Shipping Groups Push Back on Possible Hormuz Transit Fees

Industry Coalition Warns Against Compulsory Charges

Eight major shipping organizations have jointly urged the United Nations and the International Maritime Organization to oppose any compulsory tolls or transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz. According to a report by gCaptain, the groups sent an open letter to UN Secretary-General António Guterres and IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez arguing that freedom of navigation through international straits should not be treated as a bargaining chip in regional negotiations.

Signatories include the Asian Shipowners’ Association, BIMCO, Cruise Lines International Association, European Shipowners, International Chamber of Shipping, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO, and the World Shipping Council.

Context: Iran-Oman Talks on Strait Oversight

The letter follows reports that Iran and Oman are negotiating a new framework for shipping through Hormuz, reportedly including some form of Iranian oversight of vessel movements. That process traces back to a June memorandum between the U.S. and Iran calling for Iran and Oman to negotiate the strait’s future administration and maritime services, though the memorandum did not specify what that arrangement would involve.

The ambiguity has raised industry concerns about vessel traffic management, reporting requirements, and the possibility of future transit charges. The letter states that introducing compulsory charges or disguised toll-like service fees “would represent a significant departure from established international practice.”

Economic and Legal Stakes

The organizations argue mandatory fees would ripple beyond shipping, raising transportation costs across supply chains and contributing to higher energy prices and inflation. They also stress the precedent risk, warning that once compulsory charges are accepted in one strait, “it becomes increasingly difficult to resist similar measures elsewhere.”

The letter references seafarer safety during the region’s conflict, noting that crews have faced heightened risk, with some injured or killed while transiting the area. It states that seafarer safety “should be non-negotiable.”

Building on Earlier Guidance

The letter follows operational guidance issued in May by BIMCO, ICS, INTERTANKO, OCIMF, INTERCARGO, and IMCA for vessels transiting Hormuz during the conflict, which flagged risks including missile attacks, electronic warfare, GNSS jamming, AIS spoofing, mine threats, and heavy traffic congestion. That guidance also warned that rerouting outside the strait’s Traffic Separation Scheme could create navigational hazards, since nearby waters were not designed for large volumes of opposing commercial traffic.

An IMO spokesperson said in April that imposing tolls on Hormuz transits would “set a dangerous precedent,” adding that no international agreement permits such charges for passage through international straits. The industry groups say they are prepared to work with the IMO and UN to ensure that legal protections under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are not weakened.

Apeks view — For technical managers, this dispute is less about diplomacy than cost predictability. Compulsory transit fees, however framed, would add an unbudgeted variable to voyage planning and chartering on top of existing risks already flagged in prior operational guidance for the strait. The precedent concern is legitimate: once one chokepoint accepts toll-like charges, others may follow. Owners should watch this process closely, since any negotiated framework will directly shape routing decisions, insurance exposure, and crew safety planning in the region.