China's New Maritime Port Charges – CMOT Countermeasures Target US-Linked Vessels

On 17 April 2025, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced the Section 301 action targeting China's maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors to address China's dominant market position in these sectors by levying significant additional port charges for vessels with a Chinese nexus from 14 October 2025, and on 10 October 2025 further announced modifications to the Section 301 action including a partial easing of the restrictions specifically related to the liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector (collectively, the USTR Measures)¹.

In response to the USTR Measures, China's Ministry of Transport (CMOT) announced on 10 October 2025 that effective from 14 October 2025, similar additional port charges will be imposed against vessels with a US nexus, and on 14 October 2025 CMOT further promulgated implementation measures (collectively, the CMOT Countermeasures)².

1. CMOT Countermeasures

The CMOT Countermeasures, mirroring the US Measures, are aimed at imposing additional port charges on vessels with a US nexus calling at China ports and impose additional port charges on these vessels.

1. US nexus

The following categories of vessels with a US nexus are subject to additional port charges when calling at Chinese ports:

1. Vessels owned by US companies, organizations or individuals;
2. Vessels operated by US companies, organizations or individuals;
3. Vessels owned or operated by companies or organizations in which US companies, organizations or individuals directly or indirectly hold 25% or more of (i) equity, (ii) voting rights, or (iii) board seats;
4. Vessels flying the US flag; and
5. Vessels constructed in the US.

While these thresholds provide a framework for determining which vessels are subject to the additional port charges, the CMOT Countermeasures do not currently specify what constitutes a "US company, organization or individual", nor do they specify the procedures, standards, or documentation requirements for assessing a vessel's status under these criteria. This regulatory gap creates significant uncertainty for stakeholders, particularly in complex ownership structures involving layered ownership entities, cross-border investments, or joint ventures.

2. Exemptions

Shortly after the CMOT Countermeasures were first announced on 10 October 2025, CMOT promulgated further implementing regulations which provided clearer exemptions from the additional port charges for the vessels that meet any of the following criteria:

• Vessels as mentioned in items 1) to 4) of above which are constructed in China;
• Bare-laden vessels entering Chinese shipyards solely for repairs; and
• Other vessels approved for exemption.

All such vessels are exempt from payment of the additional port charges, regardless of any US nexus. This is a significant exemption from the original CMOT Countermeasures given the significant number of Chinese-built vessels operating worldwide – including for US shipping lines and operators.

3. Port charges

The additional port charges will be collected at the first port of arrival by the vessel in China and will be charged as follows:

• Beginning on 14 October 2025: RMB 400 per net ton (approx. USD 56 at current rates);
• Beginning on 17 April 2026: RMB 640 per net ton (approx. USD 90 at current rates);
• Beginning on 17 April 2027: RMB 880 per net ton (approx. USD 124 at current rates); and
• Beginning on 17 April 2028: RMB 1,120 per net ton (approx. USD 157 at current rates),

with vessels of less than one ton charged as one ton.

For a typical LNG carrier of about 170,000 cbm capacity, this could mean additional charges of up to US$2 million per port call in China this year, rising to US$5.5 million in 2028; and for a typical 5,000 TEU container carrier US$1.5 million per China port call this year rising to bout US$4 million in 2028.

These additional port charges are subject to the following caps:

• If a vessel calls at multiple Chinese ports, it is only charged at the first port.
• The same vessel will only be charged for a maximum of five voyages per year.

4. Potential rules or detailed guidelines

The CMOT Countermeasures designate CMOT as the authority responsible for interpreting the provisions. This suggests that further rules or detailed guidelines may be issued in due course. It is common practice in China for regulatory authorities to refine implementation frameworks based on practical enforcement experience, and such developments should be closely monitored.

Any such further rules or detailed guidelines will first be proposed by the Drafting Department of CMOT, then reviewed by its Department of Laws and Regulations, and finally approved by CMOT's leadership. Once approved and promulgated they will carry the same legal effect as the CMOT Countermeasures themselves.

5. Mirroring the USTR Measures

Apart from the same start date, the CMOT Countermeasures mirror much of the USTR Measures:

This symmetry underscores the broader dynamics of the US-China trade war, where the maritime and logistics sector has become another battlegrounds for strategic leverage. By replicating key features of the US measures, China has signaled its intent to respond in kind, reinforcing the tit-for-tat nature of the ongoing economic confrontation.

2. Potential impact

Given the geopolitical context in which the CMOT Countermeasures were introduced — coming just weeks ahead of the anticipated China-US trade talks in South Korea — it is possible that CMOT may adopt a broad and expansive interpretation of what constitutes a US nexus. This could result in a wider range of vessels being subject to the imposed port fees.

In the absence of clear definitions or procedural guidance, CMOT may interpret ownership, operational control, or indirect US involvement in a manner that maximizes enforcement reach, potentially ensnaring vessels with even minimal or indirect ties to the US entities. For example:

• any offshore company incorporated in non-US jurisdiction but is listed or headquartered in the US might be deemed as "US company" as well;
• companies with US beneficial ownership, no matter how far up the ownership chain, even if listed or headquartered elsewhere, may be caught by the 25% rule;
• vessels which are financed through sale-and-leaseback regimes with lessors with a US nexus might be captured;
• vessels with historical links to US construction, repairs or registration could be scrutinized; or
• operational arrangements such as charters or technical management by US firms might be considered relevant.

This approach would align with the broader strategic intent of the CMOT Countermeasures, which is to exert pressure on US-linked maritime operations and signal reciprocal action against perceived discriminatory practices, and are poised to have far-reaching impacts across the maritime and trade ecosystem, especially the increase of costs and consumer prices, and the reduction of profit margins . Global shipping companies and operators have largely re-positioned their China-built vessels away from US port calls (and now vice versa), some are even considering cancellation or rerouting of some voyages to avoid the relevant port fees. It seems inevitable that increased costs will be passed down the chain, affecting competitiveness and margins.

Notwithstanding the above, the exemption regime provided in the CMOT Countermeasures to Chinese-built vessels is particularly noteworthy given the substantial number of Chinese-built vessels operating in global fleets, including those owned or operated by US-linked entities. Many international shipping companies, regardless of their country of incorporation, have historically sourced vessels from Chinese shipyards due to cost efficiency and shipbuilding capacity. As a result:

• a significant portion of the global fleet owned or operated by the stakeholders may qualify for exemption, potentially mitigating the financial impact of the port fees;
• operators with mixed ownership structures may find relief if their vessels were built in China, even if they fall within the 25% US nexus threshold; and
• strategic fleet planning may increasingly factor in vessel origin as a criterion for future acquisitions or chartering decisions.

3. Recommendations

Until further implementation rules are published, stakeholders — including vessel owners, operators, and charterers — may face uncertainty in determining whether, and how, the new CMOT Countermeasures might apply. Stakeholders should therefore prepare for heightened regulatory scrutiny and consider conducting a thorough review of vessel ownership structures, operational arrangements, and contract structures to assess potential exposure.

Legal and compliance teams should also closely monitor new rules and detailed guidelines and enforcement actions as these will likely clarify more details of the scope and enforcement mechanisms of the CMOT regime. It is advisable for the stakeholders to monitor official announcements and seek legal or regulatory guidance to ensure compliance.

For specific legal advice, please contact your usual Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer contact or our shipping team below.

1. For details of the USTR Measures, please visit:

HSFK original article:

https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/energy/2025-posts/ustr-proposal-could-increase-costs-for-shipping-operators-and-shippers-using-chinese-built-ordered-vessels

Original Section 301 action:

https://ustr.gov/about/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2025/april/ustr-section-301-action-chinas-targeting-maritime-logistics-and-shipbuilding-sectors-dominance

USTR further modification:

https://ustr.gov/about/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2025/october/ustr-modifies-certain-aspects-section-301-ships-action-and-proposes-further-modifications-action

2. For details of the CMOT Countermeasures, please visit: https://xxgk.mot.gov.cn/2020/jigou/syj/202510/t20251010_4177939.html

For the implementation measures, please visit:

https://xxgk.mot.gov.cn/jigou/syj/202510/t20251013_4178125.html

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.