While the port service fees may pose certain operational challenges, COSCO SHIPPING Lines remains confident in our ability to ensure stable and reliable services in the United States.
In the face of impending U.S. port fees that could cost Chinese shipping companies billions annually, COSCO Shipping Lines has taken a firm stance: business as usual. With new regulations set to take effect on October 14, 2025, the shipping giant is moving to reassure customers that its trans-Pacific services will remain stable and reliable despite the financial headwinds.
The company's calm response belies the significant financial impact these fees could have on Chinese-operated and Chinese-built vessels calling at U.S. ports. As the industry braces for what could be the most substantial shift in maritime trade dynamics in years, COSCO is leveraging its global partnerships and strategic assets to navigate the challenging regulatory environment.
The USTR Port Fee Explained
The U.S. Trade Representative's port fee policy, stemming from a Section 301 investigation into China's maritime practices, establishes a two-tiered system targeting Chinese influence in global shipping.
- For Chinese shipowners and operators: Fees will start at $50 per net ton per voyage, increasing by $30 annually to reach $140 per net ton by 2028, with a maximum of five fees charged per vessel annually.
- For non-Chinese operators using Chinese-built vessels: Lower rates apply, starting at $18 per net ton or $120 per container (whichever is higher), gradually increasing to $33 per net ton or $250 per container by 2028.
The financial impact on individual vessels is staggering. A typical 50,000-TEU container ship operated by COSCO on trans-Pacific routes could face initial costs of $2.5 million per voyage, potentially rising to over $7 million by 2028. For COSCO Thailand, an 8,500-TEU vessel, this translates to approximately $2.95 million per U.S. call starting in October.
COSCO's Strategic Response: Confidence Amid Challenges
In customer advisories released in September, COSCO Shipping Lines acknowledged the operational challenges posed by the fees but expressed confidence in maintaining service stability. The company emphasized its long-standing commitment to the U.S. market and its compliance with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations.
"We are committed to maintaining stable capacity deployment and service quality, consistently delivering reliable, secure, and high-quality logistics solutions," the company stated. COSCO also highlighted its plans to enhance its product portfolio to meet evolving U.S. market demands while maintaining competitive rates and surcharges.
Orient Overseas Container Line (OOCL), a COSCO subsidiary, echoed this commitment despite the financial burden: "For decades, OOCL has been a trusted partner in facilitating U.S. exports and imports, consistently delivering reliable, secure, and high-quality logistics solutions. That commitment has not changed".
Mitigation Strategies: The Ocean Alliance Advantage
HSBC analysis suggests that COSCO may have a pathway to minimize the financial impact through its membership in the Ocean Alliance. By leveraging partnerships with CMA CGM and Evergreen, COSCO could potentially switch vessel deployments to utilize non-Chinese-built tonnage for U.S. routes.
This strategy is feasible because non-Chinese-built vessels account for 71% of the world's containership capacity by TEU, though they currently represent only 15% of U.S. port calls. The alliance structure provides COSCO with operational flexibility to deploy the most economically efficient assets to each trade route.
Other major carriers have already announced their approaches to the new fees:
- Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) will absorb costs internally without passing them to clients
- CMA CGM has implemented contingency plans and won't impose USTR-related surcharges
- Maersk will prioritize rerouting Chinese-built vessels away from U.S. routes
Industry-Wide Implications Beyond COSCO
The USTR fees are sending ripples across the global shipping industry, affecting not just Chinese operators but any company utilizing Chinese-built vessels. Israeli carrier Zim, with nearly half its fleet built in China, is evaluating operational adjustments including potential port call transfers to Caribbean transshipment hubs.
The regulations have also begun influencing newbuild decisions, creating hesitancy among some owners toward Chinese shipyards. This could potentially redirect orders to Japanese and Korean yards despite China's current dominance in shipbuilding.
The American shipbuilding industry, which the fees are designed to support, faces structural challenges including military order backlogs, skilled labor shortages, and weak training systems that may limit its ability to capitalize on the new policy. As Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc noted, even with these fees, the U.S. would need "6-7 years to build the first commercial vessel".
Stable Outlook Despite Financial Headwinds
Despite HSBC's projection that COSCO could face up to $1.5 billion in annual port fees-equivalent to 74% of its projected 2026 EBIT-the company's reassuring messaging suggests confidence in its ability to adapt.
The strategic deployment of non-Chinese-built vessels through alliance partnerships, combined with potential operational adjustments, provides COSCO with tools to mitigate the financial impact while maintaining service quality. The company's decades of experience in the U.S. market and sophisticated global network position it to navigate these regulatory challenges more effectively than smaller competitors might.
As the October 14 implementation date approaches, COSCO's focus remains on delivering stable and reliable services to its customers. While the new fees will undoubtedly reshape some aspects of trans-Pacific shipping, COSCO's response demonstrates its resilience and commitment to this crucial trade lane.
The coming months will reveal the full impact of these fees on global shipping patterns, but COSCO's early communications suggest the company is prepared to adapt while maintaining its competitive position in the U.S. market.
