President Donald Trump plans to impose tariffs on China, as well as countries with a significant trade deficit with the United States, and his proposal to impose a large fee on Chinese ships docking in U.S. ports threaten the major U.S. business sectors, as well as global trading partners.
Trump says his administration will Reciprocal tariffs were issued on April 2especially the country that Finance Minister Scott Bessent calls the “Dirty Nine” which includes long-time allies, such as South Korea. The proposal has led to a fierce debate on tariffs and trade restrictions in various countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
But other proposals, such as the massive expenses of Chinese ships docked at U.S. ports, have sparked a rebound in anger in the U.S. and claimed the idea would hammer U.S. exports. Trump said the White House is also considering taxes for departments such as cars, despite relief Monday when his officials said the fees had been delayed.
See also: Chinese Prime Minister demands open market “strike instability, uncertainty”
this Docking fee proposal – Part of a program to help fund the revival of U.S. shipbuilding – was attacked by critics who said that if Chinese ships docked each time they could weaken trans-Pacific trade and attack smaller U.S. ports.
According to a proposal from the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the fee would involve an executive order (with review capacity) requiring taxation on Chinese-made vessels and vessels including Chinese-made vessels.
However, a wave of export and agricultural agencies in the United States said the current form is not feasible because there are simply not enough ships in the United States or other trading partners.
“Threat the US $130 billion in coal exports”
The plan has caused the expansion and shocking uncertainty in the agricultural market for U.S. coal stocks as exporters struggle to find ships to send goods abroad, Reuters reported.
According to major U.S. exporters and transportation traders, these potential port fees have limited the availability of ships needed to transfer agricultural, energy, mining, construction and manufacturing goods to international buyers.
Xcoal Energy & Resources CEO Ernie Thrasher said in a letter to U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the owners refused to offer an offer for future U.S. shipments due to the proposed USTR fees.
Thrasher said that developing and implementing these costs could halte coal exports within 60 days, putting $130 billion worth of goods at risk. He said the fee structure could increase U.S. coal costs by 35%, leaving it without competition in the global market.
“Losing direct and indirect work would be disastrous,” Thrasher said, confirming that the letter was sent and saying he had not received a response.
Letters from Pennsylvania-based coal marketer Xcoal and comments from agricultural representatives with obvious impacts on proposed fees have not been reported.
West Virginia coal mines are also preparing to lay off employees as unsold coal stocks accumulate, West Virginia Coal Association CEO Chris Hamilton told Reuters.
Oil, LNG and fuel exports are also risky
The proposed fees could also make it harder for the U.S. to export other energy products such as oil, liquefied natural gas and refined fuels, the powerful oil industry lobby said in a comment submitted on March 10 at the United States International Airport (USTR).
The USTR proposal also seeks to transfer domestic exports to ships marked and built in the United States. The current number of U.S. cargo ships is less than 200, not all of them are built in the United States.
In a March 17 USTR commentary, BIMCO said few offshore operators were able to record that their annual export volumes matched 20% of what the U.S. needed for 20% of what U.S. built.
This could mean reducing U.S. energy exports — “particularly liquid natural gas (LNG) because there is no US-FARAG LNG carrier built in the U.S. is operating or order,” Bimco said, the carrier could also be severely affected.
The U.S. Farm Bureau Federation said U.S. farmers have been plagued by retaliatory tariffs from China, Mexico and Canada, and have also been plagued by the firefighting of China's ship fares.
Three U.S. cereal exporters traders told Reuters that it is not possible to ensure marine freight transportation is available from May and beyond, limiting their sale of bulk U.S. agricultural products such as corn, soybeans and wheat, as exporters are unsure of what the final cost will be.
According to U.S. Census Bureau trade data, the U.S. exported more than $64 billion in bulk crops, bulk animal feed and vegetable oil in 2024. The North American Export Cereals Association, which represents exporters of crop commodities, will attend next week's hearing.
The Farm Bureau said a large number of agricultural exporters could face an additional $372 million to $930 million in annual transportation costs from the expenses. This would represent a substantial loss in the global market where competitiveness is usually determined by just pennies per bushel.
Alexa Combelic, executive director of soybean government affairs, said U.S. agricultural exporters stand out from global competitors by leveraging a cost-effective, efficient domestic transportation system to move products to the market.
“When you add costs to this efficient system, it is no longer effective. We no longer have a competitive advantage,” Combelic said.
CK Hutchison Port Trading May Cut in Half
Analysts have speculated that Xi Jinping and Trump may decide the outcome of Blackrock's $23 billion acquisition of 80% of CK Hutchison ports.
Many believe he will get two ports near the Panama Canal, as Washington will not accept any other results. It has a strong argument because it built canals and a powerful U.S. Navy presence in the area.
Victor Li reportedly reportedly reported how the company's 2024 results were reported to be clues about how the deal was scaled back when announcing the company's 2024 results. Asian sentinelThey said they expect their nine ports to be mainly in Greater Asia (excluding China) and 12 ports in the Middle East, as well as other ports in Hong Kong and mainland China.
It said there was no mention of the company's port in Panama “as well as other parts of the Americas, Europe and Australia”, adding that it has two ports in Australia and 13 ports in Europe. So if Trump and Xi Jinping agree, BlackRock may end up being less than half the original agreement.
“The Middle East ports of CK and Hutchison, including the Suez Canal, are highly strategic for China,” it said. “It is unthinkable that Beijing will allow the United States to control this strategic waterway, thus making convenient transportation from Europe to Asia. In addition, it is unlikely that Beijing will control more ports in Asia to the United States, because Asia is China's backyard.”
The storm continues Cosco
Another casualty in port costs is that China's state-owned entity Cosco Spient is the world's largest transportation group.
If docking fees are imposed, demand for ships of $30 billion conglomerate will be hit hard. Last year, the company reported its best $6.9 billion in revenue ever, allegedly being a massive export of carry-on products ordered through Shein and Temu E-Commerce Apps.
Cosco's parent company owns the world's largest fleet by tonnage and its 15% share of the trans-Pacific route.
Chinese President Xi Jinping and his senior officials have been working on a reactive trade deal that could include the Green Light US units selling Tiktokattempt to minimize these effects.
The deal will depend on avoiding a full-scale trade war and the possible inflationary impact.
- Jim Pollard and Reuters.
See also:
Plan to worry about high port fees for our exporters on Chinese ships
Chinese ships may face substantial fees to enter U.S. ports
US investigation shows that China is unfairly dominant: Source
China says Hong Kong ship accidentally destroyed Baltic air ducts
China's Cosco Transport, Fortescue watches ammonia fuel ship
Transport chaos will be “new normal” in the case of war, climate change
Marine freight charges explode after new Red Sea vessel attack
Japanese, German transport companies still avoid Suez Canal
Transportation companies' charts return to the Red Sea, driven by U.S. military
Chinese companies order dozens of electric vehicles, exports surge
Taiwan's evergreen helps Chinese navy cut costs, U.S. Group says
