ensuring a robust accounting system that is distinct from book and claim methods. This distinction is crucial because mass balance is based on verifying that traded molecules of biomethane are always accompanied by proofs of sustainability that are not a separately tradeable object. In fact, mass balancing provides a verifiable and accountable method that is perfectly aligned with UN guidelines and ensuring accurate GHG accounting. The issue related to the use of subsidised volumes of biomethane is highly political. Member states often argue that if they provide financial support — directly through subsidies or indirectly through suppliers' quotas — they should remain in control of the entire value chain. For example, if a member state gives feed-in tariffs to biomethane production, it may want to block exports of these volumes. Conversely, if a member state imposes a quota to gas suppliers, it may require this to be fulfilled with domestic biomethane production. No other commodity — not even football players — is subject to similar restrictions to export and/or imports only because subsidies are involved. This protectionist approach creates barriers to internal trade within the EU, hindering the development of a unified biomethane market and limiting the potential for growth and decarbonisation across the region. The Netherlands next year will implement two significant pieces of legislation — a green supply obligation for gas suppliers and a RED III transposition. The Dutch approach combines GHG accounting arguments with a rejection of EU mass-balance rules, essentially prohibiting biomethane imports unless physically segregated as bio-LNG or bio-CNG. This requirement contradicts EU law, as highlighted by the EU Commission's recent detailed opinion to the Netherlands . France's upcoming blending and green gas obligation, effective in 2026, mandates satisfaction through French production only. Similarly, the Czech Republic recently enacted a law prohibiting the export of some subsidised biomethane . Italy's transport system, while effective nationally, disregards EU mass balance rules. These cases indicate a deeper political disconnect and highlight the need for better alignment and communication within the EU. We know you've been getting a lot of questions around whether subsidised bio-LNG is eligible under FuelEU. What have your findings been? The eligibility of subsidised bio-LNG under FuelEU has been a topic of considerable enquiry. We've sought clarity from the European Commission, as this issue intersects multiple regulatory and legal frameworks. Initially, we interpreted EU law principles, which discourage double support, to mean that FuelEU, being a quota system, would qualify as a support scheme under Article 2's definition, equating quota systems with subsidies. However, a commission representative has publicly stated that FuelEU does not constitute a support scheme and thus is not subject to this interpretation. On this basis, FuelEU would not differentiate between subsidised and unsubsidised bio-LNG. A similar rationale applies to the Emissions Trading System, which, while not a quota obligation, has been deemed to not be a support scheme. Despite these clarifications, the use of subsidised biomethane across Europe remains an area requiring further elucidation from European institutions. It is not without risks, and stakeholders require more definitive guidance to navigate the regulatory landscape effectively. By Emma Tribe and Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Viewpoint: North American BZ, SM output to dip in 2025


02/01/25
02/01/25

Viewpoint: North American BZ, SM output to dip in 2025

Houston, 2 January (Argus) — North American benzene (BZ) and derivative styrene monomer (SM) production and operating rates may decline in 2025 as production costs climb. SM and derivative output will likely see a drop due to the permanent closure of a SM plant in Sarnia and an acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) plant in Ohio. In 2024, SM operating rates averaged about 71-72pc of capacity, up by 1-2 percentage points from the year prior, according to Argus data. In 2025, operating rates are expected to pull back closer to 70pc due to lackluster underlying demand, offsetting the impact of the two plant closures. Many SM producers on the US Gulf coast are entering 2025 at reduced rates due to high variable production cash costs against the SM spot price. The BZ contract price and higher ethylene prices recently pushed up production costs for SM producers. A heavy upstream ethylene cracker turnaround season in early 2025 will keep derivative SM production costs elevated in Louisiana, stifling motivation for some downstream SM operators to run at normal rates. Gulf coast BZ prices typically fall when SM demand is weak. But imports from Asia are projected to decline, leading to tighter supply in North America that could keep BZ prices elevated. BZ imports from Asia are expected to decline in 2025 because of fewer arbitrage opportunities, as Asia and US BZ prices are expected to remain near parity in the first half of the year. The import arbitrage from South Korea to the Gulf coast was closed for much of the fourth quarter of 2024. Prices in Asia have garnered support because of demand from China for BZ and derivatives, as well as from aromatics production costs in the region that have increased alongside higher naphtha prices. In January-October 2024, over 60pc of US BZ imports originated from northeast Asia, according to Global Trade Tracker data. Losing any portion of those imports typically tightens the US market and drives up domestic demand for BZ. But tighter BZ supply due to lower imports may be mitigated by SM producers, if they continue to run at reduced rates in 2025. The US Gulf coast is around 100,000 metric tonnes (t) net short monthly on BZ, but market sources say the soft SM demand outlook for 2025 will cut US BZ import needs almost in half. Despite fewer BZ imports to North America, reduced SM consumption could hamper run rates for BZ production from selective toluene disproportionation (STDP) unit operators. The biggest obstacle for STDP operators in 2025 will like be paraxylene (PX) demand. Since STDP units produce BZ alongside PX, there needs to be domestic demand for PX. But demand has been weak due to PX imports and derivative polyethylene terephthalate (PET). STDP operations increased at the end 2025 after running at at minimum rates or being idled since 2022. This came as BZ prices consistently eclipsed feedstock toluene prices. The BZ to feedstock nitration-grade toluene spread averaged 30.5¢/USG in 2024 and the BZ to feedstock commercial-grade toluene (CGT) spread averaged 49.25¢/USG, according to Argus data. This means that for much of the year STDP operators could justify running units at higher rates to produce more BZ and PX. But another challenge to consider on STDP run rates in 2025 is the value of toluene for gasoline blending compared to its value for chemical production. In 2022 and 2023, the toluene value into octanes was higher than going into an STDP for BZ and PX production. Feedstock toluene imports are poised to fall in 2025, a factor that would narrow STDP margins and further hamper on-purpose benzene production in the US in 2025. By Jake Caldwell Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Ethiopia’s EABC counters at $639/t cfr for DAP


02/01/25
02/01/25

Ethiopia’s EABC counters at $639/t cfr for DAP

London, 2 January (Argus) — Fertilizer importer Ethiopian Agricultural Businesses (EABC) has countered offers for lots 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 at $639/t fob under its 23 December tender to buy DAP. Suppliers have until 10:00am on 5 January to respond. Reports that EABC awarded lot 4 — 60,000t with laycan 9-15 February — to trading firm Midgulf International at the offered price of $639/t fob Jordan have emerged. But Jordanian producer JPMC has so far not committed to supplying this cargo to Midgulf International. EABC has not given counterbids for lots 7, 8 or 9, and has probably scrapped these lots. Offers for DAP from Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and China totalled 780,000t and ranged $639-705/t fob . EABC had initially sought to buy 611,000t in the tender. The importer stipulated laycans for its counterbids in a document seen by Argus as follows: Lot 1: 16-22 January Lot 2: 25-30 January Lot 3: 1-5 February Lot 5: 10-15 February Lot 6: 21-25 February Each lot is for 60,000t. Initially, the laycans for lots 5 and 6 had been 21-27 February and 5-11 March, respectively. By Tom Hampson Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

India extends special DAP subsidy and keeps MRP steady


02/01/25
02/01/25

India extends special DAP subsidy and keeps MRP steady

London, 2 January (Argus) — The Indian government yesterday extended the special DAP subsidy of Rs3,500/t into the new year, while local sources say the maximum retail price (MRP) will remain unchanged. The special subsidy, which was approved in July 2024 and valid from April 2024 , was initially set to end on 31 December. It will now remain in place until further notice. This subsidy supplements the existing nutrient based subsidy (NBS) of Rs21,911/t for the 2024-25 rabi season (October-March). In mid-December local sources reported that the government would allow the MRP to rise by around Rs4,000/t to about Rs31,000/t from 1 January. But sources now state the MRP will remain at Rs27,000/t. DAP importers buying at $632/t cfr face losses of around $101/t with the current dollar-rupee exchange rate, MRP and NBS including the special subsidy. The government is set to keep compensating importers for these losses until the end of March. Provisional data indicates India was on track to end 2024 with 1.2mn t of DAP in stocks because of slowing imports, well below a comfortable 2mn t, as had been maintained in previous years. By Adrien Seewald Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more