A second source confirmed that the US demanded that the Iranian delegation leave, but said Araghchi was scheduled to travel back to Tehran on Monday night anyway, Axios reports

Expulsion demands of this kind, where a delegation is asked to leave but the departure timing turns out to have been pre-scheduled, sit in a familiar grey zone between diplomatic rupture and choreography. The precedent pattern is that markets price the optics rather than the substance at first: the crude risk premium and haven bid on such headlines have historically faded once the follow-up reporting clarifies whether talks are formally broken off or merely paused, since the two paths carry very different implications for Gulf supply, freight and insurance costs. The actors matter here: second-source confirmation via a Washington-focused outlet typically signals an administration willing to have the pressure narrative public, which has in past episodes preceded either escalation or a negotiated de-escalation framed as strength. The distinction worth drawing is between a symbolic expulsion and a termination of the negotiating channel itself; only the latter has tended to sustain a durable move in the front of the oil curve rather than a transient headline spike. Worth watching is whether the delegation's departure is followed by cancellation of further rounds, movement in sanctions enforcement on Iranian barrels, and any statement from Tehran characterising the talks. As reporting rather than a confirmed rupture, the signal is directional and the usual sequence is headline, clarification, retrace or extend.