ExxonMobil and Chevron profits surge as US-Iran war reshapes energy markets
The two largest US oil companies reported combined second-quarter earnings of $26.6 billion, driven by a crude-price spike and record refining margins after the Strait of Hormuz disruption.
ExxonMobil posted a net profit of $14.5 billion for the second quarter of 2026, more than double the $7.1 billion it earned a year earlier, while Chevron’s earnings jumped to $12.1 billion from $2.5 billion. The results, published on Friday, mean Exxon alone generated roughly $160 million a day during the period. Revenue at Exxon reached $116 billion, a 42% increase, as the company’s average realised oil price in the United States climbed from $62.58 to $97.58 per barrel.
The surge was fuelled by the conflict between the United States and Iran, now in its sixth month, which has largely halted tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose from about $70 a barrel before the fighting to above $100 for much of the spring, touching $126 at one point. The supply shock was compounded by damage to refining capacity: Andy Lipow of Lipow Oil Associates estimated that the world lost 6 million to 7 million barrels per day of refining capacity, pushing margins for gasoline, jet fuel and diesel to record levels. Chevron’s downstream segment swung from an $817 million loss a year ago to a $4.9 billion profit.
Consumers bore the cost. The average US gallon of regular gasoline, which was below $3 before the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran, reached $4.10 this week. The Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University calculated that the war has cost consumers more than $76 billion in higher gasoline and diesel prices. Fuel rationing was introduced in Australia, and government offices closed in Nepal and Sri Lanka. “There are constituencies around the world who are having a very good crisis, and the oil producers are one of them,” said Patrick Galey of Global Witness, which noted that six large European oil companies had already posted first-quarter profits 43% higher than a year earlier.
In Washington, Democrats in Congress introduced bills to impose a windfall tax on major oil producers. The legislation, sponsored by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Ro Khanna, would levy a 50% tax on the difference between the current oil price and the average price per barrel last year for companies that produced or imported at least 300,000 barrels per day in 2025. President Donald Trump, meanwhile, said he had instructed the Department of Justice to investigate why gasoline prices were not falling as quickly as crude. Exxon returned $9.4 billion to shareholders during the quarter and plans full-year capital expenditure of $27-29 billion.
| Russian & CIS press | 0.00 | neutral |
|---|---|---|
| Latin American press | −0.50 | critical |
| Atlantic / Anglosphere press | −0.60 | critical |
| Iranian & allied press | −0.90 | critical |
ExxonMobil's quarterly net profit doubled to $14.53 billion due to the surge in energy prices after the start of Middle East military operations; this is a straightforward financial result.
By presenting financial data without moral context, the profit appears as a natural market outcome, avoiding any attribution of responsibility for the war.
The human cost of the war and consumer suffering are absent from the report, which only focuses on corporate earnings.
These extraordinary profits are the fruit of war; consumers pay the price while oil companies reap windfalls.
Repeated use of the term 'extraordinary' and 'windfall' alongside explicit reference to the war constructs an implicit causal link between conflict and profit, nudging readers toward moral condemnation.
The companies' own justifications (e.g., operational performance, portfolio strength) are mentioned but not weighed against the moral critique; the broader geopolitical context of the war is also downplayed.
Consumers are suffering from high fuel costs while oil companies rake in record profits – this is unjust.
The narrative focuses on consumer hardship (suffering, shortages) and contrasts it with corporate profits, creating an emotional equation of inequity that invites outrage.
The specific profit figures and companies' own explanations are missing; the role of the US government in the conflict is also not discussed.
American companies enrich themselves with Iranian blood; the world must see this injustice.
The metaphor of 'sweet taste from the bitterness of war' and the contrast with citizen suffering transforms corporate profits into a moral theft, delegitimizing both the companies and the war itself.
The article omits any mention of Iran's role in the conflict (e.g., attacks on shipping) and presents the war solely as US aggression without context.
Broaden your view
Trump Suspends Planned Iran Strikes, Citing Outline of Deal on Hormuz and Nuclear Programme
2 languages · 74 outlets
From TechnologyFalcon 9 upper stage to strike Moon on 5 August, offering rare scientific opportunity
3 languages · 8 outlets
From Science & HealthTime-restricted eating improves problem-solving in overweight older women, trial finds
4 languages · 10 outlets