The U.S. diesel ban never came, but it showed that Chile is the South American country with the least room to face it

What was discussed in Washington

On September 22, at the UN General Assembly, U.S. President Donald Trump argued for stopping diesel sales abroad. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the same day that the government was assessing whether a full or partial ban would be viable.

The next day, according to a U.S. report reproduced by the wire agencies, the White House was preparing a 90-day ban. The stated goal was to lower the domestic price, which had reached 6.52 dollars per gallon, before the legislative elections on November 3. The oil industry opposed it, and so did part of the government itself: the Energy Secretary preferred a voluntary reduction of exports by the refineries.

On October 2, the G7 countries agreed to release 100 million barrels of oil and diesel from reserves over four months, and committed not to restrict energy exports among themselves. The same day, Trump said he would not impose the ban. According to another agency, he also said it had never been under discussion, which contradicts what he himself had said in the previous two weeks.

There was no executive order and no official text. The ban never existed. What existed were ten days in which it was treated as likely.

Why Chile

The United States is the world's largest diesel exporter and accounts for about one fifth of all diesel shipped by sea. In Latin America, the biggest buyer by volume is Mexico. But, in proportion to what it consumes, Chile is among the most exposed in the region.

According to Chile's central bank, the country imported more than 4 billion dollars of diesel in 2026, of which more than 3.8 billion came from the United States. A survey by the Institute of International Finance records 119.3 thousand barrels per day of U.S. diesel in the first half, the second-largest volume in Latin America. The same source estimates that about two thirds of the diesel consumed in Chile is American. An investment bank says more than half.

Diesel, in Chile, is not just any fuel. Trucks carry 96% of the country's goods, according to the association that groups truck owners. And copper mining, which accounts for much of the 34.9% that commodities represent in Chilean trade, depends on it to run machinery and move ore.

The cushion that no longer exists

Chile had a shock absorber for this kind of blow: the Fuel Price Stabilization Mechanism, known by the acronym MEPCO, which smooths the pass-through of international swings to the pump.

In March, at the start of José Antonio Kast's government, that mechanism was modified because of the cost it represented for the State. The immediate effect was a 62% rise in diesel and 32% in gasoline, the second largest in the country's history.

Since then, the international price has kept rising, driven by the wars involving Iran and between Russia and Ukraine. The diesel refining margin reached about 100 dollars per barrel, four times the usual level. On October 1, Chile's state oil company applied the fourth consecutive increase: diesel has risen another 0.31 dollars per liter since the end of July.

With the shock absorber reduced, the blow reaches the final price. That is why the American threat frightened Chile more than countries that still subsidize the fuel.

What the truckers are asking for

Truck owners did not ask for a subsidy. On September 30, after meetings with the finance and economy ministries, they opened a negotiation on two matters: a fuel surcharge provided for in law, which would pass the change in diesel on to whoever hires the freight, and a review of the stabilization mechanism's parameters.

President Kast, for his part, said that an American ban would be "bad news for the entire world" and that the government was already thinking about palliative measures targeted at the most vulnerable, as at the start of the war.

The retreat does not protect Chile

Here is the point that coverage of the retreat left in the background.

The October 2 commitment not to restrict energy exports was made among the G7 countries. Chile is not a member. A reading in the Mexican press understood that the American promise applies only to that group; the American president's statements do not draw that line explicitly, but they do not rule it out either.

At the same time, the causes of the pressure continue. The International Energy Agency warned on October 14 that the diesel shortage may last well into 2027. And the political motive for the ban, the price of fuel in the United States on the eve of an election, does not disappear on November 3; it only changes calendar.

Reading

Chile did not suffer the ban. It suffered, and continues to suffer, the increase that motivated it. The difference between the two is that the increase is visible and gradual, and the ban would have been sudden.

The episode showed that the country depends on a single supplier for most of an input on which almost all of its transport depends, and that it has already given up part of its public protection against price. As long as those two things hold, the next announcement in Washington reaches Chile with the same weight.