- China’s new “special port fee” on U.S.-linked vessels marks a major escalation in trade measures affecting Sino-American maritime operations.
- The regulation applies to vessels owned, operated, or partly controlled by U.S. entities, introducing fresh compliance and cost challenges for shipowners and financiers.
- Contractual risk allocation must be revisited, as existing clauses may not clearly define responsibility for such regulatory levies.
- Shipowners and operators are urged to review corporate structures, verify vessel ownership data, and update contracts to address future trade-related risks.
The new “special port fee” imposed on US-linked vessels marks a significant shift in the commercial and legal landscape for shipowners, operators, and financiers engaged in Sino-American trade. This development underscores the growing complexity of international maritime compliance and its implications for global shipping networks, as reported by Hill Dickinson LLP.
Understanding the New “Special Port Fee”
On October 14, 2025, China’s Ministry of Transport officially introduced the “Measures for the Implementation of Collecting Special Port Fees for U.S. Vessels.” This policy requires vessels with U.S. ownership or operational links to pay a special port fee for calls at Chinese ports, applicable from the same date and increasing annually until 2028. The measure, presented as a reciprocal response to U.S. port levies, could bring significant commercial and legal implications for stakeholders trading between the two nations.
Two main vessel categories fall within the scope of this regulation. “Pure” U.S. vessels include those built, owned, or operated by U.S. nationals or entities, or flying the U.S. flag. The second group—U.S.-linked vessels—captures cases where U.S. entities or nationals hold 25% or more of ownership or control. This latter classification could affect numerous financing structures, including joint ventures, sale-and-leaseback deals, and bareboat charters, making it vital for owners and financiers to reassess their exposure.
Exemptions apply to Chinese-built vessels, ballast calls at Chinese shipyards, and certain repeat calls within a defined period. However, compliance obligations remain strict, as vessels must self-report ownership details, with Chinese authorities empowered to request verification and additional documentation.
Implications for Contracts and Risk Management
The new port fee has immediate implications for ongoing and future contractual relationships. While port charges under time charters are typically the responsibility of charterers, the exact allocation depends on contract wording. Stakeholders must therefore review clauses addressing levies or regulatory changes to determine liability under this new framework.
Although the imposition of additional fees may render certain contracts less profitable, this alone does not constitute a valid reason for termination. Instead, shipowners and operators are encouraged to adapt by revisiting contractual protections. Including provisions for trade war–related risks, sanctions, or material economic hardship could safeguard long-term agreements from sudden regulatory changes. Borrowers should also consider how these developments might influence their ability to meet financial obligations, especially where profitability is directly affected by the new fee.
Strategic and Compliance Considerations
Industry participants are advised to take a proactive approach to mitigate potential disruptions. This includes reviewing corporate and shareholding structures to ensure transparency around ultimate beneficial ownership and confirming the accuracy of vessel data in public intelligence databases. Companies listed on U.S. exchanges may face particular scrutiny if they meet or exceed the 25% U.S. beneficial ownership threshold.
Re-flagging or restructuring may seem like a potential workaround but carries significant reputational and legal risks if not carefully executed. As regulatory conditions evolve, Chinese authorities may also expand the scope of the port fee or adjust the criteria for determining U.S. linkage. Stakeholders should therefore plan ahead—introducing clauses to address responsibility for disputed charges, ensuring enforcement mechanisms, and monitoring updates from organizations such as BIMCO and Intertanko regarding new standard clauses tailored to U.S.-China trade measures.
Close engagement with legal counsel and local practitioners remains essential. Maintaining up-to-date compliance frameworks, anticipating contractual risks, and staying informed on emerging regulatory trends will be key to navigating this complex and shifting trade environment.
Did you subscribe to our Daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Hill Dickinson LLP
