China could bar U.S.-service ships in new maritime dispute volley

The regulations provide for “necessary countermeasures” including fees on vessels of that country or region when berthing at Chinese ports; prohibiting or restricting vessels of that country or region from entering or leaving Chinese ports; and prohibiting or restricting organizations and individuals of that country or region from obtaining data, information, and engaging in international maritime transport … involving Chinese ports.”

The amount of the fees was not spelled out.

The U.S.-flag lines calling China are American President Lines, a unit of CMA CGM of France, and Matson. Germany’s Hapag-Lloyd operates some U.S.-flag priority services on Pacific routes intersecting with Asia, under special U.S.-flag service agreements. Other major global carriers also serve the China-U.S. trade.

The U.S. measures come after an investigation begun during the Biden administration that found China built a dominant position in global shipping and shipbuilding through unfair trade practices such as below-market pricing and centralized subsidies. The fees are designed to blunt that dominance in the trans-Pacific trade, and help fund a resurgence in American-flag shipping and shipyards.

Since the fees were announced in April, ocean container lines serving the Asia trade have reshuffled services and shifted vulnerable tonnage out of U.S. rotations. Some operators, such as Hapag-Lloyd, said they do not plan to impose surcharges to cover the U.S. port charges.

At the same time, industry observers said that the effect of the U.S. port fees is a restructuring of trans-Pacific services.

While Cosco, China’s largest ocean container line, has stated that it will not be adjusting U.S. services despite the new USTR fees, the adjustments are already happening, said Peter Sand of consultant Xeneta.

“Since April, Cosco has been systematically reducing Chinese-built vessel (CBV) capacity from U.S.-bound services,” Sand wrote in a LinkedIn post. “Today, 215,000 twenty foot equivalent of Cosco’s trans-Pacific capacity remains CBV, but only 18% of vessels deployed to the U.S. are CBVs.
Sand noted that on the USEC3 service, which calls both East and West coasts, Cosco has swapped out 52,000 TEUs of CBV capacity between late March and upcoming November deployments.  “Importantly, overall service capacity hasn’t dropped. Cosco is replacing vessels rather than removing them.”

This matters, Sand said, because it shows how carriers can balance compliance with political and economic headwinds while maintaining headline stability.

“For ports, shippers, and BCOs [beneficial cargo owners], these capacity reallocations have real implications on cost exposure, routing strategies, and supply chain resilience,” he wrote.

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Ports brace for government shutdown 

Houston gains as New Orleans, Corpus Christi slip in August

Texas shipyard purchased by Turkish consortium for $50M

UN: Trade reset, geopolitics to hurt container trade growth