Trump proposes 20% fee on Hormuz cargo

On 6 July, roughly 45 large vessels crossed the Strait of Hormuz. By 10 July, ship-tracking firms counted five (Straits Times). No government sealed the waterway that carries nearly 20% of global oil and about a fifth of global LNG trade (EIA). Insurers, charterers and shipowners closed it themselves, voyage by voyage, by deciding the risk no longer justified the premium.

Trump then turned a shipping-risk story into a legal fight over passage rights. On 13 July he declared the United States "Guardian of the Hormuz Strait" and proposed collecting 20% of all cargo value shipped through it (gCaptain). No verified collection mechanism exists. The IMO (the UN body governing shipping) said the same day there is no legal basis for compulsory transit fees in an international strait; Oman, which shares the waterway with Iran, told the IMO Council that transit passage is guaranteed under international law (Maritime Executive). The fee proposal has no basis in maritime law, but the commercial closure is already visible in insurance prices.

The Cost Chain

War-risk premiums for Gulf voyages climbed toward 3% of vessel value, up from 2% days earlier, with some underwriters advising owners to pause transits entirely (Claims Journal). Italian shipping analysts put VLCC (very large crude carrier) premiums at roughly 4% of vessel value for a single week, between $250,000 and $375,000 per passage (TrasportoEuropa). Those costs pass from insurers to shipowners, from shipowners to charterers, from charterers to cargo owners. Then they hit the pump, the airport fuel truck and the supermarket loading dock.

The sharpest transmission runs through refined products, not crude. BNP Paribas estimates that Asia and the Middle East supplied 23% of European diesel imports and 90% of jet-fuel imports in 2025 (BNP Paribas). International diesel quotations jumped nearly 10 cents per litre while gasoline moved only four (Quattroruote). Diesel fuels trucks and farms. It carries cost through every supply chain it touches before inflation statistics register anything.

Three Governments, One Bind

The same shock shows up in national fuel markets across Europe, and each government faces the same choice: absorb part of the hit through tax relief, spending fiscal room, or let consumers take the full price and absorb the political cost instead.

Portugal chose to cushion. Lisbon expected diesel to rise seven cents per litre in the week from 13 July and increased fuel-tax support through its ISP discount mechanism (Observador, ECO). Ireland let the price pass through: fuel retailers expected diesel up about 10 cents per litre on higher wholesale costs, stressing that supply remained adequate (RTÉ). Hungary faces a compounding problem. Diesel stood at 608 forint per litre, and a weakening forint against the dollar amplifies every dollar-priced barrel into a larger domestic cost (Portfolio, Holtankoljak).

The Missing Evidence

The European Commission's energy security task force said on 13 July it saw no immediate winter supply problem (European Commission). Most crude through Hormuz heads for Asia, not Europe, and Gulf exporters have some alternative pipelines and ports (LSEG). That calm may be justified.

But no EU member state has published, during this crisis, a verifiable breakdown of reserve days, Hormuz-linked diesel and jet-fuel dependence, or the insurance surcharge data that would let citizens check whether official reassurance rests on numbers or hope. National energy ministries and fuel-market regulators owe the public that accounting. The actors who actually decide whether Hormuz is commercially usable — insurers repricing war-risk cover, charterers pausing voyages, banks checking sanctions exposure — are not waiting for diplomacy. They are pricing the danger now, and European drivers, truckers and airlines are already absorbing a bill whose true size only the market knows.