Venezuela steal oil from the United States

1. What the president said and how he framed “theft”

President Trump publicly labeled the Maduro government a “foreign terrorist organization,” ordered a “total and complete blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers to and from Venezuela, and asserted that Venezuela had “stolen” oil, land and other assets from the United States — language repeated across White House posts and media briefings as justification for seizures and a blockade ^{[6] [7] [8]}. Multiple outlets note he tied the rhetoric to the historic nationalization of oil assets and to civil and arbitration claims by U.S. companies, while critics and fact-checkers flagged the president’s phrasing as misleading because it conflates private-company arbitration wins with a theft of U.S. government property ^{[2] [4]}.

2. The legal and historical roots: expropriations and arbitration

Under Hugo Chávez the Venezuelan state nationalized large parts of the oil sector beginning in the 2000s, a process that stripped some American companies of assets and led to international arbitration and court judgments; reporting cites arbitration rulings upheld in 2025 totaling about $8.7 billion plus interest and larger claim totals approaching tens of billions in related litigation ^{[1] [2]}. Those rulings give U.S. firms legal grounds to pursue Venezuelan assets abroad and explain the administration’s assertion that Caracas owes American entities money, but they are not the same as documentary proof that Venezuela physically stole oil owned by the U.S. federal government ^{[2] [4]}.

3. Recent enforcement: seizures, sanctioned tankers and Washington’s rationale

In December 2025 U.S. authorities seized at least one tanker the administration said was sanctioned and used to transport oil from Venezuela and Iran, an action the government described as the execution of a seizure warrant tied to sanctions and suspected illicit shipping networks; Venezuela denounced the move as “piracy” and “blatant theft” ^{[3] [9]}. U.S. analysis and specialist outlets describe a “shadow fleet” of tankers that employ spoofing and other methods to evade sanctions, and U.S. officials characterize seizures and a blockade as enforcement against those sanctioned flows rather than the repossession of U.S. government oil stocks ^{[5] [10]}.

4. Competing narratives and international law implications

Caracas has protested to the U.N. and called U.S. actions violations of sovereignty and international law, while U.S. officials argue seizures target illicit networks and sanctioned property; observers warn the measures blur enforcement and geopolitical coercion and could prompt legal fights over jurisdiction and the disposition of seized cargoes ^{[11] [10] [9]}. Analysts also note that much Venezuelan crude moves to buyers like China and that the ultimate effect of seizures and sanctions depends on enforcement capacity and foreign buyers’ willingness to comply ^{[7] [5]}.

5. Bottom line — did Venezuela “steal” oil from the United States?

Based on the sources available, the claim that Venezuela “stole oil from the United States” is an imprecise political shorthand: Venezuela did nationalize oil assets formerly operated by U.S. companies, producing arbitration awards in favor of those companies and longstanding disputes ^{[1] [2]}, and the U.S. has seized sanctioned tankers carrying Venezuelan oil as part of a sanctions enforcement campaign ^{[3] [5]}; however, the reportage and fact-checks included here do not document a straightforward case of Venezuelan authorities taking U.S. government-owned oil reserves, and major outlets flag the president’s broad phrasing as misleading when treated as a literal statement about U.S. federal property ^{[4] [2]}.