The Trump administration has backed away from a potential diesel export ban that was floated as a way to lower prices at the pump, a proposal economists warned could have ultimately driven up costs for American consumers and businesses.

The administration’s latest position marked something of an about-face after President Donald Trump told reporters Tuesday at the United Nations General Assembly in New York that he had urged aides to consider keeping more diesel at home. 

«I’ve said let’s not send out the diesel. We make a lot of diesel,» Trump said. «I’ve called for it within my people. I’ve been talking about it.» Alongside Trump, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the administration was evaluating whether an export ban was «feasible in terms of the overall refining capacity» and whether «a full or partial ban would work.»

But a White House official told Digital on Wednesday that the administration was no longer considering an export ban, adding that «the president always makes the decision that is best for the American people. He wants to see gas prices at the pump fall and is evaluating all the options on the table.»

Diesel and all major global crude prices have become an unexpected political headache ahead of November’s midterm elections as the war in Iran enters its eight month and shipping routes for oil remain significantly blocked or interrupted by conflict. 

The national average for diesel climbed to $6.53 per gallon for the week of Sept. 21, 2026, up from $3.75 during the comparable week a year prior, according to federal energy data.

Gasoline may get the headlines, but diesel is the workhorse fuel powering the trucks, farm equipment, freight trains and heavy machinery that keep the U.S. economy moving.

«The price of diesel touches everything within the transportation services category of the American economy. That means there will be an increase in your grocery prices, because everything that gets delivered to the grocery store will get that much more expensive with further rises in diesel prices,» Joe Brusuelas, principal and chief economist for RSM US LLP, told Digital.

Those higher fuel costs can ripple through supply chains, raising expenses for trucking companies — including those that carry most goods available to U.S. consumers — farmers tending to their fields and other businesses. Some of those raising diesel costs can ultimately reach consumers by the supply chain resulting in higher prices for groceries, packages delivered to their doorsteps, household goods and even new homes.

RECORD GAS PRICES SQUEEZE AMERICANS AS SUMMER TRAVEL SEASON ENDS, MIDTERMS LOOM AND IRAN WAR WAGES ON

Brusuelas warned that while restricting diesel exports could initially lower prices in some parts of the country, any relief could prove short-lived and trickle down to other areas of life.

«This is why this is one of those policies that sounds good on the surface but is significantly counterproductive, not just for overall inflation, but the balance sheets of American consumers and what they have to spend to maintain their livelihood,» he told Digital.

Brusuelas estimated that if a ban were to go into effect, consumers could begin seeing prices rise within four to six weeks.

WHY THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ MATTERS AS TRUMP ISSUES FRESH ULTIMATUM TO IRAN

The record price of fuel comes as the Iran war continues to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a key route for global oil and refined fuel that has become a chokepoint of where roughly 20% of the world’s petroleum and liquid fuel supply usually traverse.

Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure have also disrupted refinery operations as Moscow already moved to restrict diesel exports, further tightening supplies. Additionally, Iran-backed Houthi’s advancing and attacking along Yemen’s coast has further restricted Middle East oil transport out of another key shipping route – the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

The U.S. shipped a record 1.6 million barrels of diesel overseas each day in August, up from roughly 1 million barrels per day in February, according to data from energy analytics firm Kpler.

Meanwhile, U.S. diesel supplies are nearly 13% below the average for this time of year, despite refineries operating at about 97% capacity.

FORGET GASOLINE: THIS OVERLOOKED FUEL COULD RAISE THE PRICE OF NEARLY EVERYTHING YOU BUY

Richard Stern, vice president of the Plymouth Institute for Free Enterprise, said the U.S. has already seen the consequences of restricting energy exports.

«We already tried fuel export bans in the ’70s, and it led to higher prices, starved our industries and aided our enemies. We should not repeat this disastrous policy,» Stern told Digital.

The U.S. imposed broad crude oil export restrictions in 1975. According to the institute’s analysis, gas prices more than doubled over the next six years, rising 50% faster than overall inflation. The report also says domestic oil production declined as reliance on foreign imports increased.

Stern said the history shows an export ban could create new problems without shielding Americans from global prices.

«Diesel and other fuels are part of a global market, and a U.S. export ban would simply redirect where fuel goes, not shield Americans from globally set prices,» Stern said. «Instead, the ban would force our allies to look to Russia and China for fuel and would ultimately interfere with the supply chains that feed American industry.»

THE SIMPLE FIXES CONSERVATIVES SAY COULD MAKE LIFE CHEAPER FOR AMERICANS

The ban could have initially pushed more diesel into the U.S. market and temporarily lowered prices, but analysts warn that relief could fade as refiners cut production and supplies tighten elsewhere.

Europe, which relies heavily on diesel from the U.S. Gulf Coast, could be forced to seek fuel from other suppliers, including Russia.

That could turn a proposal aimed at easing costs for Americans into a policy that raises prices, disrupts supply chains and complicates Trump’s pledge to make energy more affordable ahead of the midterm elections.

economic policy, economy, midterm elections, energy, politics, geopolitics, trade

Advertisement

US and Polish pilots stand together on NATO’s front line

Fox News Digital goes inside Poland’s 32nd Tactical Air Base where American and Polish forces operate together as Warsaw prepares for a new era of military firepower. (Flight video courtesy of the 32nd tactical base, Lask, Poland.)

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Polish President Karol Nawrocki has revived a proposal to establish a permanent U.S. military base in Poland named «Fort Trump» as Warsaw pushes to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank amid continued Russian incursions into allied airspace.

Advertisement

Nawrocki said that he was confident Warsaw and Washington would reach a deal on the base, which Poland has sought as part of its effort to secure a long-term American troop presence and boost defenses against Russia.

«I hope that when work on the base is completed, President Trump will be able to personally attend the inauguration of ‘Fort Trump,’» Nawrocki said in New York Sept. 22.

POLAND SEEKS ANSWERS AFTER PENTAGON SCRAPS PLANNED US ARMORED BRIGADE ROTATION

Advertisement

Presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki, a conservative historian backed by the right-wing Law and Justice party, greets supporters as he arrives at his headquarters after the presidential election runoff in Warsaw, Poland, Sunday, June 1, 2025. (AP Photo/Czarek Sokolowski)

The proposal dates back to 2018, when Nawrocki’s predecessor, President Andrzej Duda, suggested naming a permanent U.S. military installation in Poland «Fort Trump» as part of an effort to secure a lasting American military presence in the country.

The urgency behind Warsaw’s push this month was underscored within hours of Nawrocki’s remarks in New York, when a Russian Mi-8 military helicopter briefly penetrated Polish airspace from Russia’s Kaliningrad region.

Advertisement

Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski also mentioned the issue during a briefing with Polish media following his address to the U.N. Security Council in New York on Wednesday.

According to the Polish Army Operational Command, the helicopter entered Polish territory north of the town of Braniewo at 11:08 a.m., reaching a maximum depth of about 300 meters.

The Russian aircraft remained in Polish airspace for 42 seconds before exiting.

Advertisement

Polish radar systems tracked the helicopter throughout the incursion, prompting fighter aircraft to scramble while ground-based air defense units were placed on standby.

Polish military authorities said the brief violation indicated Moscow was once again testing the readiness and response times of NATO air defenses.

The incident adds urgency to Poland’s push for a permanent U.S. military base. Nawrocki acknowledged that specific deadlines have not yet been established because administrative and financial details are unresolved.

Advertisement

«It’s hard for me to give specific dates, but I think this matter has been definitively confirmed, because President Trump is known for keeping his word,» Nawrocki said.

«Infrastructure preparation is progressing. In fact, the appropriate infrastructure is already being selected,» he told Bloomberg.

Nawrocki also called the establishment of the base «only a matter of time» and seemed optimistic that construction could be completed before Trump’s term ends in 2029.

Advertisement

NATO’S EASTERN FLANK RACES TO REARM AS TRUMP PRESSURE EXPOSES WESTERN EUROPE’S DEFENSE GAP

President Donald Trump shakes hands with Polish President Karol Nawrocki, during a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, Sept. 3, 2025, in Washington. (Evan Vucci/AP Photo)

Deputy Defense Minister Stanisław Wziątek had also mentioned establishing the U.S. base, with the remaining question being the precise location, according to reports.

Wziątek said the installation would likely host between 3,000 and 5,000 U.S. troops.

Advertisement

Poland ultimately hopes to host «around 15,000» American troops, building on the roughly 10,000 U.S. troops currently stationed in the country, largely on a rotational basis.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned Sept. 18 that, according to intelligence available to Warsaw, Russia was planning drone and missile strikes against eastern NATO countries that Moscow could present as accidental, The Associated Press reported.

TRUMP PUSHED NATO TO PAY UP. NOW ALLIES MUST TURN PLEDGES INTO POWER

Advertisement

Donald Tusk, Poland’s prime minister, during the Polish Army Parade in Warsaw, Poland, on Friday, Aug. 15, 2025. (Damian Lemanski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Russian drones have repeatedly entered NATO airspace and crashed on alliance territory, including in Poland and Romania, while NATO countries have scrambled fighter aircraft in response to Russian aerial activity near their borders over the years.

Trump had also signaled progress in strengthening the U.S.-Polish military relationship, calling the developments on a base a «historic step for our Great US/Polish Alliance» and indicating on Truth Social that further details could be announced.

«Thanks to the bold leadership of my friend, Karol Nawrocki, President of Poland, major progress is being made towards establishing a US Army base in Poland,» Trump said Sept. 17.

Advertisement

Emma Bussey is a breaking news writer for Fox News Digital. Before joining Fox, she worked at The Telegraph with the U.S. overnight team, across desks including foreign, politics, news, sport and culture. 

world, nato, national security, military, geopolitics, donald trump, foreign policy, defense

Michael Whatley, the former chair of the Republican National Committee and the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in North Carolina, holds between $246,000 and $690,000 in energy investments with companies fueling the data center growth in the Tar Heel State, according to his federal reporting.

Those holdings raise questions about whether Whatley stands to benefit from his support of data center expansion, an issue that has drawn national attention over community zoning, energy use and state growth.

Most of his reported holdings are with four companies.

POLL: DEMOCRATIC ENTHUSIASM SHAPES NORTH CAROLINA SENATE RACE

Whatley and his family have holdings between $149,000 and $410,000 in Duke Energy, between $1,000 and $15,000 in Arista Networks, from $80,000 to $200,000 with Dominion Energy, and between $16,000 and $65,000 in GE Vernova.

While most of those, like Duke and Vernova, don’t directly build data centers themselves, they offer services or products used by them. Duke is a major utility provider in North Carolina, and Vernova produces on-site gas turbines used by data center facilities operated by companies like Amazon and Microsoft.

In addition to those investments, Whatley reported $361,000 from CAPCVentures LLC, a D.C. for consulting services in 2025, according to his financial disclosure. That firm lists GE Vernova— a major supplier of turbines and grid equipment used to power data centers — as a client, along with Centrus Energy and the Renewable Fuels Association.

Earlier coverage put his pay from the same shop at about $755,000 between 2022 and 2025.

When asked about his holdings and whether he saw them as a potential conflict of interest, Whatley’s campaign noted that he supports restrictions on stock trading for members of Congress.

«Whatley supports the Stop Insider Trading Act and urges the U.S. Senate to pass the commonsense legislation, and supports commonsense reforms requiring elected officials to place their assets in qualified blind trusts, ensuring they have no control over how those assets are invested,» DJ Griffin, a campaign spokesperson, said in a statement to Digital.

The campaign also said that Whatley would support letting local communities decide for themselves what kinds of data center projects to accept and which ones to rule out.

«Michael Whatley’s standard is simple: data centers pay their own way, families pay nothing and communities decide. That means Big Tech builds or buys every megawatt it needs and covers every dime of the grid upgrades to deliver it, with zero costs shifted onto residential ratepayers. It means no special subsidies and no sweetheart deals cut over the heads of taxpayers,» Griffin continued.

«And it means the people of North Carolina’s counties and towns, not bureaucrats in Raleigh or Washington, decide what gets built in their communities. North Carolina should win the AI economy, and it should win it on terms that protect the families who live here.»

THE DATA CENTER FIGHT COULD DECIDE THE NEXT PRESIDENT AND COST AMERICA THE AI RACE

Whatley’s campaign also turned the spotlight on his Democratic opponent, Roy Cooper, the former governor of North Carolina.

«Roy Cooper is the only candidate in this race who has used the powers of his elected office to recruit data centers to NC and to have them subsidized by NC Taxpayers,» Griffin added, noting that Cooper also has supported restrictions on congressional stock trading.

Notably, the bulk of North Carolina’s tax breaks already existed by the time Cooper became governor in 2017.

The year before, in 2016, the state had implemented statute G.S.105-164.13. Under that provision, lawmakers had expanded data center tax exemptions on sales, servers, storage and networking for companies investing at least $75 million in projects over five years.

The state did, however, approve several major grants to companies like Apple and Corvid Technologies under Cooper’s watch through «Job Development Investment Grants» (JDIGs). Those aimed to further job development in the state, dovetailing with existing development efforts. Among the more high-profile JDIGs, Apple entered into a $845 million grant over a period of 39 years alongside another $112.4 million that would go to an industrial development fund to build out rural infrastructure. The agreement is contingent on Apple creating a certain number of jobs, but the company has yet to meet the JDIG’s projected goals since its implementation.

For his own part, Cooper’s campaign bashed Whatley for, in their view, not being sensitive enough to local resistance to data center expansion.

«Longtime utility company lobbyist Michael Whatley believes people’s concerns about data centers are fake as he continues to shill for his billionaire buddies in the utility industry instead of standing up against rate hikes that are crushing hardworking families,» a spokesperson for the Cooper campaign said in a statement.

Cooper has taken a more critical approach to their expansion, arguing that they are forcing local communities into higher and higher utility bills.

SILICON VALLEY IS LOSING THE DATA CENTER FIGHT, RISKING A REPEAT OF A CLASSIC FAILURE

Like many Democrats on the topic, Cooper has framed his stance in the broader context of championing affordability policies.

«[Cooper] believes local communities must have the final say on new projects coming to their area, which includes local moratoriums, and data centers must pay for all of the energy they use without passing on any of their costs to consumers,» Cooper’s campaign said.

Having cleared their respective primaries, Cooper and Whatley will face off in North Carolina’s general election on Nov. 3.

republicans elections, politics, companies, growth, north carolina, energy