Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
European Tech Sovereignty
17MAY

GL 134A lapses toward quiet extension

3 min read
14:28UTC

Treasury's Russian crude waiver expired on 11 April with wire reporting from Reuters, Semafor and Bloomberg pointing to renewal worth roughly $150 million a day to Moscow at current Urals prices.

TechnologyDeveloping
Key takeaway

The Russian oil waiver is the same instrument doing the opposite job it was designed for.

General License 134A (GL 134A), the OFAC (Office of Foreign Assets Control) waiver that authorised transactions for Russian crude loaded before 12 March, expired on 11 April. Reuters, Semafor and Bloomberg report, citing people familiar with the discussions, that an extension is coming 1. A Treasury spokesperson offered only that the department "does not preview actions related to our sanctions."

Daniel Fried at the Atlantic Council called on Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on 8 April to let the waiver lapse and fall back on the price cap. Asian governments led by India and the Philippines are pushing in the other direction. A week ago this was framed as a binary choice at $121 Urals . Bloomberg estimates the waiver is worth roughly $150 million a day in additional Russian budget revenue at $114 to $116 Urals.

One week of that uplift covers a fortnight of Kinzhal strikes. A full year covers a sum the EU has spent months trying to route to Kyiv against Hungarian opposition. The original GL 134 was defensible in March at $73 a barrel as market stabilisation after the Strait of Hormuz closed. At 64% above that price, and with the Iran ceasefire of 8 April partially reopening Hormuz, the same instrument now hands Moscow a surplus the sanctions architecture was designed to prevent. The Russia-Iran corridor that Israel struck at Bandar Anzali last month still runs.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

When the Iran conflict disrupted oil markets in March, the US Treasury issued a temporary waiver allowing banks and traders to continue processing payments for Russian crude already at sea. The idea was to prevent a sudden oil price spike. The waiver was set to expire on 11 April. The problem: when the waiver was issued, Russian oil was selling at $73 per barrel. By expiry it was trading at $114-116. That means every extra day of extension hands Russia roughly $150 million in war-funding revenue that sanctions were supposed to block.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

GL 134A was issued on 12 March 2026 as a market-stabilisation measure when the Iran war disrupted Gulf crude flows. The structural problem is that the licence's dollar value is oil-price-sensitive: a barrel-price doubling since issuance means the waiver now hands Moscow a windfall the original policy never contemplated.

The secondary cause is bureaucratic path dependency. Once a sanctions waiver is issued to enable active market transactions, financial institutions and energy traders build positions around it. Lapse without a wind-down window triggers counterparty defaults that US regulators are reluctant to own.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    Each week of extension at current Urals prices transfers approximately $1.05 billion to Russia, partially offsetting the impact of the EU's phased gas import ban beginning 25 April.

  • Risk

    If the waiver is extended without a firm sunset date, it establishes precedent that sanctions can be indefinitely deferred when market conditions create lobby pressure, weakening the credibility of the entire OFAC architecture.

First Reported In

Update #12 · Three narrowings of US support for Kyiv

Reuters (via Kyiv Independent)· 11 Apr 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
OpenForum Europe / open-source community
OpenForum Europe / open-source community
The EUR 350m Sovereign Tech Fund has no Commission host, no budget line, and no commissioner's name attached six weeks after the April conference, while Germany is already paying maintainers to staff international standards bodies. The CRA open-source guidance resolves contributor liability but leaves the financial-donations grey area open with the 11 September reporting clock running.
ASML / Christophe Fouquet
ASML / Christophe Fouquet
ASML's Q2 guidance miss of roughly EUR 300m below consensus reflects DUV revenue compression set by US export controls, not European policy. Fouquet said 2026 guidance accommodates potential outcomes of ongoing US-China trade discussions; a bipartisan US bill to tighten DUV sales further would accelerate the cross-subsidy thinning Chips Act II's equity authority is designed to address.
Anne Le Henanff / French G7 Presidency
Anne Le Henanff / French G7 Presidency
Le Henanff chairs the 29 May Bercy ministerial two days after Brussels adopts the Tech Sovereignty Package, making the G7 communique the first international read of the Omnibus enforcement split and CAIDA's scope. France's Cloud au Centre doctrine is already operational via the Scaleway Health Data Hub contract.
German federal government
German federal government
Berlin operationalises sovereignty through procurement mandates (the ODF requirement and the Sovereign Tech Standards programme) rather than waiting for Commission legislation. The Bundeskartellamt has still not received the Cohere-Aleph Alpha merger filing, leaving Germany's flagship AI champion in structural limbo six weeks after the deal resolved.
US Trade Representative
US Trade Representative
The USTR Section 301 investigation into EU digital rules closes with a 24 July 2026 final determination. CAIDA's public-sector cloud restriction sits within the criteria that triggered the 2020 Section 301 action against France's digital services tax, and the US has not signalled whether the Thales-Google S3NS arrangement resolves CLOUD Act jurisdiction concerns.
CISPE / Valentina Mingorance
CISPE / Valentina Mingorance
CISPE shipped its own pass-fail sovereignty badge in April to establish an industry-auditable floor the Commission could adopt. Whether CAIDA inherits the CISPE binary or the multi-tier SEAL approach will determine whether certification is enforceable by public contracting authorities or requires Commission discretion.