The war with Iran has become a battle about a tollbooth. Free seas are at risk

A New Era for Global Maritime Trade: The Hormuz Tollbooth Crisis

The war with Iran has become – What began as a military campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear program and its international terror networks has evolved into something far more consequential for worldwide commerce. The ongoing conflict has transformed into a struggle over dominance of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the planet’s most critical maritime corridors. This narrow waterway serves as a vital artery for oil, natural gas, fertilizers, and numerous other essential commodities moving across global markets.

The stakes could not be higher. Should this conflict result in either Iran or the United States establishing permanent control over Hormuz, it may mark the twilight of free passage on the open seas—a foundational principle that has supported international trade for hundreds of years.

“This could set a dangerous precedent and make international seaborne trade much more expensive, a cost that would ultimately be passed on to end-consumers,” Erik Grundt, a senior analyst at consultancy Rystad Energy, told CNN.

The Birth of a Maritime Chokepoint

When US and Israeli forces launched coordinated attacks on February 28, Iran responded with remarkable speed by declaring the Strait of Hormuz closed. This decisive move triggered what experts are calling the largest oil supply disruption in recorded history. Recognizing the tremendous leverage this position provides over the global economy, Tehran has been determined to maintain its grip on the strait.

Commercial vessels seeking to navigate through the waterway now face a difficult choice: coordinate with Iran’s newly created Persian Gulf Strait Authority, which may require substantial payments, or risk coming under fire from the Revolutionary Guard Corps. Although these fees were temporarily suspended following Iran’s 60-day Memorandum of Understanding with the United States on June 18, Tehran’s authority over maritime transits has only strengthened during this period.

Iran has strategically invoked a specific provision within the MOU that requires Tehran to “make arrangements… for the safe passage of commercial vessels,” using this language to justify and solidify its control. According to Iranian claims made on Tuesday, over 200 non-Iranian ships worked with the PGSA during the three weeks following the agreement’s signing, though CNN was unable to confirm these figures independently.

Conflicting Interpretations and Rising Costs

The Trump administration interpreted the same clause differently, believing it guaranteed unrestricted transit through the 60-day window. Ship movements certainly increased during this period, with approximately 70 vessels daily navigating the strait at the peak—roughly half the pre-war average. However, renewed tensions have reduced this figure dramatically, with Sunday’s transits numbering just over a dozen vessels.

In a move that mirrored Iran’s own approach, President Donald Trump briefly announced that the United States would impose a 20 percent fee on commercial ships utilizing Hormuz, citing American efforts to safeguard the waterway. This declaration, however, lasted less than a full day before being withdrawn from social media platforms.

“20% is of course too much,” Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on X Monday. “We will be fair.”

According to shipping association BIMCO, that proposed 20 percent charge would have represented approximately $27 million for each voyage undertaken by a very large oil tanker. Despite what many viewed as an unreasonable figure, Trump’s announcement inadvertently validated Iran’s position—an irony the Iranian regime promptly highlighted with sarcasm on social media channels.

Insurance Challenges and Global Precedents

Rob Thummel, senior portfolio manager at Tortoise Capital, noted that if toll collection becomes standard practice in Hormuz, shipping expenses could climb significantly. While the financial burden matters, it represents only part of the problem. Reports indicate Iran has been collecting between $1 and $2 per barrel from oil tankers, generating roughly $2 million for each Very Large Crude Carrier.

However, even willing shippers face complications. Insurance providers may decline coverage for vessels making payments to sanctioned organizations, including several major Iranian institutions. “Forget the legal arguments, insurers will settle this first,” explained Nigel Green, CEO of financial advisory giant deVere Group. “Involve a toll with sanctions risk and underwriters could simply stop writing cover.”

Even if neutral parties like Oman collected these fees, such arrangements would likely violate international maritime regulations, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), giving insurers grounds to cancel voyages or withdraw protection entirely.

Beyond Hormuz, there exists a broader anxiety that monetizing this strategic passage could establish a template for other global chokepoints. Nations from Indonesia and Singapore to China, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom might increasingly weaponize their geographic positions. Across ten major maritime bottlenecks worldwide—including Hormuz, Gibraltar, Taiwan, Dover, and Malacca—potential annual passage revenues could fundamentally reshape international commerce patterns and alter the balance of power in global trade corridors for decades to come.