The U.S. oil and gas industry has gone through some profound changes in the last couple of years. These changes are due in large part to the different regulatory philosophies of the Biden and Trump administrations. Additionally, the U.S. is the world’s largest petroleum products refiner. In 2024, it reached an astonishing high of 18.4 mbbl/d. However, this production is mostly dependent on imported feedstocks, creating a complicated relationship between domestic production and international trade.
In response to the rise of new tech, President Joe Biden’s administration unveiled a regulatory framework. Many in the industry saw it as a “war on oil and gas.” This plan sought to restrict operations by implementing tougher production practices that industry shot back at as constraints on growth and exploration. On the other hand, Donald Trump’s administration took steps to reduce these burdens with common sense reforms designed to encourage exploration and production. The competing policies have spurred dynamic public debates about the industry’s direction. As the U.S. attempts its own path to energy independence, it does so under enormous pressure from the global marketplace.
Shifts in Production and Import Dependency
The U.S. is currently the world’s largest producer of petroleum products. It still depends on imports, receiving an average of 8.51 million barrels per day from 86 different countries in 2023. Specifically, 76% of these imports were crude oil. This oil was largely used to feed the refineries lining the Gulf Coast. This area is home to the greatest density of crude oil refineries anywhere on the planet. This makes it a critical tool in addressing the U.S. energy landscape.
Industry stakeholders previously had lampooned the Biden administration’s top-down regulatory approach. They claimed it created burdensome limitations on what could be produced. It’s important to remember that under Biden’s leadership, the U.S. crude oil production actually increased modestly. It increased by 1.05% YoY during his last year in office. Trump’s policies left the pander in the dust. Consequently, production in January through October of 2025 boomed by 5.56%.
“Barack Obama had a war on coal. Joe Biden had a war on oil and gas,” – Mike Sommers
For their part, the two administrations have followed starkly divergent trajectories. This divergence ignites a larger, important debate happening across America about energy policy, particularly how regulations affect total production.
Regulatory Changes and Industry Response
Even the Trump administration’s retort to the current regulatory landscape of Biden—the repeal of a number of environmental safeguards considered burdensome—is not enough. Industry leaders have welcomed these changes. They view them as necessary for developing a new era of exploration and production.
On July 4, 2025, president Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). This legislation called for a specific offshore lease plan that permitted 36 oil and gas licenses. This legislation would encourage more exploration activities and renew access to federal lands and waters for energy exploration.
“We finally have new access to the Gulf of America and federal lands,” – Mike Sommers
As the political landscape changed, industry stakeholders quickly mobilized. In return, they worked alongside regulatory agencies to write strong, enforceable regulations that limited production and mitigated environmental impacts.
“We were appreciative of the delays that EPA announced last year. What we are doing now is working with them on crafting durable rules that we think are common sense and provide the flexibility needed to maintain production levels, while still reducing emissions and incentivizing continued innovation in this space,” – Mike Sommers
The bipartisan acknowledgment of the need for comprehensive reform underscores the complexities involved in navigating energy production amidst fluctuating political landscapes.
Tariff Implications on Economic Prospects
Beyond these burdensome regulatory challenges, tariffs have become the second key factor hurting the oil and gas industry. Industry leaders voiced concerns that tariffs on imported materials, especially steel, could adversely affect machinery and infrastructure across the supply chain.
“The most harmful individual tariff has been on imported steel, which impacts machinery and infrastructure across the supply chain,” – Paul Hasselbrinck
Hasselbrinck agreed, adding that economic uncertainty created by tariff proposals is threatening long-term economic prospects. In reality, this uncertainty may be more destructive than the specific cost increases imposed by tariff levies.
“Regardless of which specific product it is levied on, tariff and trade uncertainty hurting economic prospects is far more damaging to the industry than any individual cost hike associated to tariff levies,” – Paul Hasselbrinck
The changing tariff landscape is symptomatic of larger economic trends that are already affecting investment choices across the broader oil and gas economy.