Delivery: Supply of US Bay tanker ships can decrease, rates can rise at the cost of the new USTR Port
The new port fee announced by the US Trade Representative (USTR) is less substantial than the proposal from February, but a shipping analyst expects the supply of ships to decline and the rates rise on a particular route.
Theodor Gerrard-Anderson, Chemical Transport Analyst at Lighthouse Chartering, said that most bulk liquid ship owners will not be affected by the final plan of the USTR for port fees on ships related to China, but Chinese large operators will see the impact of Appendix I.
And apart from the exception in Appendix II, Gerrard-Anderson anticipated the supply of more stringent ships and higher rates for ships that transmitted the US Bay.
Appendix I and II of the final plan of the USTR is the part that applies to the bulk liquid transportation market.
The effect of Appendix I, which focuses on service costs on Chinese ship operators and Chinese ship owners, will be affected because many of these owners have set significant presence in the US market and maintain a large Affreight (COA) contract portfolio for special chem trading and mass liquid cargo, said Gerrard-Anderson.
Appendix II, which basically has an impact on all bulk liquid transportation markets, including exceptions to tankers of less than 80,000 dead weight (DWT) even if they are built in China, and for ships with short marine trade less than 2,000 nautical miles.
Ships built specifically for transporting chemicals in the form of bulk liquids will not be filled.
Another exception, which is designed to help maintain US exports, is that the ballast ship that arrives will not be charged to ensure tonnage is available for exports.
Analysts at Netco’s shipping broker said that most ships in their segments were excluded under Appendix II.
On the container shipping side, the softening of the cost structure reduces the risk of severe port congestion and can alleviate the overall upward pressure on the tariff of the goods, according to an analyst at the Analytical Company of the Ocean and Transportation of Xeneta.
Emily StausbØLL, Xeneta’s senior shipping analyst, said that it is very important that the final proposal has the cost based on net tonnage per US shipping, rather than cumulative costs for each port called by the ship.
“We must see the potential impact of the revised port fee, but the changes will be welcomed by the sea container shipping industry given the significant criticism that is raised in the initial proposal during the public hearing,” said StausbØLL.
“The cost of facts will not be charged on every port call is very important because it reduces the risk of congestion if the operator decides to cut the number of calls on each service to the US,” said StausbØLL. “This port congestion has the potential to cause severe disturbances and upward pressure on the tariff of the goods.”
StausbØLL said the costs can still be very high for Chinese operators and operators who operate ships made in China-especially for ships with the largest capacity.
“The latest announcement must still be seen in the context of the original proposal, which offers a terrible consequence,” said StausbØll. “The situation has changed for the better, but it is not a big win for the sea container shipping industry because this cost still adds to further pressure when the business has tried to navigate the tariffs announced by Trump’s administration.”
Ships and container costs for containers shipping are relevant to the chemical industry because while most chemicals are liquid and sent in tankers, ship transport vessels, such as polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP), sent in pellets. Titanium dioxide (TIO2) is also sent in a container.
They also transport liquid chemicals in isotans.
Sumber: ICIS oleh Adam Yanelli, https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2025/04/18/11093936/shipping-us-gulf-tanker-supply-could-decrease-could-new-new-suxu-port-port-fees /-COUPREASE-CATES-COUP-ON-MUES-Port-Port-Port
