• Sign up for the Daily Digest E-mail
  • X
  • LinkedIn
  • See more results

    Generic selectors
    Exact matches only
    Search in title
    Search in content
    Post Type Selectors

BOE Report

Sign up

See more results

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
  • Home
  • StackDX Intel
  • Headlines
    • Latest Headlines
    • Featured Companies
    • Columns
    • Discussions
  • Well Activity
    • Well Licences
    • Well Activity Map
  • Property Listings
  • Land Sales
  • M&A Activity
    • M&A Database
    • AER Transfers
  • Markets
  • Rig Counts/Data
    • CAOEC Rig Count
    • Baker Hughes Rig Count
    • USA Rig Count
    • Data
      • Canada Oil Market Data
      • Canada NG Market Data
      • USA Market Data
      • Data Downloads
  • Jobs

Proposed Hormuz passage deal not feasible for shipping industry, sources say

August 6, 20268:46 AM Reuters0 Comments

A proposed deal between Iran and Oman that would give Tehran control over ships entering the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz is not easily workable due to U.S. sanctions and restrictive insurance clauses on any payments, four industry sources said. Until U.S.-Israeli airstrikes at the end of February unleashed war in Iran, the narrow waterway between the Gulf and the Indian Ocean was the main route for about a fifth of world oil supplies and other vital goods. It was freely open to all ships with no fees.

Control of the strait has been the biggest sticking point in efforts to end the conflict.

Under the latest proposal, Tehran would be able to intervene if necessary with any inbound traffic, while outbound traffic would follow a route between Iran and Oman, with exit clearance granted through Oman after notifying Iran, a senior Iranian source told Reuters this week.

The ability of merchant ships to navigate international waterways “safely, predictably and without unnecessary impediment is fundamental to resilient supply chains, economic stability and energy security,” the world’s leading shipping associations said in an open letter this week.

‘A TOLL IN ALL BUT NAME’

Introducing compulsory charges through the strait for transit or service fees was “a toll in all but name”, the letter said, which was sent to the UN’s shipping agency.

“It would establish a precedent that could undermine the internationally recognised legal framework governing straits used for international navigation and transit passage.”

What is known as a two-way traffic separation scheme was adopted by the UN’s shipping agency in ⁠1968 with the agreement of countries in the region. It created the current ship routing system that split sailing corridors through Iranian and Omani waters. Iran is seeking fees of between 5% and 7% of the price of cargoes from ships using the strait, according to the senior Iranian official. Oman is discussing fees of around 3%, while Washington wants no fees at all.

The UN’s International Maritime Organization said it could not comment on reports of the proposals.

In July the agency’s governing council said countries around the strait should guarantee the “non-discriminatory and unimpeded right of transit passage of all ships” through the traffic separation scheme and that passage should remain free of any tolls and charges.

FEES WOULD CREATE COMPLIANCE ISSUES

For shipping companies and oil traders, any imposition of fees creates major compliance issues given the U.S. has imposed sanctions on the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, which Iran set up in May to operate the waterway.

The U.S. Treasury has also prohibited U.S. persons from receiving services from Iran’s government related to a “guarantee of safe passage”. Any payment could lead to asset freezes, the industry sources said. They declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.

A further complication is the introduction in late July by Lloyd’s Market Association of a clause for use by war underwriters that terminates insurance cover for a vessel if it has paid a transit fee, toll or other charge for passage through the Strait of Hormuz.

Ships sailing through the strait need to pay an additional war risk premium to ensure they have insurance if their ship is damaged during transit.

“Under the clause, insurers have no liability to indemnify any such payment and, where such a payment has been made, are discharged from obligations in respect of the relevant vessel,” the LMA said in July.

The LMA represents the interests of all underwriting businesses in the Lloyd’s of London insurance market. Shipping companies were in a “catch 22” situation, one insurance industry source said, as the LMA wording prohibits insurers from covering shipowners who pay, while Iran aims to charge a toll.

(Reporting by Jonathan Saul and Marwa Rashad; editing by Barbara Lewis)

Follow BOE Report
  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn

Sign up for the BOE Report Daily Digest E-mail

Successfully subscribed

Latest Headlines
  • Andy O’Brien, the insider poised to lead ConocoPhillips
  • Oil traders double down on Iran deal bet as odds worsen: Bousso  
  • Iran warns Gulf states: tell Trump to desist or we hit you hard
  • Lycos Energy Inc. announces closing of previously announced strategic acquisition of Sparky waterflood assets, $34.5 million equity financing and expanded credit facility
  • Proposed Hormuz passage deal not feasible for shipping industry, sources say

Return to Home
Alberta GasMonthly Avg.
CAD/GJ
Market Data by TradingView

    Report Error







    Note: The page you are currently on will be sent with your report. If this report is about a different page, please specify.

    About
    • About BOEReport.com
    • In the News
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Editorial Policy
    Resources
    • Widgets
    • Notifications
    • Daily Digest E-mail
    Get In Touch
    • Advertise
    • Post a Job
    • Contact
    • Report Error
    StackDX
    • BOE Report Jobs
    • StackDX Intel
    © 2026 Stack Technologies Ltd.