As the U.S. government moves forward with new tariffs targeting the global shipping industry, logistics and maritime stakeholders are grappling with how these measures—alongside other proposed trade and maritime enforcement policies—will impact their operations. Among the most scrutinized are potential penalties aimed at “Chinese-owned” vessels and fleets, raising concerns about enforcement, definitions, and long-term business implications.
Amid this backdrop, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has reintroduced the SHIPS for America Act, a legislative proposal aimed at revitalizing U.S. shipbuilding and the broader commercial maritime sector. The legislation would establish a Maritime Security Trust Fund, using revenues collected at American ports—including duties, fees, and penalties levied by U.S. Customs and Border Protection—to invest in rebuilding domestic maritime capacity.
According to a summary from the bill’s sponsors, the fund would draw from a variety of sources, including international shipping fees, tonnage taxes, and penalties assessed on foreign-built vessels. Notably, it proposes new penalties on vessels owned or operated by foreign entities of concern, including those linked to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, as well as companies engaged in significant business with the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC).
While it’s still unclear whether these proposed penalties would replace earlier tariff ideas floated by the Trump administration—including a now-retracted plan to charge Chinese-built vessels up to $1.5 million to dock at U.S. ports—the initiative signals a continued push to deter reliance on Chinese maritime infrastructure.
The ambiguity surrounding implementation and enforcement has stirred apprehension across the logistics sector. “Clients are already looking for ways to map their risk now rather than wait for enforcement,” said Leigh Hansson, a partner at Reed Smith specializing in global regulatory enforcement. She noted a surge in inquiries from companies trying to navigate the shifting regulatory environment.
As policymakers weigh the next steps, industry stakeholders are left balancing business continuity with compliance amid a rapidly evolving trade landscape.