US port charges on China vessels add to supply chain uncertainty

Observers say fees another form of tariffs

OOCL vessels unload at Port of Long Beach terminal. (Photo: Port of Long Beach)

The Trump administration’s proposal to assess massive port charges on Chinese-built and -operated cargo vessels is creating more questions than answers for the global maritime industry.

The proposal announced Friday by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has its roots in a 2024 investigation that found China leveraged unfair trade practices to dominate the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors.

The fees include:

  • Up to $1 million per call for a Chinese-operated vessel, based on a rate of $1,000 per net ton of capacity.
  • From $500,000 to $1.5 million per call depending on how many Chinese-built vessels are in an operator’s fleet.
  • From $500,000 to $1 million per call for operators with vessels on order at Chinese shipyards.

There are also new ocean cargo preference rules which would immediately require 1% of U.S. exports move on U.S.-flagged and -operated ships, then 3% within two years, 5% within five years and 15% within seven years.

“What this does is inject chaos and uncertainty into the container shipping supply chain,” said John McCown, an analyst with the Center for Maritime Strategy. “It’s another form of tariffs, that’s all it is, but with a bluntness that makes it even more nonsensical than tariffs.”

McCown said the proposal raises a host of complicated questions, such as whether a ship built in a country other than China, but drydocked there for repairs or maintenance, a common practice, runs afoul of the new rules. Or, how the fees will affect a China-linked bulk carrier or tanker that arrives empty to load American grain or crude oil for export.

“It doesn’t appear as though the administration has really thought this through,” McCown said. “What happens to an empty Panamax vessel that arrives to load grain from the Midwest? With the fees, we’re suddenly less competitive than Brazil.” 

“If the intention is to drastically increase costs for U.S. importers and make U.S. exports uncompetitive, this proposal is likely to do the job,” said consultant Lars Jensen of Vespucci Maritime, in a LinkedIn post.

Short term, there is speculation that carriers and shippers could divert to ports in Mexico and Canada where cargo would then move by rail to the U.S. But that scenario is also less clear-cut.

The key western Canada container ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert in 2024 struggled to manage increased volumes, noted intermodal analyst Lawrence Gross, when shippers diverted container shipments away from the East Coast of the United States during longshore labor disruptions and from changes in vessel rotations during the Red Sea crisis.

“They’ve really suffered because of all the disruptions,” Gross said, “and their share of inbound TEUs [twenty-foot equivalent units] is depressed right now. So there is some capacity there. The freight that’s at risk is ‘swing’ freight — the divertable freight moving, for example, to the U.S. midwest. There’s a variety of routing available such as choice of coast, choice of port region, for stuff that moves intact inland, such as [international] container moves.”

He estimated freight that could be diverted comprises a high-single-digit share of all U.S.-bound cargo. But Canada and Mexico may be less attractive as alternative ports now that the U.S. will levy previously announced tariffs on imports from those countries.

“If you take a ship with capacity of 14,000 TEU, that breaks down to 7,000 [40-foot] containers, [standard for international shipping], so the port fee will really account for a small percentage of the cost of goods delivered,” Gross said. “The port fee impact is not something consumers are going to notice amid all the other things that are happening.”

McCown agreed, adding that the uncertainty triggered by the port fees likely has logistics planners already looking at diverting container shipments through Mexico and Canada. 

“The supply chain works best when it’s moving rhythmically,” he said. “The whole process is incredibly efficient. For ocean lines, it’s a 3% run-rate cost compared to the value of what’s being shipped.”

McCown recalled that it took about six months until the impact of tariffs levied during the first Trump administration were felt in the container supply chain. 

Ocean lines did not immediately respond to requests for  comment.

The net effect of the port charges, like tariffs, Gross said, will be a braking effect on the economy.

“This will freeze everything: No investments will be made, no plants can be built, until this situation shakes down. We’ll see it in a slowdown of the GDP. With interest rates where they are and inflation rates not changing, the downside risk is rising as we speak.”

Public comment is being accepted through March 24, after which President Donald Trump will decide whether to implement the proposal.

Join the discussion at forum.freightwaves.com

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

US targets China ships, operators with millions of dollars in new port charges

Tariff fears help Port of Long Beach containers to best start on record

No sure thing? ILA head tells rank and file contract vote an ‘obstacle’ to overcome

While supply chain frets, Port of Los Angeles sees record January volume

Upcoming FreightWaves Events
Compliance

Brokerage Compliance Symposium

The day before F3. Every compliance issue you face - fraud exposure, carrier liability, FMCSA rules, cargo theft, insurance gaps - navigated by attorneys and operators defining best practices in a changing industry.

October 26, 2026
The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN
Register Now
Awards

F3 Awards Dinner

The night before F3. FreightTech100 companies honored. FreightTech 25 and Shipper of Choice winners revealed live. Cocktail reception into dinner and live music - 300 industry leaders in one purpose-built room.

October 26, 2026
The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN
Register Now
FreightTech

F3: Future of Freight Festival

Industry-defining keynotes, rapid-fire technology demos, and industry leaders networking in experiences across Chattanooga - plus the inaugural F3 Awards Dinner featuring the FreightTech and Shipper of Choice reveals.

October 27, 2026 – October 28, 2026
The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN
Register Now
Compliance Brokerage Compliance Symposium Oct 26 • The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN

The day before F3. Every compliance issue you face - fraud exposure, carrier liability, FMCSA rules, cargo theft, insurance gaps - navigated by attorneys and operators defining best practices in a changing industry.

The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN Register Now
Awards F3 Awards Dinner Oct 26 • The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN

The night before F3. FreightTech100 companies honored. FreightTech 25 and Shipper of Choice winners revealed live. Cocktail reception into dinner and live music - 300 industry leaders in one purpose-built room.

The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN Register Now
FreightTech F3: Future of Freight Festival Oct 27 – Oct 28 • The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN

Industry-defining keynotes, rapid-fire technology demos, and industry leaders networking in experiences across Chattanooga - plus the inaugural F3 Awards Dinner featuring the FreightTech and Shipper of Choice reveals.

The Signal at Chattanooga Choo Choo • Chattanooga, TN Register Now

Stuart Chirls

Stuart Chirls is a journalist who has covered the full breadth of railroads, intermodal, container shipping, ports, supply chain and logistics for Railway Age, the Journal of Commerce and IANA. He has also staffed at S&P, McGraw-Hill, United Business Media, Advance Media, Tribune Co., The New York Times Co., and worked in supply chain with BASF, the world's largest chemical producer. Reach him at stuartchirls@firecrown.com.