• Mon - Fri 9.00 - 19.00

Yearly Archives: 2026

Airline Fuel Costs Jump to $350bn and Fares Follow

The global airline fuel cost bill is on course to rise from $252 billion in 2025 to $350 billion in 2026, according to the International Air Transport Association — an increase of close to 40 per cent that is already showing up on tickets as carrier-imposed surcharges.

What follows

The numbers behind the fare rises

IATA’s mid-year assessment, published in its June release on industry profitability, put jet fuel at an expected average of $152 a barrel for 2026, up almost 70 per cent on the $90 average of 2025. The underlying crude assumption was Brent at $95 a barrel for the year, up 37 per cent from $69 in 2025.

Because fuel sits at roughly 29 per cent of global airline operating expenses — a share IATA expects to reach 31.4 per cent in 2026 — a move of that size cannot be absorbed in margins. Passenger ticket revenue is forecast at $839 billion in 2026, up 9.2 per cent on $768 billion in 2025, and a good part of that increase is fuel pass-through rather than growth.

These are an industry association’s own projections, and IATA has an interest in framing cost pressure sympathetically. The direction, though, is corroborated by its own jet fuel monitor and by carrier disclosures.

The crack spread problem

Crude is only half the story. The crack spread — the premium refined jet fuel commands over Brent — is expected to average $57 a barrel in 2026, which IATA describes as a historic high.

That matters because hedging programmes are usually built around crude, not the refined product. An airline that hedged Brent well can still be badly exposed if refining margins blow out, which is what a record crack spread means. It also means fares do not fall as fast as crude does when the oil price retreats, because the refining premium is slower to normalise.

How it reaches your ticket

Passengers rarely see a line item called fuel. They see YQ or YR codes, grouped on the fare breakdown under “taxes, fees and carrier-imposed surcharges”. The grouping is misleading: those two codes are set by the airline, not by any government or regulator.

On long-haul premium itineraries the amounts are substantial. On a round trip between London and New York in a premium cabin, carrier-imposed surcharges alone can exceed $700. The effect is sharpest on award bookings, where surcharges are typically payable in cash — so a redemption that cost a fixed number of points last year now carries a much larger cash component.

Two practical checks help. Compare the total, not the headline fare, when the same route is offered by carriers in different jurisdictions, since surcharge practice varies. And on award tickets, price the same route on a partner airline before booking, because surcharge policy differs between partners on identical metal.

Airlines are still profitable

The industry is not in distress. IATA forecasts net profit of $23.0 billion for 2026 — roughly half the previous year’s figure — on operating expenses of $1.117 trillion, with expense growth of 13 per cent outrunning revenue growth.

Halving a margin is painful, and it changes behaviour: thinner routes get cut, frequencies fall on marginal city pairs, and older, less efficient aircraft come out of service faster. Passengers feel that as reduced choice before they feel it as higher headline fares.

The variable nobody controls

Every figure above rests on the crude assumption, and crude has run ahead of it. Brent has traded above $100 a barrel since supply disruption in the Middle East, with the shutdown of a major Saudi export line adding to the pressure — see our reports on the East-West pipeline outage and the resulting price shock across Asia.

If Brent holds above the $95 assumption for the rest of the year, IATA’s profit forecast is optimistic and surcharges have further to run. If the disruption eases, crude falls before the crack spread does, so relief on tickets will lag relief at the pump. Either way, the near-term direction for fares on long-haul routes is up. Operational strain is compounding it, as our coverage of UK airport disruption this month shows.

Questions about fares and surcharges

How much are airline fuel costs rising in 2026?

IATA projects the industry fuel bill rising from $252 billion in 2025 to $350 billion in 2026, an increase of close to 40 per cent.

What is the crack spread and why does it matter?

It is the premium jet fuel commands over crude. IATA expects it to average $57 a barrel in 2026, which it describes as a historic high, meaning airlines pay more than the crude price alone would imply.

What are YQ and YR on a ticket?

They are carrier-imposed surcharge codes shown under taxes, fees and carrier-imposed surcharges. The airline sets the amount, not a government or regulator.

Are airlines losing money?

No. IATA forecasts industry net profit of $23.0 billion in 2026, roughly half the previous year’s level, on operating expenses of $1.117 trillion.

Do surcharges affect points bookings?

Yes. Carrier-imposed surcharges are generally payable in cash even on award tickets, which is why redemption values fall when surcharges rise.

Will fares keep climbing?

That depends on crude. IATA’s forecast assumed Brent averaging $95 a barrel for the year, and prices have traded above $100 since the Middle East supply disruption.

Related business coverage

The US Just Barred Flights Over a Fast-Growing Ebola Outbreak

US health authorities have barred travelers who recently visited the Democratic Republic of Congo from boarding commercial flights to the United States. The country’s Ebola outbreak is growing into one of the largest ever recorded.

The CDC Ebola travel restriction applies to anyone, including US citizens, who has been in the DRC within 21 days of departure. Affected travelers should stay outside the United States for at least 21 days after leaving the DRC before flying to a US destination.

How large the outbreak has become

As of September 14, 2026, the DRC had reported 7,258 confirmed Ebola cases and 3,510 related deaths. Health officials say the outbreak is spreading faster than previous Ebola epidemics. It now ranks as the second-largest on record.

The scale of the outbreak is what pushed US authorities toward a boarding restriction, rather than relying only on airport screening.

CDC Ebola travel restriction

Which areas carry the highest risk

The CDC has issued its highest-level travel notice for Ituri and Nord-Kivu provinces. It recommends against all travel there, except for humanitarian aid or emergency response work.

A lower but still elevated notice covers Haut-Uélé and Tshopo provinces. The CDC recommends avoiding nonessential travel there while the outbreak stays active.

What this means for the United States

The CDC stresses that no Ebola cases have been confirmed in the United States from this outbreak. It says the overall risk to the American public remains low.

The boarding restriction adds a preventive layer on top of existing screening. It aims to keep the virus from reaching the US at all, not to respond to domestic cases.

How this outbreak compares with past Ebola crises

The 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola outbreak remains the largest on record. Comparisons to that event partly explain why health officials are treating this outbreak’s rapid spread with real concern.

Public health tools have improved since then, including faster genomic tracking and larger vaccine stockpiles. Those give authorities more options today, even as this outbreak’s case count climbs quickly.

What happens next with the CDC Ebola travel restriction

The restriction will likely stay in place as long as case counts keep climbing. It could tighten further if the outbreak spreads to more provinces or crosses into neighboring countries.

Airlines on routes that connect through the region are expected to coordinate with US authorities on compliance. Travelers with any recent DRC history should check current guidance before booking flights to the United States.

What travelers to the region should do now

Anyone with planned travel to or through the DRC should check the latest CDC guidance before booking. Province-level advisories can change quickly as the outbreak evolves.

Travelers who recently visited affected provinces and develop a fever or other Ebola symptoms should seek medical care right away. Tell providers about the travel history rather than waiting to see if symptoms pass.

Frequently asked questions

Who is affected by the CDC Ebola travel restriction?

Anyone, including US citizens and nationals, who has been in the Democratic Republic of Congo within 21 days of their planned departure is barred from boarding commercial flights to US destinations.

How big is the current Ebola outbreak?

As of September 14, 2026, the DRC had reported 7,258 confirmed cases and 3,510 related deaths, making it the second-largest Ebola outbreak on record.

Which provinces have the highest travel warnings?

The CDC recommends avoiding all travel to Ituri and Nord-Kivu provinces, and avoiding nonessential travel to Haut-Uélé and Tshopo provinces.

Has Ebola reached the United States?

No. The CDC says no cases have been confirmed in the US as a result of this outbreak, and the risk to the American public remains low.

How long do affected travelers have to wait before flying to the US?

Travelers who have been in the DRC should plan to remain outside the United States for at least 21 days after leaving the country before attempting to fly to a US destination.

Related coverage on Tamara News

Sources

Canada Express Entry Draw Sends 2,000 Invitations at CRS 519

Canada issued 2,000 invitations to apply for permanent residence in a Canada Express Entry draw held on 15 September 2026, with the Comprehensive Ranking System cut-off for the Canadian Experience Class settling at 519 points — two below the round two weeks earlier.

Quick navigation

The 15 September round

The round was category-restricted to the Canadian Experience Class, the stream for candidates who already hold skilled work experience in Canada. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada issued 2,000 invitations, with the department’s own timestamp recorded at 10:21:41 UTC.

The tie-breaking rule did significant work in this draw. Where multiple profiles sit exactly on the cut-off, IRCC admits those submitted before a stated date and time. That timestamp reached back to 26 March 2026 — close to six months before the round itself, which indicates a deep pool of profiles clustered at 519.

Specialist trackers including Moving2Canada and Canadian immigration practices reported the same figures independently. IRCC publishes each round on its ministerial instructions page, which is the authoritative record.

Where the CRS line is heading

The Canadian Experience Class threshold peaked at 523 in the 18 August round, the highest of the year. The 1 September round came in at 521, and 15 September at 519. That is a downward drift of four points over a month.

Read carefully, it is a mild trend rather than a door opening. Single rounds are noisy: invitation volume, the mix of categories drawn and the size of the pool all move the line. A candidate sitting at 510 should not read a four-point drift as a forecast. A candidate at 517 or 518 has reason to keep the profile current.

A record year for invitations

Volume, not the threshold, is the more striking number this year. As of the 4 September round, trackers counted 53 Express Entry rounds in 2026 and more than 126,000 invitations issued — a record annual total, with almost four months of the year still to run.

That combination — record invitation volume alongside historically high cut-off scores — tells you the pool has grown faster than the draws. More candidates are competing for a larger number of places, which is why the threshold has held up despite the issuance rate.

How the levels plan shapes the draws

Express Entry rounds are downstream of the Immigration Levels Plan. Canada’s 2026-2028 plan, summarised by practitioners tracking the file, sets a target of 380,000 new permanent residents in 2026, held flat for the following two years.

Within that, the plan allocates 109,000 places to skilled workers in 2026, rising to 111,000 in 2027 and 2028. The plan brings back the Federal High Skilled category, leans harder on the Provincial Nominee Program, and keeps a deliberate focus on helping people already in Canada transition to permanent residence — which is precisely why Canadian Experience Class rounds keep appearing.

The money side of the system also tightened this year. Our report on the revised study permit proof-of-funds requirement covers the change most likely to affect candidates building Canadian experience through study.

Planning around the next round

IRCC does not publish a draw calendar in advance, and the interval between rounds has varied. Candidates within a few points of the line should do three things: confirm language test validity, since expiry silently drops a profile’s score; update work experience the day it crosses a year boundary; and keep an eye on provincial nominations, which the levels plan has made a larger share of the intake.

For comparison across destinations, our coverage of Australia’s visa processing priorities and of green card category retrogression in the United States sets out how the other two large skilled-migration systems are rationing places this year.

Express Entry questions answered

What was the CRS cut-off in the 15 September Express Entry draw?

The Canadian Experience Class round on 15 September 2026 used a Comprehensive Ranking System cut-off of 519 points.

How many candidates were invited?

IRCC issued 2,000 invitations to apply, the same volume as the 1 September round.

What is a tie-breaking timestamp?

Where several profiles sit on the cut-off score, the department admits those submitted before a stated date and time. For this round the timestamp reached back to 26 March 2026.

Is the CRS threshold falling?

The trend has been gently downward since the 18 August round set the year’s high of 523 for the Canadian Experience Class, but two points is a small move and single rounds are noisy.

How many invitations has Canada issued in 2026?

Trackers counted more than 126,000 invitations across 53 rounds as of the 4 September draw, a record annual total.

What does the 2026-2028 levels plan target?

The plan sets 380,000 new permanent residents in 2026 and holds that level for the following two years, with 109,000 places for skilled workers in 2026 and 111,000 in each of 2027 and 2028.

More immigration reporting

A Judge Just Stopped Trump’s Birth Tourism Crackdown

A federal judge halted the Trump administration’s effort to end so-called birth tourism on September 14, 2026. The judge ruled the policy is almost certainly unconstitutional and cannot take effect while the case proceeds.

The birth tourism rule blocked decision covers Executive Order 14419, signed August 6, 2026. It would have let immigration officials deny visas or block entry for people believed to be visiting the US to give birth. It also allowed revoking travel authorization already granted.

What Executive Order 14419 tried to do

Under the order, the State Department and Department of Homeland Security would have gained new authority. Acting through USCIS, Customs and Border Protection and ICE, they could treat suspected birth tourism as grounds to deny or revoke a visa.

The administration framed the order as closing a loophole. It says the loophole has been used to secure automatic US citizenship for children born to visiting foreign nationals.

birth tourism rule blocked

Why the court blocked it

The federal judge issued a preliminary injunction after immigrant rights advocates challenged the rule. She found it likely conflicts with settled constitutional protections for children born on US soil.

A preliminary injunction pauses a rule while litigation continues. It doesn’t strike the rule down permanently, so the case will keep moving through the courts even though the rule can’t be enforced for now.

How this fits a pattern of blocked immigration rules

This isn’t the only Trump administration immigration rule paused by a federal court this month. A separate September 14 ruling also blocked a change to the Duration of Status system for international students and exchange visitors.

Together, the rulings suggest courts are moving quickly to pause major immigration policy changes issued through executive action, before they can affect travelers or families.

What legal experts are watching next

Immigration attorneys say the constitutional question here is well-settled. Existing Supreme Court precedent holds that children born on US soil are citizens at birth, regardless of their parents’ travel intentions. That’s part of why the judge moved so quickly.

That doesn’t guarantee the outcome on appeal. But it means the administration faces a high bar to get a higher court to let the rule take effect while the case continues.

What happens next in the birth tourism rule blocked case

The administration is expected to appeal the injunction. That process could take months and may eventually reach a higher court, given the constitutional questions involved.

Until the litigation resolves, current rules on visa issuance and entry for pregnant travelers stay unchanged. Families shouldn’t expect the blocked policy to affect travel plans in the near term.

How this affects visa applicants right now

Consular officers are processing visa applications under the standard rules that predate the blocked order, with no new birth-tourism screening questions in effect.

Applicants who were previously worried about extra scrutiny under the new policy can proceed with their applications as normal. Attorneys still advise keeping an eye on the case as it moves through appeal.

Frequently asked questions

What is Executive Order 14419?

It’s an August 6, 2026 executive order titled ‘Ending Birth Tourism’ that would let US immigration officials deny or revoke visas for foreign nationals believed to be traveling to the US to give birth.

Why was the birth tourism rule blocked?

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction on September 14, 2026, finding the rule likely unconstitutional and pausing it while a legal challenge from immigrant rights advocates proceeds.

Is the birth tourism rule permanently struck down?

No. A preliminary injunction is a temporary pause while the underlying lawsuit continues; the case could still go through further appeals.

Does this affect current visa applicants?

For now, current rules on visa issuance for pregnant travelers remain unchanged, since the blocked rule cannot be enforced while the injunction is in effect.

Are other immigration rules facing similar court challenges?

Yes. A separate September 14 ruling also blocked a change to the Duration of Status system affecting international students, part of a broader pattern of court challenges to recent immigration rules.

Related coverage on Tamara News

Sources

EU AI Act High-Risk Deadline Moves to December 2027

The EU AI Act high-risk deadline that was due to bite on 2 August 2026 has moved to 2 December 2027 for standalone systems, and to 2 August 2028 for AI built into products already governed by EU product-safety law. The shift came through Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, the Digital Omnibus package amending the AI Act, which entered into force on 27 July 2026.

On this page

What moved, and to when

The Digital Omnibus was tracked through the European Parliament as a simplification measure and published in the Official Journal on 24 July 2026. Its effect on timing is narrow but consequential.

Annex III covers standalone high-risk systems — the categories such as biometrics, critical infrastructure, education, employment, essential services, law enforcement and administration of justice. Compliance for those moves from 2 August 2026 to 2 December 2027. Annex I covers AI embedded in products already regulated under EU product-safety legislation, and that moves to 2 August 2028.

The obligations themselves are unchanged in substance: risk management, data governance, technical documentation, record-keeping, human oversight, accuracy and robustness, cybersecurity, conformity assessment, post-market monitoring and incident reporting. Only the date on which they become enforceable has moved.

What did not move

This is where several summaries have gone wrong. Three tranches stayed on their original schedule.

Article 5 prohibited practices — the outright bans, including certain biometric categorisation and social scoring — have been in force since February 2025. General-purpose AI provider obligations have applied since August 2025. And Article 50 transparency duties, including the labelling of AI-generated content and disclosure when users are interacting with an AI system, took effect on 2 August 2026 as originally written.

So a provider of a large model selling into the EU gained nothing from the omnibus. A provider of, say, a CV-screening tool gained sixteen months.

The AI Office now has teeth

The other thing that happened on 2 August 2026 is that the European AI Office’s supervision and enforcement powers became exercisable. Analyses from firms advising on the file, including Gibson Dunn, set out the scope: the Office can request information from providers, demand access to models, order mitigation measures, and require withdrawal or recall from the EU market.

Those are enforcement powers attached to obligations that are already live, chiefly the general-purpose AI and transparency provisions. The practical exposure for frontier model developers is therefore now, not December 2027.

The reason given

The justification offered for the deferral is capacity rather than policy reversal: harmonised standards under the Act were not finalised, and notified body capacity to run conformity assessments was not in place. Without a standard to build against and an assessor to certify against it, providers could not have demonstrated compliance on the original date.

Critics read the same facts differently, as evidence that the Act’s conformity architecture was over-specified relative to what European standards bodies could deliver. Both readings are consistent with the text; the Commission’s own framing is the capacity one.

The deferral also lands in a year of hardening technology policy elsewhere. Our coverage of the US chip export bills and of China’s intelligent computing plan to 2030 traces the parallel tracks.

What providers should do with the extra time

The obvious risk of a sixteen-month deferral is that teams stand down. The obligations that arrive in December 2027 are documentation-heavy and retrospective — technical files, data governance records and post-market monitoring plans are easier to build while a system is being developed than to reconstruct afterwards.

Two near-term items remain unavoidable. Transparency labelling is live now for anyone shipping generative output into the EU. And for organisations that also build or deploy general-purpose models, the AI Office’s information-gathering powers are exercisable today. Our report on Microsoft’s AI code of conduct shows how large vendors are documenting these commitments ahead of formal requirements.

What people are asking about the delay

What is the new EU AI Act high-risk deadline?

Compliance for standalone high-risk systems listed in Annex III now falls due on 2 December 2027, moved from 2 August 2026. AI embedded in products already covered by EU product-safety law has until 2 August 2028.

Which obligations were not delayed?

Article 50 transparency and AI-content labelling duties, the general-purpose AI provider obligations in force since August 2025, and the Article 5 prohibited-practices regime in force since February 2025.

What changed on 2 August 2026?

The AI Office’s supervision and enforcement powers became exercisable, alongside the transparency obligations and the penalty framework for the provisions already in force.

Why did the EU postpone the high-risk rules?

The stated reason is that harmonised standards and notified body capacity were not ready in time for providers to demonstrate conformity.

Where is this written down?

Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, the Digital Omnibus simplification package amending the AI Act, published in the Official Journal on 24 July 2026 and in force from 27 July 2026.

Does the delay apply outside the EU?

The AI Act applies to providers placing systems on the EU market regardless of where they are established, so the revised dates matter to non-EU developers selling into Europe.

Further technology coverage