Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

The Ebola outbreak in Africa could become the deadliest in history because it is spreading faster than responders can deal with it, an aid group said on May 26.

Officials failed to initially detect the outbreak due to a lack of testing sufficient to identify the Bundibugyo virus, a rarer type of virus that causes Ebola. The outbreak is centered in the Ituri province in the northeast of Congo, also known as the DRC, where fighting regularly displaces people from their homes and hospitals.

“The initial failure to detect this outbreak has allowed it to spread to several areas of Ituri province in northeast DRC, where the first cases were identified, as well as to North Kivu (just to the south of Ituri) and South Kivu provinces, and now Uganda,” the International Rescue Committee, one of the aid groups on the ground, said in a report published on Tuesday.

With cases reported in key population centers such as Goma, the capital of North Kivu, and Kampala in Uganda, there is a significant risk of onward spread of the disease, the group assessed.

“The warning signs are flashing red,” Bob Kitchen, vice president of emergencies for the group, said in a statement.

“Eastern DRC is confronting this outbreak more fragile and less prepared than during the 2018–2020 outbreak that killed more than 2,000 people—and with fewer resources to fight it. Increased conflict and cuts to global aid funding have dismantled defenses at exactly the wrong moment.”

The outbreak has risen to 101 confirmed cases, about 220 suspected deaths, and more than 900 suspected cases, about one month after the outbreak was first detected. Other countries, such as Rwanda and the United States, have restricted travel from people who have been in Congo or intensified border checks.

“The delay in detecting the outbreak means that we are now playing catch-up with a very fast-moving epidemic,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the World Health Organization’s director-general, told a meeting of African ministers on Monday.

“We are urgently scaling up operations, but at the moment, the epidemic is outpacing us.”

There are no vaccines or treatments for the Bundibugyo virus. Containment efforts include widespread testing, isolating patients, and monitoring people exposed to known or suspected cases.

Ghebreyesus said that working with the governments of Congo and Uganda and other partners would be key to stopping the outbreak. Governments and other entities on Monday pledged about $500 million to ramp up efforts to respond to and prevent further spread of the outbreak, Dr. Jean Kaseya, director-general of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in a post on X.

Technicians install beds and other equipment inside the isolation area for suspected cases at CBCA Virunga Hospital during rehabilitation work aimed at preparing the facility to receive potential Ebola cases in Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo, on May 22, 2026. Jospin Mwisha/AFP via Getty Images

The International Rescue Committee, which is based in New York, recommended several steps, including relaxing restrictions on the importation of personal protective equipment such as masks, and quickly donating funds to central Africa to support health workers and others.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, another aid group with personnel in Congo, has called for increased funding to expand surveillance and deploy more teams to help locals safely bury Ebola victims.

Patrick Muyaya, a Congolese government spokesman, said in a May 25 post on X that the epidemic was “well contained” in the Ituri, North Kivu, and South Kivu provinces.

“Every day, response teams are being strengthened and surveillance is being intensified,” he wrote, adding later that “we have the experience and expertise to contain this outbreak.”

President Trump is signaling “make a good deal” or walk away with no deal at all.

Overnight hostilities around the Hormuz maritime chokepoint highlight just how fragile the ceasefire remains as Washington and Tehran try to solidify a peace deal to end the conflict.

The timing of a peace deal is very important because, as we have warned readers, a no-deal scenario would collide with a deteriorating oil-supply backdrop by summer, when global buffers and floating storage begin to run down, and SPR releases become less effective in offsetting lost supply from the Gulf region.

Building on UBS analyst Arend Kapteyn’s note from Friday titled “When The Oil Buffers Run Out,” Brookings’ Robin Brooks and Ben Harris outline in a note that oil markets could face a massive price shock by mid-July as temporary supply buffers run dry.

There appears to be consensus building among Wall Street analysts at Goldman, JPMorgan, UBS, and many other desks that if the Hormuz chokepoint is not reopened in the near term, an energy cliff may materialize in early summer.

The Brookings analysts say crude prices have so far been depressed by three factors: trade rerouting, inventory drawdowns, and market expectations that the U.S.-Iran war would end quickly.

“The bottom line is that the supply shortfall will build in the coming months as temporary buffers are depleted. And if markets grow increasingly pessimistic over an eventual resolution to the impasse in the strait, oil prices may rise materially higher,” the Brookings analysts said.

However, they warned that the three factors capping crude prices are fading. Russian floating stocks are likely depleted by the end of April; Iranian floating stocks are expected to be gone by the end of May; and the IEA emergency oil release is projected to be exhausted by July 9.

They continued, “It is fair to say that the scale of the supply shortfall is now well-known to markets. But the timeline on which temporary buffers run out and how this interacts with prices is of critical importance.”

“This interaction means non-linear outcomes in prices—in other words, sharp price spikes—are possible the longer this conflict is expected to take. The potential for non-linear outcomes grows the longer oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remains severely encumbered,” the analysts ended the note.

Shifting back to UBS analyst Kapteyn’s note last week on oil buffers, he warned, “Oil prices can move much higher once inventories are depleted.”

He continued:

This week saw the largest-ever drawdown in US oil inventories since records began in 1982: commercial inventories and the SPR combined fell by 17.8mb. These stock draws help explain why—despite nearly three months of supply shortfalls from the Middle East—oil is still trading “only” around $105/bbl.

Oil prices and volumes are linked by the price elasticity of demand. A simple relationship allows us to approximate price outcomes under different supply disruptions and degrees of demand destruction:

The oil team estimates that the net supply loss via the Strait of Hormuz is around 9mb/d after SPR releases, equivalent to a ~9% disruption.

At $105/bbl, this implies demand elasticity of roughly –0.2: a 1% increase in prices reduces demand by 0.2% (see chart). Without SPR releases, the supply shock would be closer to 12%, implying a price nearer $123/bbl.

There are two ways in which oil prices could increase much more:

• First, if inventories are depleted they can no longer buffer the supply shortfall.
• Second, as the “easy” adjustments in consumption and production are exhausted, demand becomes less responsive to higher prices.

The chart highlights some scary combinations.

For instance, if the global supply shortfall were 14% then even with the current demand elasticity, oil should be trading closer to $140/bbl. If the demand elasticity was 0.15 rather than 0.2, the implied oil price would be $208/bbl, and if the demand elasticity was 0.1 prices would approach $372/bbl.

What we are outlining here is a growing consensus across Wall Street: a no-deal outcome between Washington and Tehran would represent a severe risk for energy markets, with the critical point of no return by early summer. That is when the temporary buffers suppressing crude prices, including emergency stockpile releases, floating storage, rerouted flows, and hopes for a diplomatic off-ramp, begin to lose effectiveness. Once those offsets are exhausted, the market would likely be forced to slap a new war risk premium more aggressively, removing the current ceiling on Brent and WTI.

JPMorgan analysts recently warned about this …

… the clock is ticking for Washington and Tehran to get a deal done or risk chaos far beyond energy markets that would spill over into shipping, then the global economy.

Authored by Peter Tchir via Academy Securities,

The Job Market – Vibes vs Data

It seems like we are on the cusp of an agreement with Iran. We will help analyze the market implications in a SITREP if and when the details are released.

In the meantime, the one question that seems to puzzle everyone, is what is the state of the job market?

Yes, there are all sorts of questions around AI, the AI and data center spend, affordability, and inflation, but the state of the job market seems to be the most puzzling of late.

The juxtaposition of daily discussions about no hiring, and fears of AI job losses, versus some stellar headline data.

Record low consumer sentiment versus ongoing spending remaining strong.

Mixed (at worst) evidence of delinquencies. There is little (that I could find) evidence of a broad-based increase in delinquencies. If you squint hard, you can see evidence of pressure on the lower income part of the population, but as of now, that’s about it.

Unemployment Rate

The last two headline numbers (from the Establishment Survey), as of now (before revisions), were 185k and 115k.Big numbers, an obvious A+ in terms of grading.

While the headline is important, for most of the country, within days of the Non-Farm Payroll (NFP) release, we started to talk less about the headline jobs and more about the unemployment rate. So that seems like a good starting point for exploring the jobs data.

We used the “official” titles from Bloomberg for the Unemployment rate (blue) and the Underemployment rate (black).

The unemployment rate has been trending down and it is close to its best level in 2 years. Let’s give the unemployment rate a grade of A- (though that feels a bit stingy).

The underemployment rate is a broader definition of unemployment. It captures people stuck in part-time, low-paying, or skill-mismatched jobs. The skill-mismatched subcategory (from AI) is the most interesting to me. Is that evidence of AI taking good entry level professional jobs?

The underemployment rate came down early this year, but from the highest levels in the past 5 years. It has been trending higher and is well above the 5-year average. I’d give underemployment a B- grade (though that feels a bit generous).

The unemployment rate is based on the Household Survey.

There are a few things that stand out:

• The gap higher for both the size of the workforce and those employed, that occurred as of December of 2024, appears to be part of annual revisions. It stands out, but is largely noise.

• The size of the labor force has not shrunk much since President Trump took office. I honestly have no idea how many illegal workers show up in the data, or whether they don’t show up in the data. Given the crackdown on illegal workers, I bet most of those jobs never showed up in the data (again, I will admit to being confused how people working illegally were counted in the jobs data, but I’m told by people much more into the weeds on this stuff, that it happens). In any case, I was a bit surprised by the labor force data in the past year remaining almost stable.

• Both the size of the labor force and the number working has shrunk in 2026! I don’t see any way to make fewer workers sound good.

  • The Establishment Survey has jobs of 160k for Jan, -156k for Feb, 185k for March, and 116k for April. Pretty darn good.

  • The Household Survey has -895k in Jan (adjustments included), -185k for Feb, -64k for March, and -226k for April. Even ignoring January, the last 3 months have been awful.

• While the Household Survey is wildly inaccurate, we seem to accept it for the unemployment rate, so why don’t we spend any time looking at it for signs regarding the job market. Again, just weird that it is deemed so “useless” for jobs, but is A OK for determining the unemployment rate? If we used the change in Establishment jobs the past few months, we’d probably be under 4% – which would be amazing!

• The final most salient point in how I think about these two data series, is that they tend to converge over time. They can deviate, often for months, but they tend to converge which tells me that we are probably headed for some weaker headline prints in the coming months.

For those of you not familiar with how I think about the two surveys used for jobs data:

• The Establishment Survey is largely inaccurate, and the Household Survey is wildly inaccurate! From the BLS the NFP data is +/- 122k at the 90% confidence level. For the Household it is +/- 676k at the 90% confidence level! (I used AI for that data, take it with a grain of salt, but you can dig deeper on the BLS site – starting with Employment Situation Technical Note).

  • Imagine reporting your quarterly returns as we made somewhere between losing $1 billion and making $5 billion, but we won’t really know for at least a year.

  • When you really think about the margin of error, it seems almost insane how many really smart people are forced to treat something that amounts to at best, a kind of, maybe reasonable, rough guess as to the current situation as gospel truth. The BLS takes the time to point out that a reading of +50k, gives a 90% confidence that the actual number of jobs is between -72k and +172k (meaning 10% of the time, like once a year, it is likely to be off by more than that!).

I’m almost disgusted with myself (even more than usual) that I am going to try and make a point using data that is just so bizarre!

But the Household Survey is a solid D. If there is any convergence in the two different jobs totals, then we should expect some pain in the Establishment Survey (i.e., the headline number).

I am not sure what to make of the Labor Force Participation Rate (hence the color purple rather than green or red).

• Lower participation rates can occur when times are good. Families are making so much money that a member of the family can step out of the labor force. Maybe stock market gains are so great that you don’t need to work? Overtime pay is so good, one member can step back?

• Lower participation rates can occur when times are bad. People get so frustrated with being able to find work, they just give up and drop out of the pool of people trying to get work.

It’s all a bit of a guess, but I suspect the labor force participation is a negative signal.

I continue to believe that the JOLTs data overstates jobs available (it doesn’t fully capture how many ghost jobs are out there, how many ads are on employment websites that are stale or weren’t removed, etc.).

Even if I’m not correct on my assumption that it is overstated, the jobs available picture deteriorated over the past several years and hasn’t really improved. That would provide some support that labor force participation is dropping due to frustration with the ability to find a job.

My “favorite” piece of data is the QUIT data. I like it because it “crowd sourced.” It is one of the few pieces of data where we get to see what the average worker is thinking. People tend to QUIT when they know they can find another job easily! People tend to stay in jobs, even ones they don’t like, until they find a better job, in a tough labor market. That seems to fit.

I don’t like the HIRE rate quite as much, but it is difficult to fake. It did tick higher recently (I put some green on the chart) but it is NOT showing robust hiring.

This whole section earns a C.

Uber Eats or Law School

According to AI “Law school applications have surged roughly 15% to 33%!”

Nothing says, I’m worried about AI, so I should go to law school, because certainly AI won’t affect the need for junior lawyers.

We tend to see law school applications spike when it is difficult for college graduates to get jobs. We saw this with the GFC. Then, at least, it made more sense. Law school is a great place to hide out for a few years and wind up with a pretty good job if you can do well. But right now? If it is a bad time to graduate from college, I am not sure that in 3 years (as AI improves) it is going to be a great time to graduate from law school. I could be wrong, but off hand, becoming a lawyer “suddenly” (see the spike in applications) seems to be a traditional response in a world that is rapidly evolving.

All of which brings me to my least favorite part of the jobs data – the birth/death model!

I know that not all of the adjustment passes through to the establishment number. But I still think it is useful to think about this number.

My contention is, and remains that:

• At one time people applied for an EIN (Employment Identification Number) because they were creating a real business. Hire a couple of people and make a go of it.

• I believe that with the gig economy people apply for an EIN when they are looking for a side hustle to make some extra money. One client this past week told me that one of the fintech firms provides basically one click functionality to create an LLC and get an EIN. For those with rental properties, get an EIN for each one? For more sophisticated participants get one for Uber, Lyft, etc.?

The gig economy has become a major way to supplement income. With more tools making it easier to run gig jobs as businesses, more will do it. I believe the Big Beautiful Tax Bill provides some benefits to those running their gig businesses as such.

I think that the number of jobs created for each EIN application is less than 1 (many are already working, so just adding another enterprise to their toolkit), hence the birth/death model methodology massively overstates jobs.

• Given the large annual job revisions we’ve been getting, I think there is a very strong case, that overstatement of jobs during the course of the year via the birth/death adjustment is the prime culprit.

This year’s birth/death model seems bizarrely similar to last year’s (and the year before):

• -61k in Jan 2026 vs -105k in Jan 2025 vs -121k in Jan 2024.

• 90k vs 136k vs 151k in Feb, -47k vs -33k vs -21k in March, and 391k vs 393k vs 363k in April.

We have seen massive downward annual revisions. There has been work done blaming much of it on how the birth/death model works. Since we are repeating the pattern in the data month by month, maybe we can assume we will once again be told at the end of the year that the actual jobs were a lot worse than reported?

This section isn’t particularly “damning” but I find it hard to see how it supports anyone arguing that the labor market is strong!

Where The Jobs Are

The first 4 months of the year have added 304k jobs to the economy (the Establishment data as of today).

221k jobs have been added in the Health Care and Social Assistance industry.

73% of jobs have been added in one industry. Yes, a large and vital industry, but that seems like a lot.

• Is some of this related to programs enabling you to get paid to take care of a family member? I think those are great programs, but is that job creation in the way we think of job creation?

This sector doesn’t scream “growth.” If anything, it at least whispers “affordability” as for most of us, healthcare is an expense and one that I’ve seen do nothing but go up (despite how it is calculated for CPI).

The US CPI Urban Consumer Medical Health Insurance City Average has declined 22% since the start of 2021! I know they follow some calculation, but whatever the calculation is, it doesn’t reflect the reality of what employees and employers face on the health insurance premium front.

Yet another reason, that the AFFORDABILITY issue is bigger and more painful than the CPI/Inflation issue. But that rant, is a rant for another day.

Bottom Line

There seems to be, at first blush, an inconsistency between the “vibe” on jobs and the published data.

I think that inconsistency goes away if we broaden what official data we look at.

The Fed should be concerned about jobs. At the moment they aren’t, but they should be.

I would like to see a lot more jobs being created in the ProSec™ industries, than we’ve seen of late. Maybe, if we can move beyond the Iran war, the admin will provide even more support, more quickly to these crucial industries! They are working on it as you read this, but if the President is able to direct even more attention to this, it would help.

One last word on AI and jobs. We don’t know what it does for jobs going forward, but the AI and data center buildout is creating jobs right now! We can (and will) debate the outlook for jobs as AI improves and becomes more prevalent, but the buildout does create a lot of jobs – not just in the construction, but also in the power generation and other adjacent businesses.

Without the AI and data center spend, we’d have even more concerns about the current job market, but that spend looks set to continue, which will help, and maybe buy us the time to get ProSec™ more fully ramped up!

SSDD: with stocks set to hit new record highs, the hope this morning once again is that the days may be numbered for the war in Iran, with momentum building since the start of the weekend that a deal could be in the works. Brent, which ended last week at $103.54/bbl, is this morning trading at $97.87/bbl, around -5.48% lower than Friday’s close. However, Brent had got as low as $96.02 late yesterday before news overnight that US and Israeli jets conducted fresh strikes in Southern Iran, hitting missile launch sites and mine-laying boats. These actions were described as “defensive” and not an end to the ceasefire with Iran.

Net net, optimism is still elevated that an agreement can be made to end the war. We have been here before, of course, but it has felt for some time that the move towards peace has been three steps forward and one or two back. It is now 48 days since the main kinetic encounters, and according to DB’s Jim Reid, such a prolonged truce and ceasefire would not have held if the US genuinely wanted to continue strikes, unless there was absolutely no alternative. Last night’s targeted action is clearly a warning shot that the ceasefire is fragile though, so we will have to see what the next few days of negotiations bring.

Moving on to the rest of this week, inflation once again dominates with important price data across the US, Europe and Japan. In the US, the clear focal point is Thursday’s April personal income and spending report (Thursday), which contains the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge. DB economists expect core PCE inflation at around +0.3% month-on-month, unchanged from March, with the year-on-year rate edging higher. This release matters not just for the inflation print itself, but for how it fits with the broader narrative of sticky services inflation and resilient demand.

On the real economy side of the same report (Thursday), economists expect momentum to cool after a very strong March, with personal consumption growth slowing back to around +0.3% month-on-month and personal income rising by roughly +0.4%. This comes after a hawkish speech from Waller on Friday. He discussed how the recent labor market and inflation data had caused him to reevaluate the balance of risks with inflation becoming the “driving force” behind monetary policy in the near term. In particular, he noted that he would support changing language in the statement to remove the easing bias and make it clear that “a rate cut is no more likely in the future than a rate increase”. In light of this there is a lot of Fedspeak to watch this week. You can see a list in the day-by-day calendar at the end as usual but keep an eye on Minneapolis’s Kashkari (today) and Dallas’s Logan (tomorrow), both of whom had dissented against the easing bias in the April statement. They are likely to repeat their view that the stance of monetary policy should be more balanced, particularly as inflation risks remain front of mind.

Staying with the Fed, last Friday, DB’s Chief US economist, Matt Luzzetti, wrote an interesting piece entitled “overinsured” where he discusses how the Fed has delivered 175bps of rate cuts in this cycle even as inflation has remained well above target, framing the last round as “insurance” or “risk management” cuts in response to elevated downside labor market risks. Matt suggests that relative to a set of standard policy rules, the first set of cuts in 2024 was appropriate. But following the second set last year, and the recent acceleration of inflation, the fed funds rate is now significantly below all policy rule settings. This finding is robust to different plausible estimates of r-star and the use of economic forecasts instead of current inflation and unemployment in the policy rules. 

Beyond PCE, Thursday also brings durable goods orders (Thursday), where our economists look for a modest headline increase consistent with steady but unspectacular capital spending momentum. Earlier in the week, the Conference Board’s consumer confidence index (tomorrow) is expected to edge lower, potentially reflecting the cumulative impact of higher rates and policy uncertainty. Weekly initial jobless claims (Thursday) remain an important high-frequency signal on labor market conditions, although holiday effects may add some volatility.

In Europe, attention turns to the May flash inflation prints at the end of the week, with Germany, France, Italy and Spain all reporting on Friday, ahead of the Eurozone aggregate the following week. DB economists expect inflation to remain above target across the region. Alongside the data, the ECB publishes the account of its April meeting (Thursday) and its Financial Stability Review (Wednesday), offering further insight into how policymakers are balancing lingering inflation pressures against softer growth and financial stability considerations.

In Asia, Japan is the key focus. Friday’s Tokyo CPI (Friday) will provide an early read on national inflation trends, alongside April industrial production and retail sales (Friday). Our economists expect inflation measures to firm modestly, underscoring that price pressures remain present even as activity data stay mixed. Elsewhere, China releases industrial profits (tomorrow), Australia publishes its April CPI (Wednesday), and the RBNZ announces its latest policy decision (tomorrow), where most economists expect the cash rate to be left unchanged.

On the corporate side, earnings highlights include US tech names such as Dell, Marvell and Salesforce, alongside consumer-facing firms including Costco and Dollar Tree, with most results clustered around mid-to-late week.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Tuesday May 26

• Data: US May Conference Board consumer confidence index, May Dallas Fed manufacturing activity, Philadelphia Fed non-manufacturing activity, April Chicago Fed national activity index, March FHFA house price index, Q1 house price purchase index, France April retail sales
• Central banks: ECB’s Sleijpen speaks
• Earnings: AutoZone, Zscaler
• Auctions: US 2-yr Notes ($69bn)

Wednesday May 27

• Data: US May Richmond Fed manufacturing index, business conditions, Dallas Fed services activity, China April industrial profits, Japan April PPI services, France May consumer confidence, Italy March industrial sales, EU27 April new car registrations, Australia April CPI
• Central banks: Fed’s Kashkari, Logan and Cook speak, ECB Financial Stability Review, RBNZ decision
• Earnings: Marvell, Salesforce, Synopsys, Snowflake
• Auctions: US 2-yr FRN (reopening, $28bn), 5-yr Notes ($70bn)

Thursday May 28

• Data: US April PCE, personal income, spending, durable goods orders, new home sales, initial jobless claims, France April PPI, Italy May consumer confidence index, economic sentiment, manufacturing confidence, April PPI, Eurozone May economic confidence, Canada Q1 current account balance, Norway Q1 GDP
• Central banks: Fed’s Jefferson, Goolsbee, Musalem and Williams speak, ECB’s account of the April decision, ECB’s Lane, Cipollone and Schnabel speak, BoE’s Lombardelli and Breeden speak, BoC Financial Stability Report
• Earnings: Costco, Dell, Autodesk, SSE, MongoDB, Dollar Tree
• Auctions: US 7-yr Notes ($44bn)

Friday May 29

• Data: US April advance goods trade balance, retail inventories, wholesale inventories, May MNI Chicago PMI, UK May Lloyds Business Barometer, Japan May Tokyo CPI, consumer confidence index, April jobless rate, job-to-applicant ratio, retail sales, industrial production, housing starts, Germany May CPI, unemployment claims rate, France May CPI, April consumer spending, Q1 total payrolls, Italy May CPI, April unemployment rate, Canada Q1 GDP, Sweden Q1 GDP
• Central banks: Fed’s Daly, Bowman and Paulson speak, ECB’s Panetta, Radev and Muller speak, BoE’s Bailey speaks

Finally, looking at just the US, the economic data releases this week are the durable goods report and the PCE inflation report on Thursday. There are several speaking engagements with Fed officials this week, including events with Vice Chair Jefferson and Vice Chair for Supervision Bowman; Governors Cook and Waller; and Presidents Goolsbee, Logan, Williams, Musalem, Barkin, Schmid, Paulson, and Daly

Tuesday, May 26 

• 09:00 AM FHFA house price index, March (consensus +0.1%, last flat)
• 09:00 AM Case-Shiller home price index, March (GS -0.3%, consensus -0.1%, last -0.1%) 
• 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, May (GS 91.5, consensus 92.0, last 92.8)
• 10:00 AM Dallas Fed manufacturing index, May (consensus flat, last -2.3)

Wednesday, May 27 

• 04:00 AM Dallas Fed President Logan (FOMC voter) speaks: Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan will take part in a panel on monetary policy at an event hosted by the Bank of Japan. Text is expected. In a statement explaining her dissent from the implicit easing bias in the April FOMC’s post-meeting statement, Logan said she was “increasingly concerned about how long it will take inflation to return all the way to the FOMC’s 2 percent target.” Logan stressed that “PCE inflation has exceeded 2 percent for more than five years” and that “even before recent increases in the prices of energy and other commodities, [measures of inflation that strip out extreme price changes or categories where prices are more volatile] had been running meaningfully above 2 percent.” In addition, she noted that “the conflict in the Middle East raises the prospect of prolonged or repeated supply disruptions that could create further inflationary pressures.”
• 10:00 AM Richmond Fed manufacturing index, May (consensus +4, last +3)
• 03:55 PM Fed Governor Cook speaks: Fed Governor Lisa Cook will deliver a speech on AI, the economy, and the financial system at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR)’s Policy Forum. Text and moderated Q&A are expected.
• 08:00 PM Fed Vice Chair Jefferson speaks: Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson will deliver a speech on monetary policy and supply shocks at an event hosted by the Bank of Japan. Text and Q&A are expected. On April 7th, Jefferson said he saw “our current policy stance as appropriately positioned to allow us to assess how the economy evolves.” Jefferson said he “remain[s] cautious about [the] outlook,” as “uncertainty about the economy is elevated, and the rise in energy prices and the conflict in the Middle East add to that uncertainty.”
• 10:25 PM Chicago Fed President Goolsbee (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee will take part in a panel on monetary policy and the world economy at an event hosted by the Bank of Japan.

Thursday, May 28 

• 08:30 AM Personal income, April (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.6%); Personal spending, April (GS +0.7%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.9%); Core PCE price index, April (GS +0.29%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.3%); Core PCE price index (YoY), April (GS +3.31%, consensus +3.3%, last +3.2%); PCE price index, April (GS +0.44%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.7%); PCE price index (YoY), April (GS +3.78%, consensus +3.8%, last +3.5%): We estimate that personal income and spending increased by 0.5% and 0.7%, respectively, in April. We estimate that the core PCE price index rose 0.29% in April, corresponding to a year-over-year rate of +3.31%. Additionally, we estimate that the headline PCE price index increased 0.44% in April, or increased 3.78% from a year earlier.
• 08:30 AM GDP, Q1 second release (GS +2.0%, consensus +2.0%, last +2.0%); Personal consumption, Q1 second release (GS +1.7%, consensus +1.7%, last +1.6%); Core PCE inflation, Q1 second release (GS +4.26%, consensus +4.3%, last +4.3%): We estimate no revision on net to Q1 GDP growth at +2.0% (quarter-over-quarter annualized), reflecting an upward revision to consumer spending growth (+0.1pp to +1.7%) due to stronger utilities and public transportation details in the quarterly census survey (QSS), offset by downward revisions to inventory accumulation and net exports growth.
• 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended May 23 (GS 210k, consensus 212k, last 209k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended May 16 (consensus 1,780k, last 1,782k)
• 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, April preliminary (GS +1.0%, consensus +3.9%, last +0.8%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, April preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.9%); Core capital goods orders, April preliminary (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.4%, last +3.4%); Core capital goods shipments, April preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.6%, last +1.2%): We estimate that durable goods orders increased 1% in the preliminary April report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted) based on our tracking of commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.3% increase in core capital goods orders—reflecting the continued increase in the new orders components in manufacturing surveys in April but payback for an outsized increase in the series itself in March—and a 0.5% increase in core capital goods shipments—reflecting the continued increase in core capital goods orders in recent months.
• 08:55 AM New York Fed President Williams (FOMC voter) speaks: New York Fed President John Williams will deliver a speech at the Reykjavik Economic Conference in Iceland. Text and moderated Q&A are expected. On May 14th, Williams said monetary policy was “in a good place,” which he characterized as “mildly restrictive,” and noted that he did not “see that there’s any reason to raise rates right now, or lower rates.”
• 10:00 AM New home sales, April (GS -3.0%, consensus -3.5%, last +7.4%) 
• 10:15 AM St. Louis Fed President Musalem (FOMC non-voter) speaks: St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem will deliver a speech at the Reykjavik Economic Conference in Iceland. On May 6th, Musalem said that “the risks have been shifting towards more risk on the inflation side than the employment side” and that “there are very plausible scenarios under which the economy would require us to keep the policy rate at its current level for some time.”
• 03:00 PM Richmond Fed President Barkin (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin will take part in a fireside chat at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School in Washington, DC. Moderated Q&A is expected. On May 21st, Barkin noted that “with inflation above our 2% target for over five years now, it’s worth asking whether the cumulative impact of so many waves risks loosening the anchor.” At the same time, Barkin emphasized downside risks to employment from AI, noting that “everyone I talk to is talking about AI and AI-related job loss.”

Friday, May 29 

• 06:50 AM Kansas City Fed President Schmid (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid will deliver a speech at the Reykjavik Economic Conference in Iceland. Text and moderated Q&A are expected. On May 14th, Schmid said that “continued inflation [is] the most pressing risk to the economy,” while “unemployment remains relatively low by historical standards, and the labor market is functioning effectively.”
• 08:30 AM Advance goods trade balance, April (GS -$84.0bn, consensus -$86.4bn, last -$87.4bn): We estimate that the goods trade deficit narrowed by $3.4bn to $84.0bn, driven by a decline in imports of computers and other electronic products from Asia.
• 09:10 AM Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Bowman speaks: Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman will deliver a speech on monetary policy at the Reykjavik Economic Conference in Iceland. Text is expected.
• 09:15 AM Philadelphia Fed President Paulson (FOMC voter) speaks: Philadelphia Fed President Anna Paulson will take part in an event hosted by The Chamber of Commerce Southern New Jersey. Audience Q&A is expected. On May 19th, Paulson said that she saw the current stance of policy as “mildly restrictive and that restrictiveness is helping to keep inflation pressures in check while the labor market remains stable.” As a result, Paulson noted, “keeping rates steady allows us to assess how the economy is evolving and the risks to both price stability and the labor market.” Paulson said that “assuming the labor market remains in balance, rate cuts would only become appropriate once we have seen sustained progress on inflation.” She also noted that she thought it was “healthy that market participants have taken on board scenarios where the funds rate remains unchanged for an extended period, as well as scenarios where further tightening becomes necessary.”
• 10:00 AM Wholesale inventories, April preliminary (consensus +0.4%, last +0.6%)
• 12:40 PM San Francisco Fed President Daly (FOMC non-voter) speaks: San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly will speak at the 2026 Reagan National Economic Forum in Simi Valley, California. On May 7th, Daly said that she thought “the phrasing of the [FOMC’s post-meeting] statement is less important than the actions.” Daly noted that “if the [Middle East] conflict ends and oil prices come back down and that doesn’t get passed into the broader economy, then I expect the underlying dynamics that we were facing prior to the conflict to return.” Daly characterized the current monetary policy stance as “slightly restrictive,” which would help put some downward pressure on inflation. She noted that she did not see the labor market as a source of inflationary pressure.

Source: DB, Goldman

ASP Isotopes cleared a major operational milestone at its Pretoria Silicon-28 enrichment facility, restarting the first 18 stages, and has now run them for over three weeks at target enrichment levels. Commercial shipments to U.S. customers are on track for Q3 2026.

The stock was up over 25% in early trading, back at its highest levels since January…

The restart follows nine months of targeted engineering work on non-core components. Fixes will now roll out across the remaining stages, and samples shipped to a U.S. customer last August already confirmed enrichment performance matched theoretical models.

Three commercial contracts are already signed with American buyers. 

“As we scale our production capabilities over the coming quarters, both of these applications will be central to our strategy,” said Stefano Marani, President of ASP Isotopes’ Electronics and Space division. “We have seen considerable interest in many isotopes to enable next-generation technologies.”

The material is headed for two high-stakes applications. In quantum computing, enriched Silicon-28 dramatically extends qubit coherence times by reducing nuclear spin noise. In conventional semiconductors, the isotope’s superior thermal conductivity improves heat dissipation and device reliability.

We discussed ASPI’s silicon segment back in October when they announced their largest ever supply contract and acquired a U.S.-based radiopharmacy. “The company is targeting demand ’for isotopes such as Silicon-28, which will enable quantum computing, and Molybdenum-100, Molybdenum-98, Zinc-68, Ytterbium-176, and Nickel-64 for new, emerging healthcare applications, as well as Chlorine-37, Lithium-6, and Uranium-235 for green energy applications.’”

The company is now making progress on multiple fronts, including the helium sector after completing its acquisition of Renergen, which has a project in South Africa. 

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Iranian leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued a message on May 26 calling for greater unity across the Muslim world against the United States and Israel, saying that the chants “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” will become the rallying slogans of Muslims and “the oppressed of the world.”

Khamenei’s message was to mark Hajj, the annual Islamic pilgrimage. In it, Khamenei described a historic struggle against U.S. and Israeli influence in the Middle East, repeatedly invoking the revolutionary slogan “Allahu Akbar” as the “weapon” that had enabled Iran and its allies to resist outside pressure.

He said Iran had succeeded in “making the Zionist regime helpless under its severe blows during the second imposed war” and in delivering “a harsh slap to aggressive America,” while thwarting efforts to force Tehran into submission.

The statement also praised what it called the “Resistance Front,” saying Iranian forces and allied fighters in Lebanon had secured “notable victories” against “the two terrorist armies, armed to the teeth by the American-Zionist side.”

Khamenei coupled the militant rhetoric with a broader appeal for cooperation among Muslim-majority countries, calling on regional countries to “no longer serve as shields for American bases” while denouncing Israel as a “faltering” regime that was nearing “the final stages of its cursed life.”

Fragile Diplomacy Continues

Khamenei’s message came as the United States, Israel, and Iran remain locked in a tense standoff following months of fighting that included U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear and military facilities, Iranian retaliation across the region, and disruptions to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

Although a ceasefire has largely held, negotiations continue over a proposed memorandum of understanding intended to end hostilities and establish a framework for future talks.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on May 25 that negotiations with Tehran were “proceeding nicely” but warned that failure to secure an acceptable agreement could lead to renewed military action.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio similarly said Trump would not accept a “bad deal” with Iran and warned that Washington would pursue “another way” if diplomacy failed.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the U.S. State Department in Washington on April 14, 2026. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

“The President said he’s not in a hurry. He’s not going to make a bad deal,” Rubio said during a briefing in India. “We’re going to give diplomacy every chance to succeed before we explore the alternatives.”

Details of the proposed memorandum of understanding remain unclear, with Trump saying that “nobody has seen it, or knows what it is.”

According to Iranian officials, the proposed memorandum focuses primarily on ending the fighting, easing sanctions and blockades, and reopening maritime routes through the Strait of Hormuz, while postponing the most contentious nuclear issues—such as the fate of its stockpile of enriched uranium—for later negotiations.

Trump said in a May 25 post on Truth Social that Iran’s uranium would either be “destroyed in place” under the proposed deal, or handed over to the United States, or taken to another “acceptable location” for disposal under the auspices of the Atomic Energy Commission or equivalent authority.

He has also linked a broader regional settlement to an expansion of the Abraham Accords, saying countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan should normalize relations with Israel as part of a comprehensive peace pact.

Iran Eyes Strategic Shift

Senior Israeli security officials told Epoch Magazine Israel that Tehran views the emerging memorandum not just as a mechanism to halt the fighting, but as a potentially transformative geopolitical turning point.

According to the officials, Iranian leaders increasingly view the shift from direct military confrontation toward gradual negotiations as a strategic success after months of military, economic, and diplomatic pressure from the United States and Israel.

Iranian media reports, cited by the Israeli officials, have portrayed Tehran as successfully pushing Washington toward a step-by-step negotiating framework rather than a rapid comprehensive settlement.

A woman holds up pictures of Iranian leader Mojtaba Khamenei (L) and his father, the slain Ali Khamenei, in a state-organized rally celebrating the birthday of Imam Reza, the 8th Shiite Muslim imam, and supporting the supreme leader, in Tehran, Iran, on April 29, 2026. Vahid Salemi/AP Photo

From Tehran’s perspective, the officials said, the evolving arrangement is being presented domestically as evidence that the United States retreated from maximalist demands and failed to achieve key objectives through force. These include the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program, weakening the Islamic Republic, and diminishing Iran’s regional influence.

That interpretation aligns with the tone of Khamenei’s Hajj message, which presented Iran and the broader “Resistance Front” as growing in power while portraying the United States and Israel as weakening.

Campaign Assessment in Focus

Debate has emerged in Washington and among foreign policy analysts over whether the U.S.–Israeli campaign against Iran has been a success or a failure.

The White House has strongly defended the operation, pointing to Iran having suffered major military setbacks, including damage to missile stockpiles, naval assets, and leadership structures.

Emergency crews work at the site of a US-Israeli strike on a residential building that also destroyed the adjacent Rafi-Nia Synagogue in Tehran, Iran, on April 7, 2026. Majid Saeedi/Getty Images

White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales said the United States had “met or surpassed all of our military objectives in ‘Operation Epic Fury.’”

“President Trump holds all the cards and wisely keeps all options on the table,” she added.

Alexander Gray, a former senior adviser in Trump’s first term and now chief executive officer of the American Global Strategies consultancy, said that the war had pulled Gulf states closer to the United States and away from China, while the blow to Iranian military capabilities should be seen as a strategic success.

Critics contend that Tehran has survived the assault while retaining key leverage, particularly its ability to threaten global energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations, described the conflict as “a war that was designed to be a short-term romp for Trump” that was now turning into “a long-term strategic failure.”

A couple with a dog ride a motorbike at Enqelab Square in Tehran, Iran, on April 28, 2026. Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images

Other analysts have argued that Iran’s leadership increasingly views survival itself as a victory, especially as negotiations move away from immediate dismantlement of Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure and toward a slower diplomatic process.

“What they discovered is they can exercise that leverage and with few consequences for them,” said Jonathan Panikoff, a former deputy national intelligence officer for the Middle East, adding that Iran appeared confident it could outlast Trump by being able to tolerate more economic pain.

Iran’s effective control of the Strait of Hormuz has sent oil soaring, with prices at the pump for American drivers jumping to a four-year high, pushing consumer sentiment to record lows.

After declining MoM for the first time since June 2025 in February, US home prices in America’s 20 largest cities were expected to dip again in March (according to the latest data from S&P Cotality Case-Shiller) and they did, dropping 0.16% MoM (worse than the 0.10% MoM drop expected) leaving prices up just 0.83% YoY…

Source: Bloomberg

That is the weakest annual appreciation since July 2023.

“More than half of the 20 major U.S. housing markets recorded year-over-year price declines in March, reflecting a broadening and deepening housing slowdown,” said Nicholas Godec, CFA, CAIA, CIPM, Head of Fixed Income Tradables & Commodities at S&P Dow Jones Indices.

The trend is clear across almost every city…

And the two-year chart looks particularly ugly…

“The geographic divergence remains stark,” Godec continued.

“Midwest and Northeast markets are sustaining modest growth, while much of the Sun Belt and Western regions are still seeing declines. Chicago led all cities with a 6.1% annual gain, followed by New York (4.0%) and Cleveland (3.0%). In contrast, Seattle’s 2.5% year-over-year decline was the steepest in March, with Denver (-2.0%), Tampa (-1.9%), Dallas (-1.7%), and Phoenix (-1.6%) joining Seattle among the weakest performers. Even Los Angeles (-1.6%) and Washington (-0.1%) turned negative.

The spread between the strongest and weakest markets – 8.6 percentage points, from Chicago’s +6.1% to Seattle’s -2.5% – highlights how localized this housing cycle has become. (Detroit’s March reading remains unavailable due to local transaction data delays.)

Given the lag in Case-Shiller data, one could argue that prices should be starting to rise here…

“Mortgage rates, meanwhile, have resumed climbing. The 30-year fixed rate dipped below 6% in late February but rebounded to roughly 6.4% by the end of March, re-intensifying the affordability squeeze on buyers and potentially further damping home sales and price growth,” Godec concluded.

But the oddly tight coupling with Fed Reserves suggests the path is lower…

Interestingly, for the 10th consecutive month, inflation outpaced national home price appreciation, with March CPI running 2.6 percentage points above the 0.7% annual gain, extending the streak of negative real home price returns.

Is this Trump’s ‘affordability’ plan kicking in? Or just lagged rates finally impacting reality.

They keep doing it because the consequences are not harsh enough yet, and they enjoy the protection of Democrat politicians and NGO-backed funding.  Without support from the Democrat Party and global non-profits, the Anti-ICE movement would not exist.  In other words, they’re astroturf. 

Of course, that doesn’t stop them from causing all kinds of trouble. Federal agents moved within the past 48 hours to break down a make-shift “autonomous zone” built by leftist activists around the New Jersey Delaney Hall ICE facility in Newark. 

🚨 NOW: Anti-ICE “protestors” have put a BARRIER outside the ICE facility in Newark, and are BLOCKING vehicles from entering and leaving

Is this SERIOUSLY being tolerated now??!

Start flooding the street with TEARGAS and FORCE them to move. pic.twitter.com/J7WQy8Pr2n

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) May 25, 2026

Tear gas and other less-lethal means were deployed after protesters tried to establish encampments and barricades to block vehicles from entering or leaving the site.

BREAKING: CLASHES between ICE agents agents and leftist rioters broke out this morning at the ICE facility in Newark, NJ as rioters attempted to BLOCK ICE vehicles

ICE ROUGHED UP these twerps.

Well done, ICE! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/XFSDZkscBN

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) May 25, 2026

The primary NGO organizing the NJ actions is The New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice (NJAIJ), which has been heavily involved in the Delaney protests.  These state level NGOs are often two or three layers away from larger organizers and, more often than not, money from globalist foundations like Open Society, Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation is flowing into their coffers.  

The strategies employed by activists have become standard – Incite, provoke, sabotage and disrupt until agents respond with force, then let the establishment media cherry pick footage to paint ICE as the villains while Democrat politicians “demand access and answers”.  It is a finely tuned and well organized agitation operation.

Democrat representatives continue to spread lies about the intended scope of deportations – Claiming that the operations are “not supposed to target people without criminal records”.  So, let’s be clear:

The Trump Administration has always said that deportations will apply to all illegal immigrants, not just those that committed crimes after entering the country.  At no point has Trump said immigration enforcement would be limited to aliens with rap sheets.  By extension, all illegal migrants are, by definition, criminals.

Democrats have knowingly persisted with this false narrative in order to inject it into the public discourse.  It has no validity, and the majority of the populace continues to support mass deportations.

Sob stories, performative theatrics and fake hunger strikes aside, deportations continue at a steady pace.  ICE efforts have led to 72,044 removals of illegals since April 4th, averaging around 1286 deportations per day.  Trump has announced plans to expand these actions into the end of the year, with larger processing facilities already built and more agent trained. 

Though some critics argue that the number of deportations is not enough, it’s important to remember that it was far easier for the Biden Administration to open the borders up and let illegals pour in than it is to get them back out of the country again.  It is also likely that, as Trump’s deportations increase, NGO activists will return in greater numbers to disrupt. 

As long as they can operate with relative impunity within blue states and sanctuary cities, this paid army of saboteurs will remain an ongoing obstacle.     

The Deep State just upgraded from clunky human fact-checkers to AI that scales narrative control at lightspeed.

As Tony Seruga wrote on X:

No more paper trails, subpoenas, or exposed biases – just seamless manipulation.

Automated Shaping at Scale

AI floods zones with thousands of subtly varied “organic” rebuttals in seconds.

Pre-bunks emerging stories before they trend.

Detects your writing style, reasoning patterns, and source chains to dynamically throttle—no crude bans needed.

Infrastructure Already Live

CISA’s old “election security” coordination with platforms?

Content-agnostic and ready for new “harm” definitions.

Palantir, CrowdStrike & intel partners embed AI trained on classified data into commercial tools.

WEF’s “whole-of-society” push demands exactly this AI governance.

The Upgrade

Old fact-checkers left audit trails (funding, revolving doors).

AI is a black box: “The algorithm decided.”

Trained on curated data that associates inconvenient truths with “low quality.”

Plausible deniability baked in.

Endgame?

Not winning debates—making certain ideas unthinkable.

Never seen, never debated.

Just endless “helpful” corrections from voices that feel trustworthy.

Antidote: Think independently. Support alternative platforms. Never outsource your mind to machines or badges. Question everything.

The machine doesn’t wear a “FALSE” stamp—it whispers consensus until you believe it.

What’s your move?

Ignore at your own peril!

Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

• Europe risks a major gas storage shortfall if disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz continue for another 1–3 months, with inventories still far below normal seasonal levels.

• LNG supply disruptions, strong Asian demand, and distorted gas pricing have made refilling storage unusually difficult and expensive across the EU.

• Equinor warns prolonged disruptions could push Dutch TTF gas prices toward €90/MWh, forcing industrial demand destruction and fuel switching across Europe.

Europe could face a critical shortfall in natural gas stocks if shipping disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz persist for another 1-3 months, senior executives at Norwegian energy giant, Equinor ASA (NYSE:EQNR), have warned. Europe entered the current summer refill season with severely depleted gas reserves, with gas stores only 28% full following a prolonged winter. Europe’s storage levels are currently at 35-37%, significantly below the 50% seasonal norm, increasing the risk that the continent will miss its usual 90% target at the beginning of the next winter heating season. The European Union requires member states to maintain robust storage fill levels, typically targeting an 80% to 90% capacity by early winter. A combination of factors has made filling Europe’s largest storage hubs a daunting task heading into the latter half of the year.

First off, heavy withdrawals during winter, driven by peak household heating, coupled with a spike in industrial power demand, depressed natural gas storage levels in Northwest Europe to below 30%, roughly double the EU’s overall storage deficit. Gas levels in the Netherlands, Germany, and France fell to critically low levels before spring even began: Dutch reserves plunged to just 5.8% by the end of winter, marking the lowest level in a decade; storage levels in Germany dipped to ~20% while those in France hovered around 27% by the time spring kicked in.

Second, distorted pricing and inverted seasonal price curves have contributed to Europe’s gas crisis, with an unusual market structure wherein summer spot prices are higher than winter contracts stalling necessary storage replenishment. Dutch TTF seasonal spreads have remained in negative territory to the tune of ~€ 1.3/MWh, with the unusual backwardation disrupting the traditional dynamics of injecting gas during the cheaper summer months and withdrawing it during the colder, high-demand winter season.  Europe has also been facing an LNG squeeze, with competing global energy demands and disruptions to major LNG facilities due to the Middle East conflict making replenishing stocks highly costly. Delays and infrastructure damage at key facilities particularly in Qatar combined with a phase-out of Russian LNG have intensified global competition for spot cargoes, particularly against high demand in Asia. The inverted curve has also been partially driven by expectations of an influx of new global LNG capacity later in the year, coupled with near-term supply concerns.

EU member countries have responded to the distorted pricing mechanism using various approaches. In Italy, regulators such as ARERA and transmission system operators like Snam have introduced financial compensation schemes that allow traders to bid in auctions where the market manager pays the difference between the summer and winter gas prices at the Virtual Trading Point (PSV) to ensure storage targets are met. The situation is different in Germany, with Europe’s largest economy having historically avoided direct state subsidies to force injections, instead relying on legal mandates and market-balancing tools. Germany’s Bundesnetzagentur enforces strict statutory filling targets for natural gas storage to guarantee winter supply security. Shippers and network users are legally obligated to meet specific inventory levels, and compliance is driven by market mechanisms, capacity auctions, and strategic instruments managed by Trading Hub Europe GmbH (THE). To cover costs associated with purchasing, injecting, and managing strategic gas reserves, THE utilizes a regulatory storage neutrality charge. This levy, historically applied to exit flows and network points, helps recover the costs of state-mandated storage measures.

Despite the difference in domestic incentives, both nations are subject to EU-wide regulations, requiring minimum storage levels historically targeting 80-90% of maximum capacity ahead of the winter heating season. While Italy has leaned into financial support, Germany relies on regulatory mandates, with the goal of passing storage-filling obligations onto active wholesale market participants.

Equinor has warned that whereas a quick resolution could allow for Europe to attain a manageable 75% storage level by the end of the injection season, a 1–3 month blockage would make the situation highly critical, potentially driving TTF prices toward €90/MWh. A spike in gas prices is expected to drive market corrections, including a projected 10 billion cubic meter reduction in gas-to-power demand and increased industrial fuel switching.

That said, Europe’s current gas crisis is nowhere near as dire as the situation it faced when Russia invaded Ukraine a couple of years ago. Indeed, Germany is going ahead with the privatization process for Uniper following the company’s multi-billion-euro rescue during the 2022 energy crisis. Under the European Commission state aid rules that approved Berlin’s 2022 bailout, Germany is legally required to reduce its shareholding to a maximum of 25% plus one share by the end of 2028. Uniper’s finances have improved dramatically following a massive €40 billion net loss in 2022 triggered by the cutoff of Russian Gazprom gas. The utility won major arbitration damages, and has already begun repaying government aid. This financial health makes it highly attractive to private markets. Headquartered in Düsseldorf, Uniper is one of Germany’s largest gas importers and a key player in Europe’s gas trading and storage networks.