On February 13, the Trump Administration released its Maritime Action Plan (MAP), a comprehensive roadmap aimed at revitalizing the U.S. maritime sector and domestic shipbuilding industry. Developed under the Executive Order titled “Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance,” the plan is structured around four strategic pillars: rebuilding shipyard capacity, reforming maritime workforce development, safeguarding the industrial base, and strengthening national and economic security.
At its core, the MAP reflects a broader objective: restoring U.S. leadership in maritime capability as a matter of strategic autonomy and geopolitical positioning.
A Universal Fee on Foreign-Built Vessels
Among the most consequential proposals for international shipping is the introduction of a so-called “universal infrastructure or security fee.” This charge would apply to all merchant vessels built outside the United States when calling at U.S. ports.
Notably, the fee would not depend on the vessel’s flag. Instead, it would be determined by the ship’s place of construction and calculated based on the weight of imported cargo carried into the United States.
While the MAP does not set a final rate, it provides illustrative scenarios. A levy of $0.01 per kilogram of imported cargo could generate approximately $66 billion over ten years. At $0.25 per kilogram, projected revenue could approach $1.5 trillion over the same period.
Proceeds would be allocated to a newly proposed “Maritime Security Trust Fund.” The purpose of this fund would be to finance investments in shipbuilding capacity, expand the U.S.-flagged fleet, reinforce the maritime industrial base, and provide a stable, long-term funding mechanism for the MAP’s initiatives.
Cargo Reservation Measures
Beyond financial instruments, the plan also outlines the possible implementation of cargo reservation mechanisms through a “Maritime Preference Requirement.” Under such a framework, an increasing share of U.S. imports would be required to be transported on U.S.-built or U.S.-flagged vessels, in parallel with the expansion of domestic shipbuilding output.
This proposal would represent a significant shift toward industrial policy measures in maritime transport, linking trade flows directly to domestic fleet development.
Industry Reaction and Trade Concerns
The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) has expressed support for the objective of strengthening U.S. shipbuilding capacity. However, it has also cautioned that the proposed fees could carry substantial consequences for global trade.
According to ICS, such measures risk distorting trade patterns, increasing costs for American businesses and consumers, disrupting established supply chains, and potentially triggering retaliatory actions from trading partners.
European Shipowners (ECSA) has echoed similar concerns, indicating that it will closely monitor developments in coordination with ICS.
Strategic Ambition vs. Market Disruption
The MAP clearly signals a more assertive U.S. maritime policy, blending industrial revitalization with national security considerations. Its success will depend not only on domestic execution but also on how international partners respond.
The central question is whether the plan can strengthen U.S. maritime capacity without fragmenting global trade flows or escalating protectionist tensions.
The balance between strategic autonomy and open markets will define the broader impact of this initiative — both for the United States and for the global shipping industry.