41.Russia Oil Sanctions: How the Senate’s Up-to-100% Tariff Threat Could Reshape China, India and Tanker Flows
August 8, 2026
The United States has not already imposed a blanket 100% tariff on China or India for buying Russian crude.
The Senate has passed a sanctions bill, but no new 100% tariff is in force. The real market question is whether U.S. pressure changes Chinese and Indian buying enough to remove Russian barrels—or merely widens discounts, reroutes tankers and shifts margins across refiners, airlines and oil-importing economies.
The U.S. Senate passed an amended H.R. 5334 by 86–11 on August 7, including the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026. The House has not agreed to the Senate sanctions amendment, the measure has not reached the president for signature, and the new up-to-100% secondary-tariff mechanism is not in force.
A secondary tariff targets imports from a third country because of that country's qualifying trade with Russia. Under the Senate structure, the maximum rate is a ceiling rather than an automatic 100% charge.
That distinction matters because the political headline is much larger than the physical change in the oil market so far.
For global investors, the more important question is what happens next in the physical oil market.
Does U.S. pressure change how much Russian crude China and India buy? Does Russia lose export volume, or simply accept lower prices? Do barrels disappear from the market, or move to different buyers and longer routes?
Those outcomes can produce very different results for Brent, the widely used global crude benchmark; Dubai, an important benchmark for Asian crude pricing; tanker rates; refining margins; jet fuel; inflation; and currencies—including those of major Asian oil importers such as South Korea.
- Key Takeaways
- What the U.S. Senate Approved
- The Investor Transmission Chain
- Why China and India Matter
- Urals vs ESPO
- Would Less Russian Oil Push Brent Higher?
- What If Russia Widens Discounts?
- How Tanker Routes Could Change
- Refining Margins
- Petrochemicals
- Airlines
- Trade Conflict Risk
- Currency and Oil Importers
- Korea as an Importer Case Study
- Three Market Scenarios
- Investor Dashboard
- Beginner FAQ
- Conclusion
- Sources
Key Takeaways
- The Senate-approved structure allows tariffs of up to 100% on qualifying third countries. That is a ceiling, not an automatic tariff rate.
- The House could change, block or decline to accept the Senate sanctions language.
- Presidential national-interest waiver authority remains part of the structure. A waiver allows the president, subject to the bill's certification and reporting requirements, to suspend application of covered measures when judged to be in the U.S. national interest.
- China and India are crucial, but their refinery systems, logistics and economic incentives are different.
- A fall in Russian export volume matters differently from a wider Russian crude discount.
- Russia can earn less per barrel without the same amount of crude disappearing from global supply.
- Tanker implications depend on where replacement barrels come from and how far they travel.
- Higher crude prices do not automatically produce higher refinery profits.
- For airlines, jet fuel prices and foreign exchange can matter more directly than Brent alone.
- Hormuz, OPEC+ supply, global demand and other geopolitical risks can overwhelm the Russia-sanctions signal.
What Did the U.S. Senate Actually Approve?
The legislative vehicle is H.R. 5334.
Its history is unusual. The House had already passed the original H.R. 5334, the Supporting Early-childhood Educators’ Deductions Act, in April. The Senate later used that bill as the vehicle for a much larger sanctions amendment.
Congressional records show that the Senate structure contains authority to raise tariffs on goods from qualifying countries involved in substantial Russian energy purchases or sanctions evasion to up to 100% ad valorem.
That does not mean China, India or another country automatically receives a 100% tariff.
The legislation provides room for the actual rate to be set below the ceiling. It also contains presidential national-interest waiver authority, subject to certification and reporting requirements.
| Legislative Item | Status as of August 8, 2026 | Investor Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Senate vote | Passed amended H.R. 5334 by 86–11 on August 7 | Major political escalation, but not final enactment |
| House action | House has not agreed to the Senate sanctions amendment | The sanctions package can still be changed or blocked |
| Secondary tariff | Authority of up to 100% for qualifying third countries | 100% is the ceiling, not an automatic applied rate |
| Direct Russian imports | Separate authority of up to 500% under the Senate structure | Legally distinct from the third-country tariff mechanism |
| Waiver | Presidential national-interest waiver authority remains | Implementation can depend on executive judgment and reporting |
| Current legal effect | Senate sanctions language is not yet law | No new blanket 100% tariff is currently in force under this bill |
The next legislative step is important. The House would need to accept the Senate version, amend it, or otherwise act on the differences before the bill could move toward enactment.
The House could therefore change or block the sanctions package.
An earlier proposal, S.1241, contemplated at least 500% secondary tariffs on goods from countries trading in specified Russian energy products. The current Senate structure is different. It uses an up-to-100% ceiling for qualifying third countries, while retaining separate authority of up to 500% on goods imported directly from Russia.
Those are legally distinct channels.
The Investor Transmission Chain: When Does a Headline Become an Oil Shock?
A sanctions headline affects earnings and markets only after passing through several real-world steps:
This is the most important distinction in the entire sanctions transmission chain.
Suppose Russian exporters lose buyers and cannot replace them. Production or exports may eventually fall. Fewer physical barrels would then be available to the global market.
That is a potential supply shock.
But suppose Russia keeps exporting roughly the same amount of crude by offering larger discounts or finding other buyers. Moscow may earn less per barrel, while global physical supply changes much less.
That is primarily a revenue shock for Russia.
Brent could react very differently in those two cases.
Sanctions can therefore be economically painful for Russia without automatically creating a global oil shortage.
Why Are China and India So Important to Russian Oil?
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Russia exported about 4.3 million barrels per day of crude oil and condensate in the first half of 2025 on a preliminary basis.
China accounted for about 2.0 million barrels per day, while India took about 1.6 million barrels per day.
Together, the two markets represented roughly 84% of the total on that EIA definition and period.
Those figures are useful for understanding scale. They should not be treated as current 2026 flow data.
More recent physical-market evidence is especially important because neither country is behaving as though Russian crude has already become commercially unusable.
Reuters reported that Indian imports of Russian crude reached about 2.64 million barrels per day in June 2026, against total crude imports of roughly 5.24 million barrels per day.
In China, Sinopec increased purchases of ESPO crude while Middle Eastern supplies were disrupted. Reuters reported that the company secured roughly 30–40 ESPO cargoes for July through September, equivalent to about 241,000–320,000 barrels per day.
Washington is increasing pressure on Russian oil trade, while Middle East supply insecurity can make nearby Russian barrels more attractive to Asian refiners.
| Factor | China | India |
|---|---|---|
| Russian crude logistics | Strong exposure to nearby ESPO and pipeline supply | Large exposure to long-haul western Russian Urals |
| Refinery structure | Large state refiners plus diverse independent refining capacity | Large complex refineries with substantial processing and product-export capability |
| Russian crude incentive | Short-distance supply security and delivered economics can be attractive | Discounted feedstock and refinery economics are central |
| Alternative suppliers | Middle East, West Africa, Brazil and other Atlantic Basin grades | Persian Gulf, Latin America, Africa and other suppliers |
| Tanker effect of substitution | Replacing ESPO with distant crude can increase voyage distance | Replacing western Russian crude with Gulf crude can shorten voyage distance |
| U.S. pressure channel | Trade exposure, sanctions compliance, finance and shipping | Trade exposure, refinery economics, finance, shipping and export-market considerations |
| Reason purchases could continue | Energy security and favorable nearby logistics | Larger Russian discounts can preserve refining economics |
China: Shorter Logistics and Energy Security
China should not be grouped mechanically with India.
Russian crude reaches China through multiple channels, including the Far East and pipeline infrastructure. ESPO—Eastern Siberia–Pacific Ocean crude—loaded at Kozmino has an especially short voyage to Northeast Asian buyers.
For a Chinese refiner, the economic calculation is not simply “Russian oil versus sanctions.”
crude price + freight + insurance + financing + sanctions friction + reliability of supply
If Middle Eastern supply becomes less reliable, the logistical value of nearby Russian barrels can rise even if political pressure increases.
China also has alternatives. Refiners can seek more crude from the Middle East, West Africa, Brazil or other Atlantic Basin suppliers.
But those substitutions can change freight costs, voyage times and crude quality.
China could reduce Russian purchases if actual U.S. tariff exposure becomes large enough, payment and shipping restrictions become more difficult, or alternative crude becomes more competitive.
It could also keep buying if Russian delivered economics remain attractive and energy-security concerns outweigh the additional trade risk.
India: Discount Economics and Long-Haul Urals
India has a different equation.
The country is highly dependent on imported crude and has large, sophisticated refineries capable of processing a wide range of grades. Discounted Russian Urals, a crude blend associated mainly with western Russian export routes, has become an important feedstock, while India also exports substantial volumes of refined petroleum products.
The shipping geography is different from China’s.
A barrel of Urals moving from western Russia to India already travels a long distance. If an Indian refiner replaces it with Persian Gulf crude, the voyage can become much shorter.
That matters for tanker demand.
India may reduce Russian purchases if the cost of U.S. trade penalties, financing restrictions or compliance risks exceeds the benefit of discounted Russian feedstock.
But Russia can respond by offering a larger discount.
That is why the size of the Urals discount can be more informative than the sanctions headline itself.
What Is the Difference Between Urals and ESPO?
Russian crude is not a single uniform product.
Urals is associated mainly with western Russian export routes. It has been especially important for India since the restructuring of Russian crude trade after 2022.
ESPO, or Eastern Siberia–Pacific Ocean crude, is exported through Russia’s Far East and is particularly important for China because of its location and shorter shipping distance.
Current discounts also show why grade-specific data matter.
Reuters reported that September ESPO cargoes were trading at roughly a $1–2 per barrel discount to Brent, while delivered Urals for India for late-August and September supply was around $2–3 per barrel below Brent.
Those are not exceptionally deep discounts by the standards seen at earlier points in the sanctions cycle.
Investors should therefore avoid statements such as “Russian crude is trading at a $10 discount” without specifying the grade, destination and date.
| Feature | Urals | ESPO |
|---|---|---|
| Geography | Western Russia | Russian Far East |
| Main Asian buyer relevance | India particularly important | China particularly important |
| Typical Asia voyage | Long from Baltic/Black Sea export routes | Much shorter to Northeast Asia |
| Tanker relevance | Aframax/Suezmax and long-haul structures; transfers can matter | Aframax central around Kozmino |
| Pricing lens | Delivered differential to Brent | Brent differential plus competition with Dubai/Oman-linked alternatives |
| Current verified pricing signal | Roughly $2–3/bbl below Brent for India-delivered late-August/September barrels | Roughly $1–2/bbl below Brent for September cargoes |
| Investor lesson | Watch discount and export volume separately | Short logistics can preserve demand even under sanctions pressure |
Would Less Russian Oil Automatically Push Brent Higher?
Not automatically.
Brent is a global benchmark. Its direction depends on the balance between total supply and demand, not only on Russian sanctions.
A sustained decline in Russian production or exports would increase upside risk because replacement barrels would have to come from somewhere else.
But several counterweights matter.
OPEC+ can raise supply. Reuters reported that the group agreed to increase September quotas by about 188,000 barrels per day. Quota increases still need to translate into actual physical barrels, but they can offset part of a disruption.
U.S. production can respond. Higher sustained prices can encourage additional supply, although the timing and magnitude are uncertain.
Other buyers may emerge. Russian barrels rejected by one buyer can move to another if discounts become attractive enough and shipping remains possible.
Demand can weaken. The International Energy Agency’s July outlook projected a decline of roughly 1 million barrels per day in global oil demand in 2026. That is a forecast rather than an observed fact, but it illustrates why a supply shock cannot be analyzed without the demand side.
And there is the Middle East.
As of August 8, physical uncertainty around the Strait of Hormuz has a more immediate connection to available barrels, freight and insurance than a Senate tariff mechanism that is not yet law.
Brent closed at $83.55 per barrel on August 7, while WTI settled at $78.18.
Are Russian exports actually falling faster than other producers and weaker demand can offset them?
What If Russia Simply Offers Bigger Discounts?
This is the scenario most likely to be misunderstood.
Imagine Russia exports 100 barrels at $80 each.
Revenue is $8,000.
Now assume sanctions pressure forces Russia to sell the same 100 barrels at $70.
Revenue falls to $7,000, but no barrels have disappeared from global supply.
Russian realized price ↓
Russian revenue ↓
Brent impact more limited
The revenue impact can be meaningful even though the physical supply impact is small.
The situation changes if Russia cannot find enough buyers even after cutting prices.
Russian exports ↓
Available global supply ↓
Brent/Dubai upside risk ↑
This is why investors should monitor export volumes and discounts separately.
How Could Sanctions Reshape Tanker Routes?
Oil shipping depends not only on how many barrels move, but also on how far they travel.
ton-mile demand = cargo volume × distance
A ton-mile is a shipping-demand measure combining the amount of cargo carried with the distance traveled.
If the same amount of crude has to travel twice as far, ships remain occupied for longer. That can reduce the number of vessels available for other cargoes.
But higher ton-miles do not automatically produce higher tanker rates.
Rates also depend on vessel availability, positioning, congestion, bunker fuel, insurance, sanctions eligibility and the type of tanker required.
A VLCC, or very large crude carrier, typically carries roughly 1.9–2.2 million barrels and is central to long-distance crude trades.
A Suezmax is roughly a 1-million-barrel class vessel.
An Aframax is better defined by size—generally around 80,000–120,000 deadweight tons—because actual barrel capacity varies with vessel configuration and crude density.
The China and India cases can again move in opposite directions.
If China replaces nearby ESPO with crude from the Middle East, West Africa, Brazil or the U.S. Gulf, voyage distances can increase. Some substitutions could support mainstream long-haul VLCC ton-mile demand.
If India replaces long-haul western Russian Urals with Persian Gulf crude, voyage distances can fall.
“China and India buying less Russian crude means higher tanker rates.”
The route matters.
Shadow Fleet vs Mainstream Listed Tankers
The so-called shadow fleet also needs careful treatment. The term generally refers to vessels operating with less transparent ownership, insurance, flags or trading arrangements, often in sanctioned commodity trades. There is no single universally accepted definition.
Ship-to-ship transfers can also form part of these networks.
That fleet should not be treated as equivalent to the mainstream listed tanker market.
More shadow-fleet activity does not automatically increase the earnings of publicly listed tanker operators.
Even then, fleet supply and route changes can offset the effect.
Why Doesn’t Higher Oil Automatically Help Refiners?
A refinery buys crude. That makes crude a cost, not simply a positive exposure to higher oil prices.
A simplified refining margin is the difference between the value of refined products produced and the combined cost of crude, freight, energy and operations.
value of gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other products
− crude and feedstock costs
− freight
− energy and operating costs
A crack spread is the price difference between a refined product and the crude used to make it. Gasoline, diesel and jet cracks can move very differently from Brent.
That means a refinery can perform well while crude falls if product prices remain strong relative to feedstock costs.
It can also struggle while crude rises if product prices fail to keep pace.
The IEA reported that product cracks and refining margins reached roughly four-year highs in early July even while crude prices were falling. That is a useful reminder that crude direction alone is an incomplete earnings signal.
Investors also need to watch:
- refinery utilization;
- crude-grade differentials;
- product cracks;
- freight;
- inventory gains or losses;
- working capital.
Inventory effects matter because refiners hold substantial crude and products. A rapid oil-price decline can create accounting inventory losses even if future feedstock becomes cheaper.
Higher crude prices can also increase working-capital requirements because the refinery must finance more expensive inventories.
What Does This Mean for Petrochemicals?
Higher crude can raise naphtha costs.
But that still does not tell investors whether petrochemical earnings will rise or fall.
The critical variable is the product spread: how much the selling price of petrochemical products exceeds the cost of feedstock and processing.
China is especially important because large capacity additions have created significant supply pressure in several petrochemical chains.
If Chinese capacity continues to exceed final demand, product spreads can remain weak even when oil prices stabilize.
That means China’s petrochemical operating rates, capacity additions and end-demand can matter more for profitability than the direction of Brent itself.
What Does This Mean for Airlines?
For airlines, Brent is useful background information.
But two variables are often more direct:
Airlines consume refined jet fuel, not crude oil. The jet crack can therefore widen even when Brent is stable, making airline fuel costs rise faster than the crude benchmark suggests.
Currency matters because fuel, aircraft leases and other costs can be denominated in U.S. dollars.
For an airline whose revenue is largely earned in a weaker local currency, the combination of higher jet fuel and a stronger dollar can be more damaging than the crude-price increase alone.
The impact is also not immediate because airlines can hedge fuel.
Other offsets include:
- fuel hedges;
- fuel surcharges;
- higher ticket prices;
- stronger passenger yields;
- cargo yields;
- changes in load factor.
The correct earnings equation is therefore broader than “oil up, airlines down.”
Could the Bigger Risk Be Trade Conflict Rather Than an Oil Shortage?
Yes.
One plausible outcome is that China and India continue to buy substantial Russian crude while Washington escalates tariffs or other trade measures.
In that case, physical global oil supply may remain relatively stable.
But the economic damage could move elsewhere.
Broader trade conflict can weaken manufacturing, investment, freight volumes and consumer demand. That can eventually reduce oil demand as well.
In that environment, the trade shock could matter more for equities than the direct oil-supply shock.
Why Oil Importers Should Watch the Currency Channel
For a net oil-importing economy, the macro transmission can look like this:
The effect is not identical across countries.
Currency regimes differ. Fuel subsidies and taxes differ. Central banks react differently. Some governments absorb part of the increase through fiscal policy.
A country with strong external balances can also absorb a temporary oil spike better than a country already facing current-account or currency pressure.
So “oil rises, currency falls” is not a universal rule.
For investors looking specifically at Korea, see USD/KRW at 1,500: KOSPI Risk, Foreign Flows, and Korea’s External Buffer.
What This Could Mean for Korean Refiners, Petrochemicals, Airlines and Shipping Companies
South Korea is useful as a case study because it is a major energy importer with large refining, petrochemical, shipping and aviation industries.
But the same analytical rules apply.
For Korean refiners, the relevant question is not simply whether Brent rises. Product cracks, crude differentials, utilization, inventories and financing costs determine whether margins actually improve.
For Korean petrochemical producers, higher naphtha is only one side of the equation. Chinese overcapacity and downstream product spreads remain critical.
For Korean Air (KRX: 003490), jet-fuel economics and USD/KRW can be more directly relevant to earnings than Brent in isolation. Hedging and fare pass-through can change both the timing and magnitude of the effect.
For shipping, Russian crude rerouting is not automatically positive. Investors need to identify the vessel class, route, voyage distance and whether cargo moves through the shadow fleet or the compliant commercial market.
The Korean equity implication is therefore sector-specific rather than a single oil-price trade.
Three Market Scenarios
| Variable | Scenario A: China / India Reduce Purchases | Scenario B: Russia Widens Discounts and Redirects Barrels | Scenario C: China / India Keep Buying and Trade Tensions Rise |
|---|---|---|---|
| Physical oil supply | Russian supply falls only if replacement buyers cannot absorb the barrels and exports or production decline | Much of the physical supply remains in the market | Largely maintained unless financial or shipping restrictions disrupt flows |
| Oil prices | Strongest upside risk for Brent and Dubai | More limited upside if barrels remain available | Supply-side pressure can remain limited; weaker growth may cap crude |
| Russian revenue | Falls through lower volume and potentially lower realized prices | Falls mainly through larger discounts | More resilient if volumes and discounts hold, though financial sanctions can still reduce realized revenue |
| Tanker implications | Mixed: China substitution may lengthen VLCC routes; India substitution toward Gulf barrels may shorten voyages | Rerouting and ship-to-ship transfers can increase vessel-days and complexity | Existing sanctioned and shadow networks remain important; mainstream rates depend on cargo migration |
| Corporate implications | Higher feedstock and fuel risk; stronger pressure on airlines and oil importers | Discount advantages shift among refiners; smaller global energy shock | Trade and demand weakness may become more important than oil scarcity |
| Macro impact | Higher inflation and currency pressure for many net importers | Smaller inflation impulse | Tariff retaliation and weaker trade may dominate the commodity channel |
Scenario A is potentially a physical supply shock.
Scenario B is primarily a Russian revenue shock.
Scenario C can become a trade-and-growth shock.
Investor Dashboard
The most useful indicators are those that show whether policy pressure has moved from politics into the physical market.
| Indicator | What to Watch | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| 1. U.S. legislative status | House action, amendments, presidential stage | Senate passage alone does not implement the tariff mechanism |
| 2. Actual country designation and tariff rate | Whether qualifying countries are targeted and at what rate | The ceiling is up to 100%; actual tariffs can be lower |
| 3. China’s Russian crude imports | ESPO purchases, pipeline flows and refinery procurement | Shows whether the largest buyer is changing behavior |
| 4. India’s Russian crude imports | Urals volumes and refinery buying | Tests whether discount economics still outweigh U.S. pressure |
| 5. Russian seaborne export volumes | Persistent changes in loadings rather than daily headlines | The clearest test of whether barrels are actually disappearing |
| 6. Urals–Brent and ESPO–Brent differentials | Wider or narrower discounts | Separates Russian revenue pressure from global volume loss |
| 7. Brent and Dubai crude | Outright prices and relative strength | Brent shows global pricing; Dubai is especially relevant to Asian crude competition |
| 8. OPEC+ production | Actual output, not only announced quotas | Replacement supply can offset lost Russian barrels |
| 9. VLCC/Aframax freight rates and ton-miles | Route-specific rates and vessel availability | Tests whether rerouting is tightening the compliant tanker market |
| 10. Refining margins and product cracks | Diesel, gasoline and jet cracks plus utilization | Shows whether crude-market pressure is translating into corporate margins |
No single dashboard item is enough.
China/India purchases fall
Russian loadings decline
Discounts widen
Alternative long-haul crude demand increases
Sanctions headlines rise
Russian exports remain stable
Brent remains contained
Beginner FAQ
Is the United States already charging China and India a 100% tariff for buying Russian oil?
No. The Senate passed sanctions legislation containing an up-to-100% tariff mechanism, but the Senate sanctions language is not yet law or in force. House action and the presidential stage remain.
Does “up to 100%” mean the tariff will be 100%?
No. It is a ceiling. The structure allows lower rates, and presidential national-interest waiver authority is also included.
Why can Russian sanctions hurt Russia without pushing Brent sharply higher?
Russia can continue selling crude by accepting a larger discount. That lowers the price Russia receives without necessarily removing the same number of barrels from global supply.
Why do tanker rates depend on more than sanctions?
Tanker demand depends on both cargo volume and distance. A longer voyage ties up a ship for more time, but freight rates also depend on vessel availability, positioning, insurance, congestion, vessel class and whether the cargo can use mainstream compliant tonnage.
Why do investors watch jet fuel instead of only Brent for airlines?
Airlines buy jet fuel, not crude oil. Jet-fuel refining margins can change independently of Brent. Currency movements, hedging and the ability to pass fuel costs into fares can also materially change the earnings impact.
Conclusion
The 100% figure is politically powerful, but it is not yet the most useful oil-market indicator.
The U.S. Senate has approved legislation that could significantly increase pressure on countries buying Russian energy. The House could still change or block the measure. The president would retain waiver authority under the Senate structure, and actual tariffs could be lower than the statutory ceiling.
Even if the mechanism becomes law, the market outcome will depend on buyer behavior.
China may continue valuing nearby ESPO supply when Middle Eastern reliability is uncertain. India may keep buying Urals if larger Russian discounts compensate for trade and compliance costs.
Russia can also look for other buyers.
OPEC+ can increase supply. U.S. producers may respond to sustained higher prices. Weak global growth can reduce oil demand.
And a disruption involving Iran or the Strait of Hormuz could matter more to near-term physical oil availability than Russian sanctions themselves.
For investors, the central question is therefore not:
How high can Washington set the tariff?
It is:
Does U.S. pressure actually change physical barrels?
Until that chain begins to move, a political escalation should not automatically be treated as a global oil shortage.
Sources
- U.S. Congressional Record — Senate Amendment 6711 / sanctions provisions
- GovInfo — H.R. 5334, House-passed original legislation
- Reuters — U.S. Senate passes Russia sanctions legislation, August 7, 2026
- Congress.gov — S.1241 and the earlier 500% tariff structure
- U.S. Energy Information Administration — Russian crude oil and condensate export destinations
- Reuters — Sinopec increases Russian ESPO purchases amid Middle East supply disruption, August 6, 2026
- Reuters — Indian refiners and Russian crude import trends, July 21, 2026
- Reuters — Brent and WTI market update, August 7, 2026
- Reuters — OPEC+ September quota increase
- International Energy Agency — Oil Market Report, July 2026
- Kpler — Assessing the impact of sanctions on Russia’s shadow fleet
This article is based on publicly available information and is intended for informational, educational, market and company-analysis purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Investors are responsible for their own investment decisions and should independently assess market, regulatory, currency, liquidity and other risks.
댓글
댓글 쓰기