Trump’s Hormuz Fee Plan: How It Differs From Iran’s Demand

President Donald Trump proposed a 20% surcharge on all cargo transiting the Strait of Hormuz after the Iran ceasefire collapsed in a dispute over who controls the strategic waterway — a dramatic shift from Washington’s previous position that no country has the right to charge for passage through international straits. Here is what the proposal means, how it differs from Iran’s demands, and whether either approach has legal standing.

Has the US Shifted Its Position on Hormuz Fees?

The policy reversal is stark. As recently as June 25, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Gulf states that “no country on Earth has the right to charge for the use of international waterways” and that fees would never be part of any deal with Iran.

Trump had, however, previously floated the possibility of US tolls if the ceasefire broke down. In a June 20 social media post, he wrote that there would be “NO TOLLS in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the Cease Fire Period” — but added that fees could be imposed by the United States afterward “should the deal not be completed, for services rendered as the Guardian Angel to the countries of the Middle East.”

With the ceasefire now unraveling, Trump followed through. “The USA will be, from this point forward, known as ‘THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT’, but as such, and as a matter of FAIRNESS, will be reimbursed, at the rate of 20% on all cargo shipped,” he posted Monday. He did not explain what legal authority would underpin the charge or how it would be enforced.

How Does Trump’s Proposed Fee Differ From Iran’s?

Both the Trump Hormuz fee legal Iran toll debate and Iran’s parallel demand share a surface similarity — charging for passage through the strait — but the underlying objectives differ significantly.

Iran views lasting control over the Strait of Hormuz as its primary strategic asset and the best guarantee of its security against future attack. It set up the Persian Gulf Strait Authority during the war, requiring vessels to coordinate with it and mandating that ships transit near the Iranian coastline rather than the Omani shore. Iran has suggested it may eventually charge fees but has not specified terms.

Iran believes the wording of the interim ceasefire agreement — stating it “will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days only” — amounted to US recognition of Iranian management authority over the waterway. The US rejected that interpretation, viewing the clause as simply requiring Iran to allow ships to pass freely.

Trump’s proposal frames the US as the strait’s self-appointed guardian seeking reimbursement for military protection costs — a fundamentally different framing, though one that also lacks clear legal foundation.

Is Charging Fees for Hormuz Transit Legal?

The strait sits within the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, with the maritime boundary running along the middle. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea — widely regarded as the governing framework of international maritime law — states bordering straits cannot demand payment simply for granting passage.

Limited fees for specific services such as piloting, tugging, or port services are permitted, but cannot be imposed more heavily on vessels from particular countries. Importantly, neither Iran nor the United States is a signatory to UNCLOS, though both are generally bound by the customary international law principles it codifies.

In 1968, Iran and Oman established a traffic separation scheme with the International Maritime Organization designating sea lanes along the strait’s middle. Iranian mine-laying during the war has rendered that traditional route unsafe, according to the IMO.

Would the World Accept Fees on Hormuz Shipping?

No unilateral fee demand for strait transit has been attempted in modern maritime history, shipping industry officials say. The prospect of a 20% surcharge on all Hormuz cargo alarmed Gulf states, whose primary access to global markets for energy exports runs through the waterway. Major importers of Gulf oil and fertilizers would also face significant cost increases.

Oman, which shares the strait with Iran, has held its own dialogue with Tehran on the issue and issued guidance last month for vessels transiting through its waters that required no fees. Trump ultimately stepped back from the proposal Tuesday, announcing that Gulf states would instead make investment deals with the United States in lieu of the toll — a reversal that came just hours before the fee was due to take effect.