A proposed charge on commercial cargo moving through the Strait of Hormuz could produce between $176 billion and $194 billion a year for the United States, though major legal, diplomatic and enforcement questions remain unresolved.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
President Donald Trump’s proposal to charge a 20% toll on commercial cargo passing through the Strait of Hormuz could generate nearly $200 billion in annual revenue for the United States if applied to prewar shipping volumes and fully collected.
An analysis by the New York Post estimated that the plan could produce between $176 billion and $194 billion each year based on supply-chain data provided by Exiger CEO Brandon Daniels.
Between $880 billion and $970 billion in international trade moved annually through the strategic waterway before the war with Iran, according to the figures cited in the analysis. Applying a 20% charge to that volume would result in the projected revenue range.
Trump unveiled the proposal Monday while announcing the restoration of a U.S. blockade of Iranian ports and declaring that the United States would assume responsibility for protecting commercial traffic through the strait.
“The U.S.A. will be … known as ‘THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT,’” Trump wrote.
He said the United States should be “reimbursed, at the rate of 20% on all cargo shipped,” in exchange for providing security along the strategically important shipping route.
The administration has not publicly explained how the toll would be calculated, collected or enforced. It also has not identified which federal department or agency would administer the proposed charge.
If the revenue estimates proved accurate, the money would be sufficient to cover the salaries of approximately 1 million federal civilian employees, according to the Post’s analysis.
Daniels cautioned that the proposal would face substantial practical and legal obstacles before it could be implemented.
Questions include whether the United States possesses the legal authority to charge vessels for passage through an international strait, how payment requirements would be enforced and which government entity would collect the money.
The plan has already triggered opposition from international officials and legal experts.
A group of independent experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council argued that requiring commercial ships to pay for access to an international strait would violate international law.
The experts also warned that the proposal could weaken the long-established principle of freedom of navigation, which generally protects the right of vessels to travel through internationally recognized waterways without improper interference.
Trump’s proposal differs from Washington’s previous position on transit charges in the Strait of Hormuz.
When Iran earlier considered imposing its own fees on ships using the waterway, the United States rejected the idea. American officials argued at the time that the strait is an international passage through which commercial vessels are entitled to unimpeded transit under international law.
Iran has also rejected Trump’s proposal.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi argued that Tehran, rather than Washington, has historically served as the guardian of the strait. He also criticized the proposed 20% toll as excessive.
The dispute adds another layer of uncertainty surrounding one of the most economically important maritime passages in the world.
The Strait of Hormuz carries hundreds of billions of dollars in crude oil, liquefied natural gas and other commodities each year. Its narrow shipping lanes connect major energy producers in the Persian Gulf with international markets.
Any interruption, restriction or additional cost imposed on traffic through the strait could affect global shipping expenses, commodity prices and energy markets.
A 20% toll would represent a substantial added charge on cargo moving through the waterway. Depending on how companies and governments responded, the cost could be absorbed by shippers, passed to consumers or reflected in higher prices for oil, natural gas and other goods.
The proposal’s financial potential is therefore matched by significant uncertainty over whether it could be carried out without violating international maritime rules or provoking resistance from foreign governments and commercial shipping interests.
The projected $176 billion to $194 billion in annual revenue assumes that commercial traffic continues at prewar levels and that the United States successfully collects the full 20% charge on qualifying cargo.
Any decline in shipping volume, rerouting of vessels, legal challenge or refusal by carriers to comply could reduce that amount.
The administration has not provided a timeline for establishing the toll or detailed how the policy would operate alongside the renewed blockade of Iranian ports.
Trump has framed the charge as compensation for the expense and responsibility of securing the Strait of Hormuz. Critics maintain that safeguarding navigation does not provide a lawful basis for imposing a unilateral fee on international commerce.
The plan now stands as both a potentially enormous source of federal revenue and a major test of international maritime law, U.S. enforcement authority and the willingness of trading nations to accept American control over access to one of the world’s most consequential shipping corridors.
Original article
Comments