China’s decision to charge U.S. ships means that the trade friction between China and the U.S. extends from the tariff war to the sea route, so what impact will China have on the global shipping pattern if it charges U.S. ships?
On October 10, China’s Ministry of Transport announced that from October 14, the “special port charges” for ships owned, operated, or manufactured in the United States will be applied in four stages, starting from 400 yuan per net ton, up to 1120 yuan in 2028. This is not a symbolic charge, but a counteract of real gold and silver. According to Reuters, an American ship with a capacity to load thousands of containers can cost millions of dollars on a single port. For American shipping giants, this is a burden, and more importantly, the cost will inevitably be transferred to American importers and retailers, and ultimately presses on American consumers.
To understand this step taken by China, we must start from the provocation of the United States. Previously, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative launched a 301 investigation against China on the grounds of so-called "unfair competition in China's maritime and shipbuilding industries" and announced that starting from October 14, additional port service fees will be levied on ships owned or built by China companies. The fee starts from US$50 per net ton and increases to US$180 within three years. In the name of "correcting competitive imbalances," it is actually using administrative means to weaken China's competitiveness in the global shipbuilding industry and shipping system.
After all, China is already well-deserved as the "largest shipbuilding country." Data shows that in 2024, China's new shipbuilding orders accounted for 61.4% of the world's total, and shipbuilding production accounted for more than half of the world's total, far exceeding South Korea and Japan. However, the commercial shipbuilding industry in the United States has long been in decline, shipyard production capacity is limited, and even the delivery of naval ships has been repeatedly delayed. The US charging plan is essentially a "policy intervention-based industrial revival dream"-it hopes to artificially increase the cost of Chinese ships and force international shipping companies to return to using American ships or third-country ships, thereby revitalizing the domestic shipbuilding industry.
But the problem is that the cost of building a 10,000 TEU container ship in the United States is five times that of China. Such an industrial structure gap cannot be made up for by fees. China's choice to counter measures is to send a clear signal that in the field of international trade, China is no longer a passive player, but a player with rules, means and rhythm. What is more noteworthy is that this countermeasure was not an isolated action.
In late September, the State Council of China just revised the "International Shipping Regulations" and added a "counter-clause" authorizing the government to implement reciprocal charges and port restrictions on countries that take discriminatory measures. In other words, this charge is a legitimate response supported by legal basis, procedural justice, and international law. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Transport of China also bluntly stated at a press conference that the US approach "ignores the facts and exposes its unilateralism and protectionist nature" and that China's countermeasures are "well-founded in accordance with the law and reasonable."
Trump may not have expected that China would respond so quickly. Just a few days ago, he tweeted that he hoped the APEC summit at the end of October would "achieve substantive results", especially in the field of agricultural products. He originally thought that China would relent on soybean purchases. As a result, China not only failed to place any orders, but instead made successive moves. First, it controlled rare earth exports, and then this time it imposed port fees on US ships. It was a series of countermeasures and caught the White House unprepared.
From a global perspective, this "port charge war" is more likely to leverage changes in the shipping landscape. China controls about 30% of the world's port throughput and has the most complete shipbuilding industry chain and port infrastructure. Once China continues to increase its countermeasures, U.S. ships may be forced to detour Southeast Asian ports. The increased fuel costs and transportation cycles will further weaken the U.S.'s competitiveness in international trade. Worse, since 53% of new shipbuilding orders come from China shipyards, America's policy of "excluding China" simply cannot cut off reality dependence.
There are only two days left before the effective date. The Trump administration is still intensively evaluating countermeasures, trying to delay China's implementation through temporary negotiations, but there is little room for manoeuvre. Because once China gives in, it will not only weaken its international credibility, but also make all previous counter-measures fall short. Moreover, China's move is part of a larger game strategy-linked with the suspension of soybean procurement, the control of rare earth exports, and the layout of China-Europe and Central Asia routes. The signal behind it is very clear. In the face of unreasonable suppression by the United States, China will surely accompany it to the end.