Investments, Loans and Long-Term Receivables	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Investments, Debt and Equity Securities [Abstract]
Investments, Loans and Long-Term Receivables	Investments, Loans and Long-Term Receivables Equity Investments Dakota Access, LLC (Dakota Access) and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC (ETCO) In 2020, the trial court presiding over litigation brought by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (the Tribe) ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) addressing an easement under Lake Oahe in North Dakota. The trial court later vacated the easement. Although the easement is vacated, the USACE has no plans to stop pipeline operations while it proceeds with the EIS, and the Tribe’s request for a shutdown was denied in May 2021. In June 2021, the trial court dismissed the litigation entirely. Once the EIS is completed, new litigation or challenges may be filed. In February 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court) denied Dakota Access’ writ of certiorari requesting the Supreme Court to review the trial court’s decision to order the EIS and vacate the easement. Therefore, the requirement to prepare the EIS stood. Also in February 2022, the Tribe withdrew as a cooperating agency, causing the USACE to halt the EIS process while the USACE engaged with the Tribe on their reasons for withdrawing. The draft EIS process resumed in August 2022, and in September 2023, the USACE published its draft EIS for public comment. The USACE identified five potential outcomes but did not indicate which one it preferred. The options comprise two “no action” alternatives where the USACE would deny an easement to Dakota Access and require it to shut down the pipeline and either remove the pipe from under Lake Oahe or allow the pipeline to be abandoned-in-place under the lake. The USACE also identified three “action” alternatives; two of them contemplate that the USACE would reissue the easement to Dakota Access under essentially the same terms as 2017 with either the same or a larger volume of oil allowed through the pipeline, while the third alternative would require decommissioning of the current pipeline and construction of a new line 39 miles upstream from the current location. The public comment period concluded on December 13, 2023. The USACE plans to review the comments and issue its final EIS in early 2026. The Record of Decision will follow within 30 to 60 days after the issuance of the final EIS. The final EIS must be completed before the USACE can reauthorize the easement for the pipeline. If reauthorization occurs, new litigation challenging the reauthorization may be filed. In October 2024, the Tribe filed another lawsuit against the USACE in federal district court in Washington, D.C., again challenging USACE’s allowance of pipeline operations while the EIS process proceeds. In this lawsuit, the Tribe purports to introduce new evidence regarding the pipeline’s proximity to a reservoir and attempts to relitigate arguments about the need for injunctive relief to support its position that the Supreme Court should halt pipeline operations. A consortium of 13 states has joined Dakota Access as intervenors. The consortium argues that the pipeline reduces pollution compared to other modes of transportation and that Dakota Access is integral to the health of regional energy and agriculture markets. The Tribe’s prior request for a shutdown was denied in May 2021. This latest lawsuit seeking a shutdown does not change the current deadline for the issuance of the final EIS. Motions to dismiss the latest lawsuit were filed by USACE, Dakota Access, and Intervenors and opposed by the Tribe. The parties are awaiting the district court’s decision. On March 19, 2025, the Tribe filed a notice in support of its latest lawsuit, indicating three additional facts for the district court to consider when making its ruling on the lawsuit. These facts relate to events regarding Energy Transfer LP’s conduct and third-party actions against it. Dakota Access and ETCO have guaranteed repayment of senior unsecured notes issued by a wholly owned subsidiary of Dakota Access. On April 1, 2024, Dakota Access’ wholly owned subsidiary repaid $1 billion aggregate principal amount of its outstanding senior notes upon maturity. We funded our 25% share of the repayment, or $250 million, with a capital contribution of $171 million in March 2024 and $79 million of distributions we elected not to receive from Dakota Access in the first quarter of 2024. At June 30, 2025, the aggregate principal amount outstanding of Dakota Access’ senior unsecured notes was $850 million. In addition, Phillips 66 Partners LP (Phillips 66 Partners), a wholly owned subsidiary of Phillips 66, and its co-venturers in Dakota Access also provided a Contingent Equity Contribution Undertaking (CECU) in conjunction with the notes offering. Under the CECU, the co-venturers may be severally required to make proportionate equity contributions to Dakota Access if there is an unfavorable final judgment in the above-mentioned ongoing litigation. At June 30, 2025, our 25% share of the maximum potential equity contributions under the CECU was approximately $215 million. If the pipeline is required to cease operations, it may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Should operations cease and Dakota Access and ETCO not have sufficient funds to pay its expenses, we also could be required to support our 25% share of the ongoing expenses, including scheduled interest payments on the notes of approximately $10 million annually, in addition to the potential obligations under the CECU at June 30, 2025. At June 30, 2025, the aggregate book value of our investments in Dakota Access and ETCO was $862 million. OnCue Holdings, LLC (OnCue) We hold a 50% interest in OnCue, a joint venture that owns and operates retail convenience stores. We fully guarantee various debt agreements of OnCue and our co-venturer does not participate in the guarantees. This entity is considered a variable interest entity (VIE) because our debt agreements resulted in OnCue not being exposed to all potential losses. We have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary because we do not have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact economic performance. At June 30, 2025, our maximum exposure to loss was $251 million, which represented the book value of our investment in OnCue of $194 million and guaranteed debt obligations of $57 million. Investment Dispositions On January 31, 2025, we sold our 49% ownership interest in Coop Mineraloel AG (Coop) and settled the foreign currency forward contracts entered into in connection with the asset sale. We received cash proceeds of $1.2 billion, consisting of a sales price of $1.15 billion and a final dividend relating to financial year 2024 of $92 million from Coop that was paid on January 30, 2025. We recognized a before-tax gain of $1 billion associated with the sale in the “Net gain (loss) on dispositions” line item on our consolidated statement of income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, and is reported in our M&S segment. The final dividend of $92 million is included within the “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” section on our consolidated statement of cash flows. On January 30, 2025, DCP Midstream, LP (DCP LP) sold its 25% ownership interest in Gulf Coast Express Pipeline LLC for cash proceeds of $853 million. We recognized a before-tax gain of $68 million, which is included in the “Net gain (loss) on dispositions” line item on our consolidated statement of income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, and is reported in our Midstream segment.

In 2020, the trial court presiding over litigation brought by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (the Tribe) ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) addressing an easement under Lake Oahe in North Dakota. The trial court later vacated the easement. Although the easement is vacated, the USACE has no plans to stop pipeline operations while it proceeds with the EIS, and the Tribe’s request for a shutdown was denied in May 2021. In June 2021, the trial court dismissed the litigation entirely. Once the EIS is completed, new litigation or challenges may be filed.

In February 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court) denied Dakota Access’ writ of certiorari requesting the Supreme Court to review the trial court’s decision to order the EIS and vacate the easement. Therefore, the requirement to prepare the EIS stood. Also in February 2022, the Tribe withdrew as a cooperating agency, causing the USACE to halt the EIS process while the USACE engaged with the Tribe on their reasons for withdrawing.

The draft EIS process resumed in August 2022, and in September 2023, the USACE published its draft EIS for public comment. The USACE identified five potential outcomes but did not indicate which one it preferred. The options comprise two “no action” alternatives where the USACE would deny an easement to Dakota Access and require it to shut down the pipeline and either remove the pipe from under Lake Oahe or allow the pipeline to be abandoned-in-place under the lake. The USACE also identified three “action” alternatives; two of them contemplate that the USACE would reissue the easement to Dakota Access under essentially the same terms as 2017 with either the same or a larger volume of oil allowed through the pipeline, while the third alternative would require decommissioning of the current pipeline and construction of a new line 39 miles upstream from the current location.

The public comment period concluded on December 13, 2023. The USACE plans to review the comments and issue its final EIS in early 2026. The Record of Decision will follow within 30 to 60 days after the issuance of the final EIS. The final EIS must be completed before the USACE can reauthorize the easement for the pipeline. If reauthorization occurs, new litigation challenging the reauthorization may be filed.

In October 2024, the Tribe filed another lawsuit against the USACE in federal district court in Washington, D.C., again challenging USACE’s allowance of pipeline operations while the EIS process proceeds. In this lawsuit, the Tribe purports to introduce new evidence regarding the pipeline’s proximity to a reservoir and attempts to relitigate arguments about the need for injunctive relief to support its position that the Supreme Court should halt pipeline operations. A consortium of 13 states has joined Dakota Access as intervenors. The consortium argues that the pipeline reduces pollution compared to other modes of transportation and that Dakota Access is integral to the health of regional energy and agriculture markets. The Tribe’s prior request for a shutdown was denied in May 2021. This latest lawsuit seeking a shutdown does not change the current deadline for the issuance of the final EIS. Motions to dismiss the latest lawsuit were filed by USACE, Dakota Access, and Intervenors and opposed by the Tribe. The parties are awaiting the district court’s decision. On March 19, 2025, the Tribe filed a notice in support of its latest lawsuit, indicating three additional facts for the district court to consider when making its ruling on the lawsuit. These facts relate to events regarding Energy Transfer LP’s conduct and third-party actions against it.

Dakota Access and ETCO have guaranteed repayment of senior unsecured notes issued by a wholly owned subsidiary of Dakota Access. On April 1, 2024, Dakota Access’ wholly owned subsidiary repaid $1 billion aggregate principal amount of its outstanding senior notes upon maturity. We funded our 25% share of the repayment, or $250 million, with a capital contribution of $171 million in March 2024 and $79 million of distributions we elected not to receive from Dakota Access in the first quarter of 2024. At June 30, 2025, the aggregate principal amount outstanding of Dakota Access’ senior unsecured notes was $850 million.

In addition, Phillips 66 Partners LP (Phillips 66 Partners), a wholly owned subsidiary of Phillips 66, and its co-venturers in Dakota Access also provided a Contingent Equity Contribution Undertaking (CECU) in conjunction with the notes offering. Under the CECU, the co-venturers may be severally required to make proportionate equity contributions to Dakota Access if there is an unfavorable final judgment in the above-mentioned ongoing litigation. At June 30, 2025, our 25% share of the maximum potential equity contributions under the CECU was approximately $215 million. If the pipeline is required to cease operations, it may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Should operations cease and Dakota Access and ETCO not have sufficient funds to pay its expenses, we also could be required to support our 25% share of the ongoing expenses, including scheduled interest payments on the notes of approximately $10 million annually, in addition to the potential obligations under the CECU at June 30, 2025.

We hold a 50% interest in OnCue, a joint venture that owns and operates retail convenience stores. We fully guarantee various debt agreements of OnCue and our co-venturer does not participate in the guarantees. This entity is considered a variable interest entity (VIE) because our debt agreements resulted in OnCue not being exposed to all potential losses. We have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary because we do not have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact economic performance. At June 30, 2025, our maximum exposure to loss was $251 million, which represented the book value of our investment in OnCue of $194 million and guaranteed debt obligations of $57 million.

On January 31, 2025, we sold our 49% ownership interest in Coop Mineraloel AG (Coop) and settled the foreign currency forward contracts entered into in connection with the asset sale. We received cash proceeds of $1.2 billion, consisting of a sales price of $1.15 billion and a final dividend relating to financial year 2024 of $92 million from Coop that was paid on January 30, 2025. We recognized a before-tax gain of $1 billion associated with the sale in the “Net gain (loss) on dispositions” line item on our consolidated statement of income for the six months ended June 30, 2025, and is reported in our M&S segment. The final dividend of $92 million is included within the “Cash Flows from Operating Activities” section on our consolidated statement of cash flows.