Tanker Trade in Turbulence: Beijing Strikes Back with Port Fee Policy
AStarting October 14, 2025, the US and China have implemented reciprocal port fees targeting ships associated with opposing countries. This fee is levied on a per-net-ton basis, which is determined based on the identity of the vessel, specifically its ownership, operation, flag or shape, and not based on its cargo. Initial observations of the market indicate a pattern of selective rerouting, potential increases in ton-mile demand, and increased compliance and verification costs as companies intensify due diligence on vessel ownership and flags to mitigate exposure to reciprocal port fees.
China specific port charges
The new regulations regarding Chinese port fees, which became effective on October 14, 2025, mark a targeted response to increasing US-China trade frictions. This policy applies to ships that have ties to the United States, including ownership, operational control, or capital participation of at least 25%, as well as ships that are flagged or built in the United States.
The fee structure introduces a variable levy starting at RMB 400 per net ton in 2025, and increasing to RMB 1,120 in 2028, and is implemented at the first port in China per voyage. Each ship is limited to five chargeable sailings annually. The owner or agent must report details of the vessel and its ownership seven days before arrival, with sanctions for non-compliance including refusal of entry or port clearance.
One important feature of this policy is the exclusion of Chinese-built vessels, even if they are owned or controlled by US interests. This division reinforces Beijing’s dual goals: to punish US maritime interests while incentivizing Chinese on-the-ground development and consolidating domestic industrial competitiveness.
From an operational perspective, these regulations create structural cost asymmetries in the global shipping industry. US-linked tonnage faces higher port costs and potential route adjustments, while vessels not made in the US or Asia remain at a relative advantage in China-bound trade. This policy sharpens the commercial segmentation of the fleet and can speed up the process of reflagging, corporate restructuring, or transferring vessel investments to non-US entities to maintain market access.
Exception Update
Following the “Announcement on Imposing Special Port Fees for US Ship-to-Ships”, China’s Ministry of Transport announced implementation steps regarding special port fees, including several important exceptions.
According to the Notice, the following ships are exempt from paying special port fees:
Chinese made ship
An empty ship that only visits Chinese bases for repairs.
Other vessels recognized and approved for exemption
No further explanation has been provided at this time regarding the meaning of “Other vessels recognized and approved for exemption”.
Limited Exposure: Only a Few US-Linked or Non-Chinese Made Tankers Trade to China
Based on the graph below, Signal Ocean’s shipping data for 2025 shows that United States-affiliated ships accounted for approximately 7% of all oil tanker shipping to China, underscoring that any proposed fees China imposes on American-affiliated shipping would have a limited overall impact on the flow of crude oil and product tankers. Within this subset, only about 5% of voyages involve non-Chinese tonnage, most of which are built in South Korea or Japan. These estimates are based on US-linked commercial carriers with a minimum equity threshold of 25%, excluding US-flagged or US-built vessels, both of which are negligible in these trade flows. As a result, about 88% of China-bound oil shipping will not be affected by the measure.
Even when the data is broken down by vessel class, exposure is still limited across all segments, with only small differences between crude and product fleets:
VLCC (YTD 2025, estimated): Of the approximately 1,438 VLCC sailings to China, approximately 68 of them involve non-Chinese-built vessels connected to US commercial carriers, for an exposure of approximately 5%. Although VLCCs are the main carrier of China’s crude oil imports, the policy reach here remains narrow.
Suezmax (YTD 2025, estimated): With 139 voyages, only about 10 voyages were non-Chinese and US-related, or about 7% exposed.
Aframax (YTD 2025, forecast): Among 829 shipping, 27 of which fall into the non-Chinese-made category, with respect to the US, only 3% are exposed, the lowest among the gross tanker segment.
LR2 (YTD 2025, estimated): Of the approximately 63 LR2 voyages, 7 of them involve non-Chinese vessels, US-linked, approximately 11%, which is the highest proportional exposure, although the total volume is still small.
MR2 (YTD 2025, estimated): Of the 589 MR2 shipping, 57 are non-China and US-related, representing approximately 10% of MR2 calls, making it the largest impacted group by count, although still a small share of total product flow.
Emerging Exposures: Non-Chinese Made Tanker Order Books Show Gradually Increasing Potential Risks
While US or non-China trade exposure of US-related or non-China tankers to China currently remains limited, the future outlook points to gradual structural improvement as new capacity is added to the global fleet. This assessment focuses on non-Chinese-built tanker orders, as these vessels could theoretically fall within the scope of China’s proposed actions if they are also US-linked, combining the criteria of foreign construction and commercial affiliation.
According to Signal Ocean fleet data, about 39% of global tanker orders are not made in China, and the remaining 61% are being built in Chinese shipyards. In the non-China segment, the largest shipbuilding centers are South Korea (16%), Japan (5%), and Vietnam (4%). These shipyards dominate foreign construction, meaning a large portion of upcoming shipments could potentially come under scrutiny if Chinese policy targets foreign-built tonnage linked to the US.
At the same time, the scheduled deliveries-to-fleet ratio, which is calculated for the portion of global orders that are not made in China, highlights where future exposure may be concentrated. Suezmax showed the highest renewal rate (15%), followed by MR2 (10%), MR1 (9%), VLCC (8%), Aframax (7%), and Panamax (6%).
Looking ahead
Recent exemptions, particularly for Chinese-built vessels, provide practical relief from earlier measures, alleviating concerns about widespread cost increases. This suggests that for most fleet operators, overall financial exposure should remain under control. However, this relies on careful monitoring of ship ownership structures and limiting direct affiliation with the US. Therefore, the long-term impact of these policies is likely to be more administrative and emphasizes careful compliance rather than fundamentally changing trade flows.
Source: By Maria Bertzeletou, Signal Group, https://go.signalocean.com/e/983831/ikes-back-with-port-fee-policy/2rk7b5/542704648/h/Vk2uewkmTtXXbAFi4a3pdCjT5BLvktPgGsJU5t6JVPA
