The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) commented following the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 Investigation public hearing.
Secretary General of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), Guy Platten, testified before the U.S. Trade Representative Section 301 Committee in Washington, D.C., USA, regarding concerns around potential unintended consequences that could result from the proposed remedies following the Committee’s investigation into China’s maritime logistics and shipbuilding.
The USTR public hearing took place over two days, Monday 24 March and Wednesday 26 March 2025, with over 60 witnesses delivering testimonies in person.
The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) stated that it supports the goal of strengthening U.S. shipbuilding because a robust, competitive shipbuilding sector benefits global trade, and the international shipping industry wants more choice, not less.
However, as raised during the hearing by multiple representatives, the proposed fees on Chinese-operated and Chinese-built vessels risk significant unintended consequences. These measures could disrupt supply chains, raise costs for U.S. consumers and exporters, and reduce the global competitiveness of vital U.S. sectors, articularly agriculture, energy, and manufacturing.
When looking at our sector, the shipping industry is one of the most cost-optimized in the world. The business model is designed to drive down costs, while not compromising on safety standards, so that goods can efficiently flow from and to countries, for the benefit of those countries’ economies and populations…the shipping industry is not like a traditional business, it is unique.
…Guy Platten stated at the hearing.
Furthermore, ICS commented that these proposed measures, as currently constituted, won’t deter Chinese shipbuilding, however they could severely disrupt U.S. maritime supply chains, and threaten the US’ energy, food and economic security, and ultimately cut U.S. businesses off from the very ships they rely on.
These proposed measures could hurt our customers – the American people. They will make vital U.S. exports less competitive globally. This hurts jobs, be that at ports or at farms, and the American shipping industry, the very thing you are trying to encourage.
…Guy Platten commented.
At the hearing ICS urged the USTR to explore alternative policies that strengthen American shipbuilding without disrupting trade or harming the very industries these actions aim to support. ICS offered to work alongside the USTR and the White House to develop practical, future-focused solutions that deliver lasting value for U.S. industry, consumers, and maritime resilience.
To remind, Joe Kramer, CEO, World Shipping Council (WSC), had also requested to testify to the USTR public hearing, expressing that the proposals would result in increased costs for U.S consumers and exporters as well as supply chain inefficiencies while failing to provide China with effective incentives to alter its acts, policies, and practices.
On 24 March, following the first USTR hearing on the proposal, Joe Kramek noted that the port fees appear to go well beyond what the law authorizes: “Generating demand for domestic products and raising government revenue–whether to support a domestic industry or for other purposes–are not permissible bases for actions under Section 301” of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, which was enacted for the purpose of “inducing elimination of the foreign acts, policies, and practices at issue.’’
In addition, BIMCO in a submitted a letter to the US Trade Representative, pointed out that the proposed port fees on ships of Chinese origin or operated by Chinese-affiliated companies would significantly increase transport costs for U.S. imports and exports. Since most global shipping operators have at least some Chinese-built ships, these fees would inevitably be passed down the supply chain, ultimately raising costs for U.S. consumers and businesses, BIMCO highlighted.
