Here's Why Ending the U.S. Crude Oil Export Ban Matters for You

Why lifting the nearly 40-year ban on exports of U.S. crude oil could bring broad-based economic gains for the U.S. and a modest positive impact on the U.S. consumer.

Jun 1, 2014 at 7:30PM

U.S. exports of crude oil have been banned since 1975 as part of a law enforced by Congress in the aftermath of the 1973 OPEC oil embargo to guard domestic reserves and protect U.S. energy security.

But with U.S. crude oil production having surged by nearly 60% since 2008, thanks largely to the application of advanced drilling techniques that have unlocked a bounty of oil trapped in shale formations deep below the ground, the movement to end the nearly 40-year ban is growing ever louder.

According to recent comments by Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and White House advisor John Podesta, the Obama administration is now seriously considering relaxing federal laws prohibiting exports. If the ban is lifted, here's what it could mean for the U.S. economy and the average American consumer.


The Houston Ship Channel, one of the busiest US seaports and a key waterway for oil shipments. Photo credit: Flickr/Roy Luck.

Broad-based economics gains
According to a recently released analysis by IHS, a leading consultancy, lifting the ban would lead to broad-based economic gains by boosting U.S. oil production, reducing our petroleum imports, lowering domestic gasoline prices, and supporting nearly 1 million additional jobs.

The study, titled U.S. Crude Oil Export Decision: Assessing the Impact of the Export Ban and Free Trade on the U.S. Economy, found that ending the ban would give energy companies incentive to boost spending by nearly $750 billion from 2016 to 2030, which would result in U.S. oil production growth of an average of 1.2 million barrels per day more than if export restrictions were left intact.

This increased investment would support an additional 359,000 jobs in 2016, as many as 964,000 additional jobs in 2018, and an annual average of 222,000 more jobs from 2020-2030. As a result of increased spending and job growth, U.S. GDP would rise by more than $70 billion in 2016, by more than $130 billion in 2018, and by an annual average of $73 billion from 2020 to 2030.

This would make the nation much less reliant on foreign oil and lower net petroleum imports by nearly 1 million barrels per day in 2016, resulting in savings of more than $43 billion, and by nearly 2 million barrels per day in 2020, saving the U.S. nearly $87 billion. And total government revenues would increase by a combined $1.3 trillion over the period 2016-2030, the study projected.

Modest positive impact on U.S. consumer
Lifting the ban would also be good for the U.S. consumer through another valve -- modestly lower gasoline prices. This is because exports would increase global crude supplies, thereby reducing the price of the global crude oil benchmark, Brent, all else being equal. Since U.S. gasoline prices are more closely correlated to the price of Brent than to U.S. crude oil benchmark prices, the cost of gas at the pump would fall by 8 cents per gallon through 2030, the study found.


A Shell gasoline station in California. Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

While that might not sound like much, the combined impact of lower gas prices, increased investment, and job growth would boost average disposal income per household by an additional $391 in 2018, the study estimates. That's nearly 400 more dollars that U.S. households can spend on other goods and services.

All opposed, please stand
But while the overall economy would likely benefit from allowing crude exports, there's one major group that would suffer -- U.S. refiners. These companies, which refine crude oil into petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel, have benefited tremendously from the shale boom that has driven down U.S. crude oil benchmark prices over the past few years.

Refiners' profits are largely determined by the price difference between domestic crude oil benchmarks like West Texas Intermediate, Louisiana Light Sweet, and Brent. The larger the price gap between these benchmarks, the higher their margins. But allowing exports would likely boost domestic benchmark prices while lowering the price of Brent, thereby compressing U.S. refiners' margins.

Large refiners including Valero (NYSE:VLO) and Phillips 66 (NYSE:PSX) are among those that would be affected. For instance, weaker refining margins were a key contributor to the decline in Phillips 66's refining earnings, which fell from $904 million in the first quarter of 2013 to $306 million during the first quarter of this year. Valero similarly credited lower throughput refining margins as one of the main reasons behind the year-over-year decrease in its refining operating income in the fourth quarter of last year.  

Yes or no to oil exports?
Overall, the IHS study -- and several other studies like it -- suggests that lifting the 40-year ban on crude exports would be a net positive for the U.S. economy. Benefits including higher domestic oil production, reduced petroleum imports, job growth, lower domestic gasoline prices, and higher government revenues should easily offset the negative impact on U.S. refiners. Personally, I think a piecemeal lifting of the export ban would probably be in the nation's best interest. What do you think? Could there be any unforeseen negative consequences?

OPEC is absolutely terrified of this game-changer
As the debate over U.S. crude oil exports highlights, America's domestic energy landscape is changing radically. U.S. oil production continues to surge as our country moves closer to energy independence. And there is one company front and center that is poised to make its investors rich. Warren Buffett has already committed to it, and you can too. Click here to learn about this company in the Motley Fool's special report: OPEC's Worst Nightmare.

Arjun Sreekumar and The Motley Fool have no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information