U.S. Port Fees Coming Soon: How Global Shipping Giants Are Responding

As the countdown to October 14, 2025 begins, the U.S. government’s new port surcharge policy on Chinese vessels—dubbed by many in the industry as a “shipping tax”—is about to take effect. This regulation has quickly become one of the most talked-about issues in the international logistics sector, particularly for companies engaged in China–U.S. trade routes.

What the New U.S. Port Fee Means

The policy introduces a tiered fee structure based on vessel ownership and construction:

* Chinese shipowners/operators:

  * $50 per net ton in 2025, rising to $140 per net ton by 2028.

  * Each vessel may be charged up to five times per year.

* Non-Chinese companies using China-built vessels:

  * $18 per net ton or $120 per TEU this year.

  * Increasing to $33 per net ton or $250 per TEU by 2028.

For example, a 12,000 net ton container vessel built in China could face \$216,000 per port call—and if calculated by capacity (8,000 TEU), the cost soars to \$960,000. Failure to pay these fees could result in vessels being detained or banned from operating.

While a handful of exemptions exist (such as U.S. domestic vessels, empty bulk carriers, and some RoRo ships), the vast majority of container ships used for cross-border e-commerce will fall under this surcharge.

How the “Big Four” Shipping Companies Are Reacting

Despite the looming costs, the four largest global shipping companies—Maersk, MSC, CMA CGM, and COSCO Shipping—have all reassured the market that they will not directly pass these new fees onto shippers. Still, each is adopting a different strategy:

1. Maersk – Fleet Reallocation

Maersk was the first to act, restructuring its global fleet deployment. All China-built vessels have been reassigned to non-U.S. routes (Europe, Southeast Asia, etc.), while Korean- and Japanese-built ships are prioritized for trans-Pacific lanes. By swapping vessels, Maersk effectively avoids the surcharge while keeping U.S. rates stable.

2. MSC – Dual Approach

MSC has committed to absorbing costs while also reducing exposure. It is actively rerouting China-built ships away from U.S. ports, yet it continues to invest heavily in Chinese shipyards, with over 100 new vessels under construction. The strategy: spread risk across a massive global network.

3. CMA CGM – Internal Absorption

CMA CGM has no immediate plans to raise U.S. trade lane rates. Instead, it is optimizing scheduling, consolidating routes, and distributing additional costs across its worldwide network. For exporters relying on U.S. services, this means short-term stability in rates and services.

4. COSCO Shipping – Market Competitiveness

COSCO Shipping has emphasized service reliability and competitiveness. While acknowledging potential cost pressures, the company remains committed to maintaining stable capacity, service quality, and competitive rates for U.S.-bound trade. COSCO is also adapting its product offerings to match evolving U.S. market demands.

Notably, Hapag-Lloyd has taken a different stance, openly stating it will need to pass extra costs onto shippers, estimating an additional $89–163 per FEU on U.S. routes.

Hidden Risks for Exporters and Sellers

Even though most carriers are pledging not to raise freight rates directly, shippers—especially cross-border e-commerce exporters and Amazon FBA sellers—must prepare for indirect impacts:

1. Longer Transit Times & Higher Inventory Costs

   Some carriers are already rerouting vessels through Mexico or Canada, with cargo then entering the U.S. by rail or truck. This can add 7–10 extra days to transit, forcing sellers to hold more inventory and tying up working capital.

2. FOB Terms No Longer a Safe Shield

   Even with FOB contracts, carriers may charge destination port surcharges. If the consignee refuses payment, shipments risk being held, triggering demurrage, detention, or FBA warehouse penalties.

3. Capacity Premiums for Non-Chinese Ships

   As non-Chinese-built vessels gain priority deployment, their capacity is becoming scarce. During peak season, exporters may face higher slot premiums or struggle to secure space at all.

What Exporters Should Do Next

The U.S. port fee is not just a cost issue—it’s a supply chain stability issue. Instead of waiting to see whether carriers raise freight rates, sellers should focus on:

* Diversifying logistics channels: Combine sea freight with air freight solutions for time-sensitive goods.

* Strengthening forecasting: Adjust inventory planning to offset possible 1–2 week delays.

* Clarifying terms with buyers: Define responsibility for potential destination surcharges upfront.

* Partnering with experienced forwarders: Leverage professional support to secure space and minimize risks under shifting regulations.

Final Takeaway

The upcoming U.S. port surcharge is set to reshape the China–U.S. shipping landscape. While global carriers are working to cushion shippers from immediate price hikes, hidden costs and operational disruptions are inevitable.

At Goodship56, we help exporters and cross-border sellers navigate these challenges with flexible China–U.S. sea and air freight solutions, optimized transit times, and reliable cost management strategies.

� Get in touch with our team to secure your shipping plans ahead of October’s regulatory changes.