Shipping industry leaders have raised concerns that a newly signed US-Iran peace agreement may pave the way for charges to be introduced on the Strait of Hormuz, a key international waterway previously free of transit fees. The agreement, inked on Wednesday, includes provisions for Iran to negotiate with Oman and other Gulf states on the “future administration and maritime services” in the strait, prompting fears the language could be interpreted to authorize fees or the establishment of a fund similar to that used in the Strait of Malacca.

The Strait of Hormuz, a vital passage for global oil shipments, has historically allowed free passage under international maritime law. However, the shipping industry is wary that the accord’s wording could lead to new financial demands. Philip Belcher, marine director of the tanker industry group Intertanko, stressed that any outcome should reaffirm the principle that the strait remains free of charges. John Stawpert, marine director at the International Chamber of Shipping, noted that the reference to “maritime services” suggested a system akin to Malacca’s, where a voluntary fund collects payments from countries using that waterway to cover environmental protection and navigational studies. He questioned why such a system would suddenly be necessary in Hormuz.

The strait has become a strategic leverage point amid regional tensions. Following US-Israeli strikes earlier this year, Iran effectively closed the waterway to commercial traffic and demanded a $2 million fee payable in bitcoin, asserting control over shipping routes and even alleging the deployment of maritime mines. Throughout the conflict, US officials expressed differing views: former President Donald Trump floated ideas about a joint US-Iran operation of the strait or introducing fee-paying “VIP” lanes, while also opposing Iranian charges. More recently, US Vice President JD Vance affirmed that international waterways should remain toll-free.

Iranian state media has indicated that Tehran plans to coordinate with Oman on the future governance of the strait and that “maritime services” encompass the possibility of fee collection. Oman’s involvement has reportedly frustrated several Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members and the US, as Oman’s waters border the strait’s western edge and it has engaged Tehran in these administrative discussions. Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, strongly oppose any move to impose fees, insisting the strait’s status as an international waterway must be respected without additional charges.

As part of the peace deal, the Strait of Hormuz was scheduled to reopen to maritime traffic, with Iran committing not to charge fees for at least 60 days. Following the agreement, some vessels, including tankers operated by the Chinese shipping company Cosco and an Italian car carrier, began transiting the strait. Nonetheless, significant traffic disruption remains, with data from Kpler indicating that at least 550 ships continue to be stranded in the Gulf region. The situation highlights ongoing uncertainties over the future administration of this critical chokepoint in global energy and maritime trade.