11JUN

US gasoline hits $4.54 as Hormuz premium sticks

4 min read

09:17UTC

NBC News reports US average regular gasoline at $4.54 a gallon, up 47% from pre-war. Axios analysts no longer expect prices to retrace on a deal because Hormuz risk is now structurally priced in.

← Back to IRGC declares Hormuz shut; US strikes again Jump to analysis ↓

ConflictDeveloping

Key takeaway

The Hormuz premium is now baked into US pump prices and underwriter models; a signature would not unwind it.

NBC News reported on 8 May that the US average regular gasoline price reached $4.54 a gallon in early May, up from sub-$3 before the war began on 28 February: a 47% rise that adds roughly $24 per fill-up against the pre-war baseline ¹. North American jet fuel has risen 95% over the same period. USPS, Amazon and FedEx have all imposed fuel surcharges since the United Arab Emirates quit OPEC+ on 1 May, removing five million barrels per day of quota discipline from the producer cartel.

Axios reported on 7 May that analysts no longer expect prices to retrace to pre-war levels even if the MOU is signed. A structural premium is now priced in because Iran demonstrated, via the Persian Gulf Strait Authority and the IRGC's mining declarations earlier in the campaign, that it can halt Strait of Hormuz traffic at will. The premium reflects the view of marine insurance underwriters about the risk, not the physical flow on any given day. P&I clubs cannot reprice the strait without a verifier-backed enrichment baseline, which the MOU does not currently provide.

The market moved hard on the MOU report itself. Brent Crude swung 11% intraday on 8 May, falling from $101.20 at the 7 May close to roughly $96 before Trump's "too soon" comment recovered it to a $101.27 settlement ². WTI fell 15% intraday to $88 a barrel before recovering to $95.08. The peace dividend is currently worth between thirteen and fifteen per cent of the Brent price; the disappointment is worth roughly the same. A signature would crystallise the discount; the absence of one keeps the gap floating.

The 1973-74 oil-shock parallel is closer than the 1990 one. Both 1973 and 2026 paired supply disruption with structural-credibility loss in the producer-consumer relationship; in 1990 the disruption was discrete and confidence in Saudi reserve capacity was intact. The 1973-74 premium took eighteen months to unwind even after Saudi production normalised. Axios's 7 May analyst panel reached the same conclusion for 2026. Logistics surcharges from USPS, Amazon and FedEx will feed the next CPI print with a six-to-eight-week lag, the first to capture the full surcharge rollout.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Petrol prices in the US have hit $4.54 per gallon, up 47% from before the Iran war began. Most people assume the price rise is just because less oil is flowing through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway Iran controls, through which about a fifth of the world's oil passes. Ships carrying oil through the Strait now have to pay war-risk insurance premiums of $1-3 million per voyage on top of their normal cover, a cost that did not exist before the conflict began. That cost gets added to the price of the oil at every stage from the tanker to the refinery to the petrol station. Analysts think these insurance costs will stick even after any peace deal is signed, because insurers take months to officially re-classify a dangerous zone as safe again. A signed deal would reduce the physical risk; the insurance cost would lag behind by several months. For a typical US driver filling up a 15-gallon tank, the $1.54/gallon increase above the pre-war price adds about $23 per fill-up. With the structural insurance premium likely staying elevated through the autumn, that extra cost looks persistent rather than temporary.

What could happen next?

Consequence
Lloyd's quarterly review cycle means the Listed Area designation stays in force until at least September 2026 regardless of deal status; fuel surcharges imposed by USPS, Amazon, and FedEx will feed US CPI prints with a six-to-eight-week lag through July.
Risk
If Brent settles above $100 through June, US core CPI, already elevated by logistics surcharges, will keep the Federal Reserve from cutting rates before September, extending the domestic economic cost of the conflict beyond any diplomatic resolution timeline.

Source Landscape

This story draws on mixed-leaning sources from United States

United States

Primary parallel: The 1979 Iranian Revolution and tanker-war premium of 1984-88 is the closer structural parallel for the current insurance-driven price floor. In 1984, after Iran began attacking Kuwaiti and Saudi tankers transiting The Gulf, Lloyd's of London introduced the strait of Hormuz War Risk Zone, adding a daily surcharge of approximately 0.5% of hull value per transit day.

That premium did not disappear when the tanker war ended in August 1988; it took until the 1990-91 Gulf War resolution for insurers to reclassify Hormuz as a standard-risk zone. The structural precedent: once a chokepoint has demonstrated active lethality, insurers require verified sustained peace, not a signed ceasefire, to reprice risk. The 2026 premium will not unwind on an MOU signature alone.

Counter-parallel: The 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait produced the sharpest short-cycle oil-price spike in modern history. Brent jumped from $16 to $40 within two months, but was almost entirely reversed within six months once Saudi Arabia confirmed its spare capacity could absorb the Iraqi-Kuwaiti volume.

The 1990 case demonstrates that when an alternative supplier with credible spare capacity exists, the structural premium is temporary. In 2026 there is no credible spare capacity equivalent: the IEA's May 2026 assessment places current spare capacity at 1.3 million bpd, against an 8 million bpd disruption from the Hormuz closure. The 1990 resolution mechanism does not exist in 2026.

Marine war-risk insurance operates through the Protection and Indemnity (P&I) system, a mutual club structure underwritten by the thirteen clubs of the International Group of P&I Clubs (IG), which collectively cover approximately 90% of the world's ocean-going tonnage for third-party liability.

P&I clubs do not price war risk as standard cover; it is separately underwritten by the London and Scandinavian war-risk markets. When Lloyd's and the IG jointly declared Hormuz a Listed Area in March 2026, war-risk cover for a voyage through the strait became individually negotiated rather than rated under standard tariff schedules.

The mechanism linking Lloyd's Listed Area designation to the $4.54/gallon pump price runs through four stages. First, vessels lose automatic war-risk cover on entering the Listed Area unless they buy separate voyage endorsement, costing $1-3 million per transit for a VLCC in May 2026. Second, that cost passes through the freight rate charged to the cargo owner.

Third, the cargo owner (an oil major or national oil company) prices the freight cost into the delivered price. Fourth, the refinery margin absorbs a portion, and the remainder passes to the pump. Oxford Economics modelled the Hormuz Listed Area surcharge contributing approximately $0.40-0.55/gallon to the US retail price above and beyond the crude-price effect alone.

Axios analysts' view on 7 May, that prices will not retrace even after an MOU signature, reflects the specific P&I club repricing cycle. Lloyd's convenes war-risk Listed Area reviews on a quarterly calendar; the next scheduled review falls in September 2026. Even if the MOU is signed in May, Lloyd's repricing is structurally delayed to September absent an extraordinary mid-cycle review.

First Reported In

Update #92 · An MOU asking Iran to surrender what nobody can count

CBS News· 9 May 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

This Event

US gasoline hits $4.54 as Hormuz premium sticks

The structural insurance premium that Iran demonstrated it can impose on the strait will not unwind on signature; it requires verifier-backed enrichment freeze that the MOU does not currently provide.

Led to

Brent flat at $101.29; Hormuz floor holds

The structural Hormuz premium floor identified in ID:3162 continues to hold at $101, with Brent settling flat at $101.29 on 10 May despite the Mokhber doctrine and Doha strike

Occurred 10 May 2026

Read story →

Different Perspectives

Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters

Futures markets priced CENTCOM's strikes-complete statement as a de-escalation signal and pushed Brent down 1.7 per cent to $94.71, even as the IRGC declared Hormuz closed. Lloyd's war-risk premiums held elevated because institutional de-listing requires a UN Security Council resolution that Russia and China have just shown they will block.

Pakistan (mediator)

Interior minister Mohsin Naqvi carried dual civilian and military letters to Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on 6-7 June with no public response. The IRGC's Hormuz closure on 11 June shows the corps is acting independently of the channel Pakistan is using, making the mediation structurally unable to produce a binding commitment without direct IRGC access.

Russia and China

Russia and China voted against GOV/2026/40 at the IAEA Board, following through on the blocking position coordinated with Grossi in Geneva on 5 June; both states continue to oppose Western institutional pressure on Iran at every multilateral venue.

E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)

The E3 co-sponsored IAEA resolution GOV/2026/40, adopted 21-3-10 on 10 June, demanding Iran disclose 440.9 kg of unaccounted HEU and admit inspectors to four denied facilities. The 10 abstentions and Russia-China noes leave any Security Council referral without a viable enforcement path.

IRGC / Iran military command

The corps declared Hormuz closed to all traffic on 11 June and claimed two vessels struck, overriding the MoU its own civilian negotiators were pursuing through Pakistan. The closure order used the Persian Gulf Strait Authority apparatus to convert a toll mechanism into a military prohibition.

Trump administration / CENTCOM

CENTCOM completed a second day of strikes on Tehran, Sirik and Minab, rejected the IRGC Hormuz closure as inconsistent with observed transit, and said strikes were complete. Hegseth framed the bombing explicitly as the negotiation: the method is coercive deal-making with no stated pause threshold.