Source: Global Times
[Global Times Comprehensive Report] Editor's Note: "The U.S.' protectionist agenda has reached its peak through the plan to impose docking fees on Chinese ships." According to a report by French newspaper Le Monde on April 1, in order to revive its shipbuilding industry, the U.S. government is drafting a proposal to levy a "docking fee" on Chinese ships docking at U.S. ports. This move will cause global maritime logistics to "fall into chaos" and severely disrupt international import and export trade. Multiple industry insiders told the Global Times that once this fee is levied, it will first affect relevant industry practitioners and consumers in the United States, and then it will also be transmitted worldwide, accelerating the formation of a global shipping cost transfer chain. A Greek shipping expert bluntly stated that what is called a "docking fee" is ultimately another form of tariff, which will ultimately be paid by American consumers.
About 98% of the global fleet will be subject to additional charges.
In February 2025, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) proposed a plan targeting China's maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors, planning to impose high fees on Chinese manufacturers' ships and Chinese shipping operators entering U.S. ports. Last month, the USTR held a hearing on the "docking fee" proposal, with over 300 trade associations and other stakeholders submitting opposition opinions and testimonies regarding these fees.
The USTR's proposal is based on an "unfair trade investigation" initiated by President Biden during his administration regarding China's dominance in the maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding industries. The investigation was launched last April and conducted under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act. It is understood that the "Section 301" clause is an active provision for U.S. trade protection. When the USTR deems that foreign governments' laws or actions have "damaged U.S. trade interests," it can directly launch investigations against relevant countries.
The results of last year's Section 301 investigation claimed that China had significantly increased its share of global shipbuilding tonnage through large-scale state subsidies and preferential treatment for state-owned enterprises, rising from 5% in 1999 to more than 50% in 2023, which "squeezed the space for international private competitors." The USTR also stated that from the 1970s to today, the number of ships built annually by U.S. shipyards has dropped from 70 to 5, and the U.S.' share of global shipbuilding tonnage accounts for only 0.1%.
Following this, the U.S. began drafting a proposal to punish China's maritime system under the pretext of "revitalizing U.S. shipbuilding." The USTR's proposed measures include imposing a fee of up to $1 million per entry for U.S. ports on Chinese maritime operators' vessels, or charging $1,000 per net ton of vessel. For non-Chinese maritime operators, if their fleets include vessels manufactured in China, they will be charged up to $1.5 million per entry for U.S. ports based on the proportion of Chinese vessels in their fleets. For example, operators with more than 50% of their fleet consisting of vessels made in China will incur a port fee of $1 million per entry; those with 25%-50% will pay $750,000; and less than 25% will pay $500,000. Additionally, operators who ordered vessels from Chinese shipyards will face a docking fee of up to $1 million.
According to Clarkson Research, a research institute focused on the shipping industry, if a ship is built in China and operated by a Chinese shipping company while also ordering vessels from Chinese shipyards, the cumulative cost per docking at U.S. ports could reach up to $3.5 million.
"Concerns about charging docking fees for Chinese ships are shaking the global shipping industry." The Nikkei Asia reported recently. In fact, many ships manufactured in China are owned and operated by non-Chinese companies, including several of the world's largest shipping companies. Data from the World Shipping Council (WSC) shows that once the "docking fee" is implemented, it will quickly cover approximately 98% of the global fleet. Of the 36,595 ship entries at U.S. ports in 2024, around 43% of all international navigation ship entries at U.S. ports, and 0.7% of total global port entries, may be affected by the proposed measures.
Data from U.S. maritime service provider Veson Nautical shows that China dominates the world container ship and bulk carrier markets. In 2024, Chinese-made container ships accounted for 81% of the global market share; in the bulk carrier fleet, Chinese ships account for 75% of the global fleet. China's market share in the liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) transportation market has reached 48%, surpassing South Korea's 46%. Only in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) transportation market does South Korea still maintain a lead, with a market share of 62%, compared to China's 38%.
According to the latest data released by China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the three major indicators of China's shipbuilding industry—shipbuilding completion volume, new orders, and backlog orders—continued to steadily grow in 2024, maintaining the top position globally for 15 consecutive years. Xu Kai, chief information officer of the Shanghai Maritime University's Shanghai International Shipping Research Center, told the Global Times that among the 18 main ship types globally in 2024, China ranks first in new orders for 14 types of ships.
Looking specifically at shipping companies, according to reports by CNBC, 24% of the vessels in the world's largest shipping company, Mediterranean Shipping Company, are manufactured in China; 20% of the vessels in the second-largest company, Maersk Line of Denmark, are manufactured in China; and 41% of the vessels in the third-largest company, CMA CGM Group of France, are manufactured in China. According to data from shipping industry provider Alphaliner, among the top ten global shipping companies, five have placed more than half of their new ship orders with Chinese shipyards, including the fourth-ranked COSCO Shipping (100%), Mediterranean Shipping (92%), the fifth-ranked Hapag-Lloyd of Germany (89%), Maersk Line (79%), and CMA CGM (54%).
"Another Form of Tariff"
According to reports by Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Washington's new plan has caused unease among global shipowners. For example, Greek shipowners accounted for 113 of the 435 new oil tanker orders last year, most of which were handled by Chinese shipyards. Reports indicate that the U.S. proposal to impose "docking fees" will pose difficulties for Greek shipowners, who may need to make concessions on charter rates when renting out vessels built in China to Western shipping companies such as Mediterranean Shipping and Maersk Line in the future.
A shipping expert told the Global Times that the U.S.' proposed "docking fee" will impact both the shipbuilding industry and the shipping industry simultaneously. From the perspective of shipbuilding, China, Japan, and South Korea together account for over 90% of global shipbuilding shares, with very small percentages for other countries. Therefore, this fee may create psychological burdens for global shipowners ordering new ships from Chinese shipyards, but it will have little impact on shipyards in other regions. However, from the perspective of disrupting the global shipping industry and supply chains, once the U.S. imposes additional fees, the impact will be direct and rapid, particularly causing serious disruptions to the normal order of Sino-U.S. routes and trade.
This expert stated that the imposition of additional fees will significantly increase the voyage costs for shipping companies, potentially leading to many Sino-U.S. route voyages operating at a loss. Shipping companies, unable to absorb the costs themselves, may pass them on to importers and exporters, further increasing trade costs. Looking at the trade structure between the U.S. and other countries, compared to European countries exporting more high-value-added products like industrial equipment to the U.S., China primarily exports goods suitable for container transport to the U.S., including textiles, electronics, daily necessities, appliances, etc., which already have thin profit margins. Adding extra costs would make these export businesses unsustainable. At the same time, this will also have side effects within the U.S. — since trade is a result of mutual willingness (both Chinese exports and U.S. demand), if Chinese ships stop transporting due to increased costs, the U.S. will not be able to obtain related goods, such as potential shortages in the apparel industry, which could drive up local prices and exacerbate inflationary pressures in the U.S.
Xu Kai told the Global Times that the U.S.' "docking fee" will accelerate the formation of a global shipping cost transfer chain. Soren Toft, chairman of the World Shipping Council, emphasized that the USTR's proposal will increase the industry's annual costs by about $20 billion, equivalent to an additional $600 to $800 per container. According to comprehensive U.S. media reports, those most immediately and severely affected will be U.S.-based shipping companies, port operators, importers and exporters, related industry practitioners, and consumers.
The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), representing over 80 public ports across the U.S., stated that the proposal will "increase the cost of living for consumers and business operations, leading to chaos in U.S. ports and the transportation industry." Moreover, the U.S.' domestic import and export transportation costs may rise to two to three times previous levels. Casey Metcalf, CEO of the American Maritime Association, warned that "punishing China while also punishing the U.S. maritime system is unacceptable."
Facing this risk, small shipping companies and small ports are in the most precarious situation. Andrew Abbott, CEO of Atlantic Container Shipping, a small U.S. shipping company, stated that port fees will make the company "completely lose competitiveness in the U.S. market." Abbott said, "I will have to charge my customers $2,000 to $2,500, while larger shipping companies might only charge $800... This huge amount is enough to bankrupt us. Therefore, we will have to withdraw our ships from the U.S. routes and redeploy them to Asia." Carey Davis, president of the American Association of Port Authorities, warned that adding fees could lead to severe congestion at large U.S. ports and collapse of smaller ports' operations, resulting in higher inflation, more unemployment, and higher trade deficits.
More importantly, U.S. ship operators support key industries such as manufacturing, mining, and agriculture by transporting goods via inland waterways, the Great Lakes, and national coastal areas. According to calculations by the Shanghai International Shipping Research Center, the U.S. liner shipping industry directly and indirectly provides over 6.4 million jobs. At the same time, the U.S. food and agricultural sectors provide approximately 23 million jobs, accounting for 15% of all U.S. jobs. Rising export costs may force agricultural states to reduce capacity, and workers in the Midwest's "Rust Belt" will face dual impacts, with 240,000 people involved in China's agricultural exports also directly affected.
"Ultimately, this is just another form of tariff." A Greek shipping expert told Handelsblatt, "In the end, it will be the American consumers who bear the cost."
The American Petroleum Institute stated last month that the "docking fee" may make it harder for the U.S. to export its energy products, including oil and LNG. The Baltic and International Maritime Council emphasized that particularly U.S. LNG exports will be affected the most. According to the U.S. Shipping Chamber, in fields such as LNG and certain chemicals, there is a severe shortage of non-Chinese produced vessels; the U.S. shipbuilding industry lacks the necessary technical expertise, and currently, there are no operational or ordered U.S.-built LNG carriers.
"The U.S. punishment of Chinese ships will also hit the EU." Deutsche Welle recently reported. "If these fees are implemented, they will have significant impacts on global shipping." Ramon Fernandez, CFO of French shipping giant CMA CGM, stated that as with all shipowners, CMA CGM operates in both China and the U.S., "Goods flowing from Asia to Western economies, especially North America, have always been a crucial part of international trade. Therefore, any decision specifically targeting China will affect all transport industry participants."
Additionally, according to Bloomberg, Guyana's President Irfaan Ali stated that leaders of the Caribbean Community plan to inform U.S. Secretary of State Rubio that the U.S.' proposal to fine ships manufactured in China will harm the region's oil and gas industries and increase transportation costs.
Europe has taken two countermeasures.
The aforementioned shipping expert told the Global Times that foreign shipping companies holding and using Chinese ships are also opposing or taking countermeasures against the U.S.' proposed "docking fee." For example, European shipping companies are taking two approaches: one is resistance, where some companies consider halting U.S. routes to avoid cost pressures; the other is a "conciliatory" approach, which can also be seen as a way of "appeasing the U.S." Some European shipping companies plan to shift their next batch of new ships to U.S. shipyards for construction. However, due to insufficient U.S. shipbuilding capacity, U.S. shipbuilders cannot meet the needs of European shipowners.
Gao Lingyun, a researcher at the Institute of World Economics and Politics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that foreign shipping companies using Chinese ships may take some evasive measures, such as adjusting the use of ships based on the U.S.' determined weight or quantity standards to limit the scope of use of Chinese ships. For foreign shipbuilders, they may build more ships for China and non-U.S. routes, such as oil tankers and LNG carriers for China and Gulf countries, and fewer ocean-going freighters.
According to reports by French magazine Marine Marchande, some analysts previously believed that ports such as Vancouver and Rupert in Canada and ports in Mexico might be alternative solutions to avoid "docking fees." However, with Trump's announcement of "reciprocal tariffs," these ports are no longer real alternatives.
Xu Kai told the Global Times that the U.S.' attempt to isolate market demand through Section 301 investigations and打压 China's shipbuilding industry is essentially a strategy of transferring the consequences of its failed industrial policy, using political intervention to suppress the vitality of shipping as the "bloodline of globalization." While China's shipbuilding industry spent over 20 years researching and overcoming core LNG ship technology, the U.S. focused its efforts on designing sanction lists. The difference in these development paths is precisely the market's most powerful response to protectionism.
[Reporters of the Global Times: Li Meng, Liu Shuaoying, Special Correspondents of the Global Times in Germany and France: Qing Mu, Yue Wen]
Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7491079126191817242/
Disclaimer: The article represents the author's personal views. Welcome to express your stance by clicking the 'Agree/Disagree' buttons below.