U.S. Soybean Oil Jumps on India Trade Breakthrough

Year-round E15 update | Americans see market and growth gains ahead — but brace for higher inflation and joblessness

LINKS

Link: The Week Ahead: Feb. 8, 2026: E15 At the Brink — GOP Scramble
          as DHS Fight Threatens Ethanol Deal

Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Feb. 1, update today 
Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, Feb. 1, update today 
 

Updates: Policy/News/Markets, Feb. 9, 2026

TOP STORIES—U.S. soybean oil jumps on India trade breakthroughDuty cuts in interim deal raise hopes for expanded U.S. market share in world’s largest edible oil importer Chicago soybean oil futures rallied sharply after India agreed to cut or eliminate import duties on a range of U.S. agricultural products — including soybean oil — under a newly announced interim trade framework. The most actively traded soybean oil contract on the Chicago Board of Trade climbed as much as 1.9% intraday, reaching its highest level since July. The move extends last week’s gains after President Donald Trump said India would purchase more than $500 billion in U.S. goods, including agriculture. Why the market reacted. India is the world’s largest edible oil importer, buying roughly 16 million metric tons annually — primarily palm oil from Southeast Asia and soy and sunflower oil from South America. U.S. soy oil exports to India have historically been modest, totaling about 200,000 tons in the January–November period last year. The duty cuts could materially change that flow. If tariffs are lowered or eliminated, U.S. soybean oil becomes more competitive against Brazilian and Argentine supplies. Analysts say this could allow U.S. exporters to capture market share from South America while also pressuring demand for competing edible oils like palm. Sandeep Bajoria, CEO of Sunvin Group, told Bloomberg that U.S. soy oil prices could rise further once deal details are finalized, particularly if India shifts purchases away from South American suppliers. Palm oil holds steady — but spreads matter. Palm oil futures on the Bursa Malaysia Derivatives were largely unchanged near 4,184 ringgit per ton. Palm oil remains roughly $100 per ton cheaper than soy oil, which could limit how aggressively India shifts demand in the near term. Bajoria expects palm oil futures to trade between 4,050 and 4,450 ringgit through March, suggesting the edible oil complex could remain volatile as the trade framework moves toward implementation. Bigger picture. This development is more than a short-term price story. It signals:• A potential rebalancing of global edible oil trade flows• Stronger U.S. leverage in agricultural exports to Asia• Possible downward pressure on South American soy oil demand• A supportive demand tailwind for U.S. crush margins For U.S. soybean producers and crushers, the India opening comes at a critical time, particularly as global veg oil markets have been sensitive to biofuel policy shifts, weather risks in South America, and currency volatility. If India follows through on meaningful duty reductions, this could mark one of the more significant structural shifts in edible oil trade flows in several years. Of note: The Indian government has emphasized that the agreement does not open its market to imports of rice, wheat, corn, or dairy products, while securing access to the U.S. market for basmati rice, fruits, spices, coffee, and tea. In the United States, sectors that did not gain additional market access — or see barriers lifted — for products such as dairy, rice, corn, and soybeans are unlikely to oppose the deal outright, but they are expected to express disappointment that their commodities will not receive expanded entry into one of the world’s largest consumer markets. —House GOP forms E15 Council — Democrats shut out of biofuel task forceSpeaker Johnson structures new E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council as majority-only body amid internal Republican divisionsHouse Republican leadership has created a new working group on year-round E15 gasoline sales — but without including any Democratic lawmakers, even though many Democrats support the policy. The panel, formally known as the E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council, was established after a bipartisan fix to permanently allow year-round sales of E15 — gasoline blended with 15% ethanol — was stripped from a major government funding package. Rather than advancing the provision through that must-pass bill, GOP leaders opted to remove it and instead form a new council to develop legislative recommendations. Why Democrats were not included. The council was created and structured entirely by House Republican leadership, including Mike Johnson (R-La.), who appointed only Republican members. Unlike a formal House committee — which under chamber rules would require minority-party representation — the E15 council is a majority-driven task force. Because it operates outside normal committee structures, there was no requirement to allocate seats to Democrats. In practical terms, the council was designed as a GOP-only vehicle from the outset.Several Democratic lawmakers had expressed interest in participating, particularly given that many in the minority party have long supported expanded ethanol blending and permanent year-round E15 authority. But the structure chosen by leadership left no procedural pathway for their inclusion. Internal GOP tensions shaping the strategy. The partisan approach reflects deeper Republican divisions over biofuel policy. While many farm-state Republicans strongly support year-round E15 and broader Renewable Fuel Standard reforms, other GOP members — often aligned with refining and petroleum interests — have resisted changes related to refinery hardship exemptions and fuel-blending mandates. Faced with those internal fractures, leadership opted for a closed-door, majority-only framework. The move allows Republican leaders to manage negotiations within their caucus and attempt to unify their members before bringing any legislative proposal to the broader House. In short, the council appears designed less as a bipartisan policy forum and more as a mechanism to resolve intra-party disputes while preserving leadership control. Bottom Line: Democrats were excluded from the E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council because it was structured as a House-majority task force appointed solely by the Speaker, not as a formal bipartisan committee. Even though many Democrats support year-round E15 sales, the council’s formation reflects Republican leadership’s decision to handle the issue internally — amid ongoing negotiations within their own ranks over the future of biofuel policy.   The House-created E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council is operating under two very specific February deadlines — both designed to keep pressure on Republican negotiators as they try to deliver a year-round E15 solution. The Two DeadlinesFeb. 15 — Legislative proposal due By Feb. 15, the council is expected to produce legislative recommendations addressing permanent, nationwide year-round sales of E15 (15 % ethanol blends). Why this matters: The council was formed after the E15 fix was stripped from a larger spending package. GOP leadership wants a concrete proposal quickly so it can potentially attach the policy to a moving legislative vehicle — most likely a supplemental spending bill or another must-pass measure. Farm-state Republicans are under pressure from ethanol producers and corn growers who want certainty before the summer driving season. This deadline forces internal GOP negotiations to wrap up fast. Feb. 25 — Consideration/action window Around Feb. 25, House leadership is expected to review or consider the council’s proposal for possible legislative action. Why this matters: It aligns with anticipated movement on other funding measures. Leadership needs to decide whether the E15 proposal has enough Republican support to move forward — and whether to seek bipartisan backing in the Senate. It keeps momentum going before the spring legislative calendar gets crowded with appropriations and policy fights. In short, Feb. 25 is the decision point: does this move, or does it stall? Will DHS Funding Affect E15? Potentially — yes. The Department of Homeland Security funding situation could indirectly impact the E15 effort for three reasons: 1. Legislative vehicle competition If Congress is focused on a DHS funding deadline (or brinkmanship tied to it), floor time and political capital may shift away from energy and biofuel issues. E15 could get delayed simply because leadership prioritizes keeping the government open. 2. Negotiating leverage E15 could become a bargaining chip in broader funding talks. If a supplemental or continuing resolution moves that includes DHS funding, biofuel provisions might hitch a ride — or get dropped again to secure votes. 3. Senate math Even if House Republicans align internally, any legislative vehicle touching DHS funding will likely require Democratic votes in the Senate. That increases pressure to reopen the process beyond a GOP-only framework — ironic given Democrats were excluded from the council itself. The political overlay. This is not just about ethanol. It’s about:• Internal GOP divisions between farm-state members and refinery-aligned Republicans• Whether leadership wants a bipartisan solution or a party-line fix• How much floor time is available amid funding deadlines• Whether biofuels get tied to a larger spending or supplemental package If DHS funding tensions escalate, E15 could get delayed again. If funding moves smoothly, leadership has a clearer runway to attach an E15 fix. Bottom Line• Feb. 15: Council must deliver legislative language.• Feb. 25: Leadership evaluates and potentially advances it.• DHS funding: Not directly tied to E15 — but it absolutely affects timing, leverage, and whether there’s a legislative vehicle available to move it. The ethanol industry is watching the funding calendar almost as closely as it’s watching the Renewable Fuel Standard. —Americans see market and growth gains ahead — but brace for higher inflation and joblessnessGallup poll finds improving sentiment on stocks and GDP, while price pressures and unemployment fears persist A new Gallup survey finds Americans cautiously optimistic about the near-term economy — expecting stock market gains and stronger economic growth over the next six months — but still bracing for higher inflation and unemployment. The Jan. 2–17 poll shows sentiment rebounding from the turbulence seen last spring amid tariff-driven uncertainty under President Donald Trump. Stock market outlook rebounds. Half of U.S. adults (50%) now expect the stock market to rise over the next six months, compared with 25% who expect declines. That marks a sharp recovery from April 2025, when positive expectations collapsed to 29% amid global market volatility tied to new tariffs. Still, optimism hasn’t returned to the January 2025 peak, when 61% predicted gains. Economic growth expectations improve. Economic growth sentiment has followed a similar arc:• 49% expect growth to increase• 36% expect it to decline• 13% expect it to remain unchanged That’s a notable bounce from April’s 38% optimism reading, though still shy of early-2025 highs. Interest rates: a divided public. Americans are slightly more likely to believe rates will fall (41%) than rise (36%), with 20% expecting no change. This marks a reversal from April, when more anticipated increases. For context, back in January 2022, a striking 78% expected rates to go up — near record highs for rate-hike expectations. Inflation still looms large. Inflation remains the dominant worry:• 62% expect inflation to rise• 26% expect it to fall• 9% expect no change While that’s below the 2022 peak of 79% anticipating higher inflation, it’s still a clear majority. Unemployment fears edge higher. Half of Americans (50%) now expect unemployment to increase — up 12 points from January 2025. Meanwhile: • 32% expect joblessness to decline• 16% see no change This marks one of the weaker components of the outlook. Sharp political divide. Expectations are highly polarized: Republicans are broadly optimistic across all five measures, with majorities predicting improvement — including strong confidence in growth and markets. Democrats and independents are far more pessimistic, particularly on inflation and unemployment. Republican sentiment largely mirrors views from the start of President Trump’s second term, while Democratic and independent views remain subdued compared to early 2025. Bottom Line: Americans appear to be saying: “The markets might do better — but our wallets could still feel tight.” There’s clear improvement from last spring’s tariff-driven anxiety, especially on stocks and growth. But inflation expectations remain stubbornly high, and half the country anticipates rising unemployment. It’s a split-screen outlook — optimism on Wall Street, caution on Main Street.