China-U.S. maritime conflict has entered the white-heated phase early on October 10, China's Ministry of Transport officially announced that it will charge special port charges for ships involving the United States, and officially implemented on October 14.

The cause of the counter-reaction goes back to almost six months ago, when the US announced that it would "make a knife" with Chinese ships.

On the grounds of the so-called "unfair competition in China's maritime logistics industry", they announced that from October 14th, they would charge port service fees for ships owned or operated by Chinese enterprises, Chinese ships and Chinese-built ships.

The first phase will charge $50 per net tonne, which is planned to be increased gradually until 2028.

Trump's abacus is very good, and he wants to force away international orders by raising the cost of Chinese ships.

Faced with unreasonable pressure from the United States, China¡¯s response is both legitimate and highly targeted.

In particular, China will charge special port charges for five categories of U.S.-related ships:

Ships owned by U.S. companies or individuals, ships owned or operated by companies directly or indirectly holding 25% or more, ships flying the U.S. flag, and ships built in the United States.

The fee is calculated by ships each time they land in Chinese ports, implemented in four stages, 400 yuan per net tonne, and subsequently increased year by year to reach 1120 yuan per net tonne by 2028.

It is not difficult to see, this almost corresponds to the US tariff criteria for Chinese ships, and it is in the way of beauty.

At the same time, the rules clearly state that "the same flight multi-port rely only on the first port fee, the annual fee of a single ship is not more than 5 flights", avoiding excessive overlapping costs, but also demonstrates rigour.

The industry¡¯s most ¡°surprising¡± is the ¡°demon details¡± hidden in China¡¯s counter-reaction.

Many analysts at first glance believe that the size of the U.S. fleet operating in China is smaller than that of the Chinese fleet in the United States, and the counter-impact is limited.

However, if you delve into the terms of the rules, you will find that the definition of "the United States holds 25% or more of the shares" is actually a key "mesh", which almost includes a large number of ships related to American capital.

You know, capital players such as private equity firms and banks in the United States have a deep presence in the global shipping industry. Many shipping companies that are not headquartered in the United States and are not directly related to the United States, but in fact they all have shares behind them.

For example, some large tanker operators are ostensibly registered in Europe or Asia, but the US capital shareholding may have already exceeded 25%. According to the new regulations, these ships have to pay according to the standard fees if they want to call at Chinese ports.

Taking a giant tanker as an example, calculated by 400 yuan per net tonne per landing point, a single landing in a Chinese port will require an additional payment of about $6.2 million, which is undoubtedly a heavy cost burden for U.S. shipping enterprises that rely on the Chinese market.

This also shows that China's counter-measures are not "shaking the head", but rather touching the capital pulse of the U.S. shipping industry very thoroughly, so that those who want to rely on "shell" to "represent" the American related enterprises to avoid costs, there is no space to drill.

China's precise countermeasures have undoubtedly failed Trump's calculations: he originally wanted to suppress China's shipping industry, while helping the U.S. shipbuilding industry to "restore blood" while taking the lead in the trade game. Now this set of ideas obviously doesn't work.

Behind this seemingly simple adjustment of port charges is the positive competition between China and the United States in "rule defense" and "unilateral bullying" in the global shipping order, which also hides the unconcealed vulnerability of the U.S. industrial chain.

It is worth mentioning that this move by China also cleverly echoes the recent upgrade of rare earth export controls by the Ministry of Commerce, which together constitutes a "combination punch" for China to deal with US trade bullying.

Rare earth regulations have stuck the "lifeblood" of the U.S. high-tech and military supply chains, while special port fees for ships directly hit the "cost pain points" of U.S. shipping companies. The two work together to respond to the unreasonable suppression by the U.S., but also provide a basis for the follow-up Sino-U.S. economic and trade consultations have won more initiative.

In short, there are only three days left before the implementation date of the US additional port service fee. China's countermeasures have clearly conveyed a firm position. If the US insists on unilateral bullying, China will have enough confidence and means to accompany it to the end.