Shipping industry leaders have expressed concern that the recent US-Iran agreement on the Strait of Hormuz could lead to the introduction of fees for passage through the strategically vital waterway, which has historically been free of charge. The accord, signed on Wednesday, includes provisions for Iran to negotiate with Oman and other Gulf states on the “future administration and maritime services” of the strait, a development that has raised alarms about potential new charges.
Industry representatives worry that the language in the deal could allow Iran to implement tolls or establish a fund similar to the one used in the Strait of Malacca, a major shipping channel between Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore where fees are voluntarily paid to support environmental and navigational management. Philip Belcher, marine director of the tanker group Intertanko, emphasized the importance of maintaining the strait’s current status, stating that the waterway “must remain free of charges.”
John Stapwert, marine director at the International Chamber of Shipping, noted that referencing “maritime services” implies something akin to the Malacca model. “It didn’t exist before [in Hormuz], so it begs the question why suddenly there is a need for it,” he said. This suggests a potential shift in how the waterway could be administered in the future.
The Strait of Hormuz has increasingly become a geopolitical lever for Iran. In March, after US and Israeli strikes, Iran reportedly restricted access to the strait, demanding a $2 million fee payable in bitcoin and asserting control by deploying mines along key maritime routes. At various points, the Trump administration discussed options including a potential joint venture with Iran to operate the strait or introducing a “VIP” lane for fee-paying vessels. However, the White House has also publicly opposed the idea of Iran charging tolls for passage.
US Vice President JD Vance reaffirmed the stance that international waterways “should be free of tolls.” Currently, vessels passing through the Strait of Malacca contribute voluntarily to a fund that addresses environmental risks and navigational safety concerns, a system some fear may be echoed in Hormuz under the new arrangement.
The strait, which is wider than Malacca, was scheduled to reopen to traffic on Thursday under the terms of the peace deal. The agreement includes a commitment by Iran not to impose fees for at least 60 days. Nonetheless, the Iranian news agency ISNA reported that Iran intends to determine the strait’s administration in consultation with Oman and that “maritime services” could indeed include fee collection.
The prospect of introducing charges in the Strait of Hormuz faces strong opposition from Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as from shipping associations focused on upholding the strait’s status as an international waterway. Oman, with territorial waters along the western side of the strait, has frustrated some Gulf neighbors and the US by engaging in discussions with Iran about possible fees.
Following the signing of the deal, some vessels, including tankers operated by China’s Cosco and an Italian car carrier, resumed transit through the strait. Despite these movements, an estimated 550 ships remain stranded in the Gulf, according to data from maritime analytics firm Kpler.