Why ships could be Trump’s not-so-secret tariff weapon

Language in the MAP states that the fees “could” be used to fund a new Maritime Trust fund to help rebuild U.S. shipbuilding. But that seems by design to leave open the possibility of Trump deploying the funds for other purposes.

Some observers call the MAP fees a tax on global trade, with rapid downstream effects in the form of higher landed costs, pricing opacity, and uneven impacts across commodities and shippers. 

And since they are based on weight, the fees “don’t distinguish between value density, necessity, or strategic importance,” wrote John Krisch, chief executive of Kübox, a manufacturer of paper crates  based in Lebanon, Tenn., on LinkedIn. “That risks unintended consequences for exporters, consumers, and even U.S. logistics competitiveness, particularly at a moment when resilience and cost discipline are already strained.”

The tariff ruling also points up the non-stop chaos raking global trade, and the ongoing political risks weighing on container shipping.

“The decision impacts about two-thirds of the tariffs that have been collected to date and opens new avenues of uncertainty,” said Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, the busiest U.S. import gateway, in a statement. “First, there is not yet clarity on whether there will be refunds from the U.S. Treasury Department on tariffs already paid.  Second, the administration has already announced a new 10% global tariff in the wake of the ruling with no indication as to when that will take effect. 

“As this develops in the middle of Lunar New Year, most of the factories in China and across Asia are closed for the holiday and not expected to reopen until at least next week.” 

As the contract negotiating season gets underway, ocean carriers are wrestling with a demand-capacity imbalance that’s been pushing down rates on key headhaul routes. Whether the tariff ruling gives trade a boost remains to be seen. But if cargo fees are implemented – as Trump did in 2025 with short-lived port fees on Chinese ships – it’s an open question whether container lines will be able to meaningfully raise prices.

In a statement, Maersk (MAERSK-B.CO) said that importers should continue complying with U.S. Customs requirements until official implementation guidance is provided.

This article was updated Feb. 20 to add a statement from Gene Seroka of the Port of Los Angeles.

Read more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Hapag-Lloyd, WiseTech Global in container visibility initiative

Asia-U.S. container rates continue to fall as industry change swirls

EXCLUSIVE: Norfolk Southern, CMA CGM launch new ‘truck-like’ intermodal service

Canadian firm to acquire breakbulk, steel terminal at Mexico’s Port of Altamira