Iran Says Strait of Hormuz Won't Have 'Tolls' but It Will Have 'Fees'

[demmiblue]

Source: NYT

Though President Trump declared on Sunday that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen and be “permanently toll-free,” Iran indicated on Monday that it intended to charge fees for unspecified services in the strait.

The net effect — paying for passage through the vital waterway for global energy supplies, which was not required before the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran — could add expense and complications for commercial shipping in the waterway, and set a dangerous precedent for shipping in international waters worldwide.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baghaei, said on Monday that Iran was “not seeking to levy transit tolls; however, fees will be charged in exchange for the services that are provided.” But there was little indication of what services Iran would be providing. Iranian officials have said they might assess environmental charges.

Legally speaking, there is a distinction between a toll — a payment for passage — and fees for actual services rendered, for example providing waste services at a port. Fees can be legal in certain contexts but a toll in the Strait of Hormuz would not be, maritime law experts say, and requiring payment for ships to use a waterway that has long been free would not be rendered legal simply by calling it a fee.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/15/world/middleeast/shipping-fees-tolls-strait-hormuz.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

[Lovie777]

1. Iran wins again...............

[pat_k]

9. MUCH Bigger than that. This is a violation of the Law of the Seas, the foundation of ALL international trade.

See post 8 below.

[MichMan]

12. Why hasn't the UN been acting to keep it open?

[pat_k]

13. I don't actually know much about it, but FWIW, here's an AI summary.

Apply whatever level of skepticism you apply to all AI:

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) explicitly prohibits coastal nations from charging tolls or fees simply for transiting natural international straits

Conflicts regarding the Law of the Sea are primarily resolved through the dispute settlement mechanisms mandated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Under Part XV of the Convention, nations are legally required to settle their maritime and ocean disputes through peaceful means, such as direct negotiation, mediation, or conciliation.

If those efforts fail, nations have compulsory recourse to one of four binding judicial bodies:

International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS): Based in Hamburg, Germany, this independent judicial body specializes entirely in maritime disputes, such as delimitation of boundaries and fishing rights. It notably handles cases requiring emergency, provisional measures or the "prompt release" of detained vessels and crews.

International Court of Justice (ICJ): Located in The Hague, Netherlands, the primary judicial organ of the UN can also hear and resolve disputes between nations.

Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal: Often the most common and flexible option, this process relies on a panel of five arbitrators appointed by the disputing parties. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague acts as the registry for these proceedings.

Annex VIII Special Arbitral Tribunal: These are specialized panels composed of experts in particular fields (e.g., fisheries, marine environment, scientific research) established to resolve specific technical disputes.

When signing or ratifying UNCLOS, nations can declare which of these four forums they prefer to use. If they do not designate a preference, arbitration under Annex VII becomes the default mechanism.

[MichMan]

15. Thanks for that

The process should have already been followed as prescribed. I have heard zilch about it, so I have to assume they aren't doing a damn thing.

[pat_k]

16. Well, we don't actually have any "official" confirmation of what the hell is in the MoU.

But it strikes me that if the U.S. - Iran agreement includes a fee of any kind, it's a serious problem.

I don't see how the U.S. could make an agreement that empowers Iran to violate the Law of the Seas on behalf of all other nations.

So, if other nations balk at the insanity, it becomes a multi-nation "dispute" that needs to be resolved among themselves (likely impossible), and failing that, would probably end up with an Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal.

Of course, the felon and the administration players pulling his strings have no respect for rule of law at any level so he and his band of lunatics probably think they can just strongarm everyone into accepting this violation. And if that is allowed to stand, nations that have natural straits will start following suit. And it will become an international trade clusterfuck.

[MichMan]

17. Hasn't Iran already been charging tolls for weeks now?

[pat_k]

18. Yes. To date, I suppose the matter has been left as an issue between Iran and the nations paying the "fees" to work out.

And those nations have been waiting for the U.S. and Iran to come to some agreement -- one that would presumably bar any such fees going forward.

I suspect it will come as a shock to other nations if it turns out the U.S.-Iran MoU empowers Iran to charge fees of other nations. If that is formalized, I'm guessing that is when the shit will hit the fan.

And would guess that some of that shit is hitting the fan at the G7 right now.

[LiberalArkie]

10. Iran always wins with Republicans...

Carter wins an election... Iran decides to capture American hostages..
Hostages held until Regan sworn in...
Reagan gives them weapons.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Maybe they can call it a tariff /nt

[RockRaven]

3. Sounds like those states which brag about not having "taxes" but then have "fees" up the wazoo.

[Deuxcents]

4. Like my state..

[BootinUp]

5. Thanks Donny. Nt

[delisen]

6. Wonder what "fee" we are paying Jared for his "services."

I suspect the fee for looting the American treasury is high

[agingdem]

7. That's like saying admission is free/pay at the door...

[pat_k]

8. VERY BIG DEAL. In agreeing, the felon sez to hell with the Law of the Seas on which international trade is based.

While the foundational concept driving trade is economic, the Law of the Sea (codified primarily in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) provides the legal framework that makes physical international trade possible.

This cannot be allowed to stand. I suspect the G7 nations are raising hell about this.

And he is too f-ing clueless to understand.

I think he deteriorated to a point that he understands none of it. This may be the only explanation for the "deal." I cannot imagine the narcissistic psychopath knowingly entering this humiliating surrender and gargantuan loss. I think he is so out of it that J.D. and co are just "handling" him, assuring him it's a big win.

[MichMan]

11. Strait of Hormuz is classified as an international strait under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

Under international law, Iran must allow uninterrupted passage. Why isn't the UN doing anything?

[SunSeeker]

19. The US caused this whole debacle and isn't doing anything.

[Bengus81]

14. That will jack prices at the pump by .50--1.00 per gallon

Anything as an excuse.

[C Moon]

20. Not with a bang but a whimper.