The U.S. oil industry is lobbying the Trump administration intensively over transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz, warning that such arrangements would destabilize global freedom of navigation and trigger uncontrollable chain reactions.
According to CCTV News, an anonymous regional official revealed that a two-week ceasefire plan includes allowing Iran and Oman to charge transit fees for vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz. According to media reports, executives from several oil companies have contacted the White House, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Vice President J.D. Vance separately to express their opposition.
Industry representatives also held a meeting with senior State Department officials on Wednesday morning to formally raise their concerns. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that afternoon that Iran had submitted a &#34;more reasonable&#34; updated proposal and that the president's current priority is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz &#34;without any restrictions.&#34;
Industry representatives are most concerned about the ripple effect: if the fee arrangement for the Strait of Hormuz is established, countries controlling crucial waterways like Singapore and Turkey, which manage the Strait of Malacca and the Bosphorus Strait respectively, might make similar demands, profoundly impacting the international trade order. Industry representatives also cited international treaties, sanctions regulations, and potential cost burdens as further grounds for opposition.
<h2>Industry Lobbying: From the White House to the State Department</h2>
According to a media report quoting an anonymous industry consultant, oil company executives are using all available channels to convey their opposition to the government. When asked if executives were contacting the White House to protest, the consultant affirmed, stating:
<blockquote>
&#34;We didn't have to do this before – we thought we had won this war. As long as you can find any channel to reach the government, you ask: What on earth are you thinking?&#34;
</blockquote>
The consultant said that White House officials' responses were &#34;not a cold rejection,&#34; but more like, &#34;Okay, we've noted it.&#34;
Media reports, quoting another individual who attended the State Department meeting, revealed that industry representatives are also more discreetly conveying their concerns directly to Trump, but with extreme caution. &#34;The president is extremely sensitive to the evaluation of his war efforts, and applying pressure to the president now is considered a risky move,&#34; the source said. &#34;But despite the subtle dialogue, the White House is still listening to the industry's voice.&#34;
<h2>Three Core Concerns: Costs, Precedents, and Legal Risks</h2>
Industry representatives presented three main arguments in their communications with government officials.
On the cost front, according to meeting attendees, the transit fee proposals discussed could significantly increase the overall cost per shipment, covering the transit fees themselves and the resulting insurance rate hikes. While a widely circulated estimate of $2.5 million has been mentioned, no official confirmation of the specific amount has been made. Industry representatives emphasized that regardless of the final figure, this cost would be passed on to end consumers.
Regarding precedents, industry representatives warned that the establishment of a fee arrangement in the Strait of Hormuz could provide a basis for other countries to emulate. Jason Bennett, a lawyer at Baker Botts specializing in energy and international law, stated, &#34;The Hormuz is an open international waterway, and to date, no one has ever claimed legal control over it. I don't think anyone will accept that.&#34; He also predicted that the move would trigger &#34;a strong backlash not just from the oil industry.&#34;
On the legal risk front, industry representatives believe that paying such fees could expose companies to accusations of violating sanctions against Iran, putting companies in a dilemma.
<h2>White House Stance: Priority on Reopening, Proposal Under Discussion</h2>
President Trump stated on Tuesday that the U.S. is advancing negotiations with Iran on a &#34;long-term peace&#34; agreement and views the ten-point proposal received from Iran as an &#34;operable basis for negotiation.&#34; According to Xinhuanet, U.S. President Trump told ABC News on the 8th that the U.S. might seek to establish a &#34;joint venture mechanism&#34; with Iran to jointly &#34;operate&#34; the Strait of Hormuz, with the U.S. wanting to participate in revenue sharing from transit fees.
White House Press Secretary Leavitt confirmed on Wednesday that the &#34;joint venture&#34; idea was &#34;a concept that the president floated&#34; and that it &#34;will continue to be discussed over the next two weeks.&#34; However, she also emphasized that the president's primary priority is &#34;to reopen the Strait of Hormuz without any restrictions – whether it's transit fees or any other form,&#34; and reiterated that the &#34;red line&#34; of the president, namely Iran's cessation of uranium enrichment, &#34;has not changed.&#34;
Leavitt also stated that Iran had submitted a &#34;more reasonable and streamlined new proposal&#34; compared to the previous one, but did not provide details on specific changes to the proposal. Vice President Vance has departed for Islamabad to participate in related negotiations, and his office and the State Department have not yet responded to requests for comment.
<h2>Strait Situation: Transit Nearly Stalled</h2>
Even with the announcement of the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday evening, the transit situation in the Strait of Hormuz has not significantly improved. Matt Smith, an analyst at commodity and vessel tracking firm Kpler, stated that Iran had closed the strait again after Israel attacked its ally Lebanon on Wednesday.
According to Politico, citing a diplomat in Washington, &#34;seven or more vessels&#34; flying the Malaysian flag were reportedly allowed to pass without paying transit fees. Several diplomats in Washington expressed concern about the prospect of differentiated treatment for different vessels, believing it would bring high uncertainty to the trade order. The Malaysian Embassy did not respond to requests for comment.
Some diplomats in Washington are also conveying concerns to the White House through their own channels, though they admit that the White House has shown limited interest in their opinions previously. A diplomat from an Asian country stated that if such a precedent were established, other countries might propose similar claims for their own controlled vital waterways in the future:
<blockquote>
&#34;Will the next thing be charging for the Arctic route? My judgment is that other countries globally, especially those using straits, will likely propose some form of protest.&#34;
</blockquote>
Arthur Leichthammer, a researcher at the Jacques Delors Centre, a think tank in Berlin, stated that accepting such a fee arrangement would be &#34;a very expensive concession, both politically and economically.&#34; Most shipping companies have clearly stated they will not accept transit fee arrangements, calling them &#34;simply unsustainable in the long run.&#34;

Iran claims the foundation for negotiations has been undermined, and the Strait of Hormuz has been closed again; the White House announced that the first round of US-Iran talks will be held in Pakistan on the 11th. The situation is drawing attention. Do you think the talks can proceed smoothly?

Iran claims the foundation for negotiations has been undermined, and the Strait of Hormuz has been closed again; the White House announced that the first round of US-Iran talks will be held in Pakistan on the 11th. The situation is drawing attention. Do you think the talks can proceed smoothly?

The Hormuz National Park closes again, leaving US-Iran peace talks in limbo.

The oil industry is lobbying the Trump administration intensively, strongly opposing allowing Iran to charge transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump is even considering a "joint venture" operation of the strait with Iran. Industry insiders warn that this move would not only significantly increase energy costs and carry risks of violating sanctions but also undermine global freedom of navigation, potentially leading to similar demands for crucial waterways like the Strait of Malacca

- The U.S. oil industry is lobbying the Trump administration against proposed transit fees for vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz, warning of significant disruptions to global shipping and trade.  
- Reports indicate the proposed fees, which could raise cargo costs significantly, pose legal risks and establish a concerning precedent for other nations controlling vital waterways.  
- Despite the ongoing discussions, shipping traffic remains affected, with concerns that acceptance of such fees could lead to a broader trend of similar demands by other countries.

Wallstreetcn

BP p.l.c.

Occidental Petroleum

SPDR O&G Ex & Prd

Pro Ultr Bloomberg Crude Oil

Oil Giants Protest to the White House: If Iran Can Charge Fees, So Can Singapore and Turkey