Trade & Customs Oct 15, 2026 · 8 min read

FMC proposes $200,000 fee on Spanish ships and limits on Spanish imports

The $200,000 ship fee is a warning shot. The olive oil and tile list is the real threat. The US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has proposed a $200,000 fee every time a Spanish-flagged ship enters a US port. It has also proposed limits on five Spanish import categories worth about $3.1bn in 2025. This follows Spain turning away US-flagged Maersk ships in November 2024. Few Spanish-flagged ships call at US ports, the FMC says, so the fee alone will not hurt much in our view. The cargo list would: olive oil at $836.9m, ceramic tiles at $523.7m, perfume, stone and confectionery. Comments close 14 December. Our call is that importers will pull Spanish orders forward through November and December.

Washington’s Spain fee is a warning shot. The cargo list is the part that would hurt
The US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has proposed a $200,000 fee every time a Spanish-flagged ship enters a US port. It announced the plan on Wednesday 14 October. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on 15 October as Docket FMC-2026-0463. It also proposes limits on Spanish imports in five tariff chapters. gCaptain puts the 2025 value of those imports at about $3.1bn.
Our view is that the ship fee is a signal, not a weapon. Very little Spanish-flagged tonnage trades with the US. The import limits are the real lever. They land on olive oil, ceramic tile, natural stone, perfume and sweets, which are some of the most regular Spain-to-US flows forwarders handle. If the rule goes through as drafted, carriers could refuse those bookings whatever ship they sit on. That is the risk to plan for now, not later.

What the FMC is proposing

The rule would create a new section of US federal maritime rules, 46 CFR Part 551. The fee wording is blunt. Proposed section 551.2(c) says: “A fee of two hundred thousand dollars is assessed each time a Spanish vessel enters any port of the United States from any foreign port or place.”
A “Spanish vessel” is defined as “a vessel registered under the Spanish flag, documented or registered under the laws of Spain.” That is a narrow target. The FMC’s own notice admits there are “relatively few Spanish-flagged vessels that call at U.S. ports.”
The cargo limits are wider. The FMC lists 2025 US imports from Spain by HTS code. HTS is the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, the code system that classifies every imported product. The figures, all from the Federal Register notice, are:

Chapter 15, oils and fats: $1.15bn, of which olive oil (15.09) is $836.9m.

Chapter 33, perfumery and cosmetics: nearly $940m, of which perfumes and toilet waters are nearly $700m.

Chapter 69, ceramics: $634.7m, of which ceramic tiles (69.07) are $523.7m.

Chapter 68, articles of stone: $270.6m.

Chapter 17, sugar and confectionery: $138.8m.

Two larger product lines are left off on purpose: retail medicines (30.0490) and static converters and transformers (85.0440). The FMC says each passed $1bn in imports in 2023 to 2025. In our reading, Washington chose goods it can live without and avoided ones that would hurt US buyers.
Enforcement is where forwarders should look closely. Under proposed section 551.2(e), the FMC could ask the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to “Deny entry for purpose of oceanborne trade” or to “Detain” a designated Spanish vessel. The notice extends that to vessels carrying the covered goods. So a German- or Liberian-flagged box ship with Spanish olive oil on board could, in principle, be caught.
There is also a built-in escalator. If Spain retaliates, proposed section 551.2(f) says “the level of fee set forth in paragraph (c) of this section shall be increased” and “additional chapters of HTS goods shall be added to the definition of covered goods.”
Comments are due by 14 December 2026. The FMC is “providing an opportunity for Spain to request a hearing”. It relies on 46 USC 42101(a), which lets it act against foreign conditions unfavourable to US shipping, and 46 USC 41108(d).

How a 2024 port call became a trade case

The dispute goes back to November 2024. Two US-flagged container ships, the Maersk Denver and Maersk Seletar, signalled Algeciras in southern Spain. Both then turned to Tangier in Morocco instead. The Federal Register notice records Spain’s foreign ministry saying the two vessels “will not stop in Spain.” A third, the Maersk Hartford, rerouted to Morocco mid-voyage later that month.
These are not ordinary ships. All three belong to the US-flagged fleet of Maersk Line, Limited (MLL). The notice says “The MLL fleet is entirely enrolled in MSP and flagged in the United States”. MSP is the Maritime Security Program, run by the US Maritime Administration. The notice says its ships can serve as naval and military auxiliaries in a national emergency. Early reports, quoted in the notice, said the refused ships were “carrying cargo bound for or coming from Israel.”
Spain’s defence, as the FMC summarises it, is that its law requires it to “prevent the transit of defense and dual-use goods through its ports.” The notice also points to a September 2025 Politico report headlined “Spain Imposes Permanent Weapons Embargo on Israel.” gCaptain reports that Spain says its measures comply with Spanish, EU and international law and do not discriminate by flag. The FMC rejected that argument. It says it found “conclusive evidence” that Spain’s restrictions forced US-flagged ships to divert.
The FMC’s numbers on that point are stark. Before November 2024, MLL averaged 7.25 port calls a month in Spain. In 2026 there have been “only six visits.” Since July 2025, MLL calls at Algeciras have almost stopped, while calls at Tangier average 4.17 a month.

Softer than December’s draft, but wider

This is a step down in price from last winter. On 19 December 2025, Maritime Executive reported that the FMC was seeking comment on fines of “up to approximately $2.3 million per voyage on Spanish-flagged vessels.” Baird Maritime puts the statutory ceiling at $2,364,503 per voyage.
The new figure is less than a tenth of that. The FMC says it pegged the $200,000 to its last case of this kind, adjusted for inflation. In that case, the notice says, “the Commission imposed a $100,000 fee per-voyage on vessels operated by Japanese carriers” in a 1997 final rule.
We read the lower fee and the new cargo list as a change of tactic. A huge fee on a handful of ships makes a headline but moves little money. Limits on $3.1bn of Spanish exports put pressure on Spanish farmers, tile makers and perfume houses, who have a direct line to Madrid. That pressure is the point.

What happened last time

The Japan precedent is worth recalling, because it shows how these cases tend to end. On 4 September 1997, the FMC imposed fines of $100,000 per voyage on three Japanese lines: NYK Line, Mitsui O.S.K. Line and K Line. That is according to The Virginian-Pilot of 18 October 1997. The lines did not pay $4m in fines when they fell due. The FMC then approved an order to bar their ships from US ports and seize those already in port.
The order never bit. US and Japanese negotiators announced an agreement in principle on Friday 17 October 1997, hours before the ban was due to start. The FMC suspended it. US negotiator Stuart Eizenstat called it a “breakthrough which we hope will lead to meaningful reform of these restrictive, costly and prohibitive port practices.” An NYK Line executive, Jim Michalski, told the paper: “It’s definitely a relief.”
The lesson for us is that FMC remedies are built as leverage. They are meant to force a deal, not to be collected for years. The difference this time is that Spain’s position rests on an arms policy its government has made permanent and political. Japan’s 1997 harbour rules were a commercial practice it could reform. That makes a quick climb-down by Madrid less likely.

What it means for forwarders

Start with the cargo. Olive oil, tile, stone and cosmetics are regular Spain-to-US cargo, shipped as full containers and as LCL (less-than-container-load, where several shippers share a box). If the final rule keeps the DHS clause on vessels carrying covered goods, carriers will be wary of loading those goods for the US at all. Expect booking questions from lines well before any final rule.
Second, the timing. Comments close on 14 December. A final rule would come after that. US buyers of Spanish olive oil and tile have every reason to bring orders forward and land them while there is no restriction. We would expect firmer demand on Spain-to-US lanes through November and December.
Third, retaliation. On 15 October, El Estrecho Digital reported that a European Commission spokesperson confirmed Brussels is reviewing the US announcement and talking to Spanish authorities about its effects. Spanish government sources told the outlet Madrid’s response would be coordinated with the Commission and other member states. In our reading, any counter-move would most likely come through Brussels, not from Madrid alone. And under the FMC’s own draft, any retaliation would raise the fee and lengthen the cargo list.
Fourth, routing. The case has already pushed US-flagged calls from Algeciras to Tangier. If the cargo limits apply by origin, moving Spanish goods through Morocco will not get them round the rule. Forwarders should be careful with any client who suggests it.

Our call

We expect Spain to request the hearing it has been offered, and the EU to take the lead in responding, before comments close on 14 December. We expect US importers to pull Spanish olive oil and ceramic tile orders forward through November and December. We do not expect any limit on Spanish goods to be in force before the end of Q1 2027. As in 1997, the most likely outcome is a negotiated pause, not collected fees. But this time the talks will be slower, because the dispute is about arms to Israel, not harbour rules.

Sources