Saturday, October 31, 2026
The news that moves freight
Ocean Oct 31, 2026 · 7 min read

Grimaldi threatens to pull US ships over port fees

Grimaldi’s exit threat is a bid for January, not a goodbye to the US

On 30 October, the last day USTR was taking comments, Italian carrier Grimaldi Group told the US Trade Representative its American customers fear it could move ships out of US trades if the fee pause is not extended. It backed the proposed two-month pause, then asked for more: the Section 301 port fees on foreign-built vehicle carriers suspended permanently. Grimaldi says 86% of the cargo it carries in US trades is American exports or imports tied to US carmakers, gCaptain reported.

Section 301 is the US trade law USTR used to target China’s shipbuilding and maritime sector. The fees took effect in October 2025 and were suspended in November 2025 under a US–China trade deal. The current pause ends at 11:59 p.m. ET on 9 November 2026.

Our view: Grimaldi is not about to abandon the US. But it has said, on the record, that US car-carrier capacity depends on what USTR does next. That is the useful part for forwarders. The November date is close to settled. The January date is not.

What Grimaldi actually asked for

Grimaldi’s filing backed USTR’s proposal to extend the pause through 9 January 2027. It then went further. It asked for permanent relief from the fees “imposed under Annex III of the Section 301 action,” according to gCaptain. Annex III is the part of the action that covers foreign-built vehicle carriers. These are the ships that carry cars, trucks, tractors and other rolling cargo, often called RoRo (roll-on, roll-off) or PCTCs (pure car and truck carriers).

The company leaned hard on how American its cargo is. It reported “nearly 985,000 tons of U.S. exports” and 1.31 million tons of imports over the past three years, gCaptain reported. “According to Grimaldi, 74.7% of its U.S. import volume consisted of cargo belonging to American automakers,” the outlet wrote. In Grimaldi’s own words: “Few shipping lines have such a high percentage of American cargo.”

Then came the warning. “Many of our American customers have expressed concern at the thought of Grimaldi redeploying its ships out of US trades,” the filing said. Grimaldi also said it hopes “no insurmountable roadblocks will be put in our way.”

The argument is aimed squarely at USTR’s stated goals. A fee meant to hit China, Grimaldi is saying, lands on cargo owned by Detroit and on American exporters.

What the fee costs, and when it could come back

The Annex III fee is $46 per net ton for non-US-built vehicle carriers, according to insurer Skuld. Net tonnage is a measure of a ship’s cargo-carrying volume, not its weight. Skuld also notes that “Annex III fees will be charged up to five times per calendar year, per vessel,” and that the fee must be paid by the vessel operator at or before the first US port on a string of calls. An earlier June 2025 proposal had floated $14 per net ton instead of $150 per car equivalent unit (CEU), Skuld said, but $46 per net ton is what was set.

The timetable is now tight. USTR’s notice proposes a new suspension from 12 a.m. ET on 10 November 2026 to 11:59 p.m. ET on 9 January 2027, according to law firm Holland & Knight. Comments closed at 5 p.m. ET on 30 October under docket USTR-2026-0694. When gCaptain published the Grimaldi story, the extension had not been finalised.

Holland & Knight is blunt about what happens without it: “Absent further action, the port fees on maritime transport services and related duties would otherwise resume.” Its advice is just as direct. Stakeholders “should be prepared for the possibility that the fees and duties could resume after January 9, 2027.”

USTR’s own reason for the extension, quoted by Supply Chain Dive, is to “allow for further negotiation with China regarding the acts, policies, and practices at issue in this investigation.” In other words, the pause is a negotiating tool. It is not a ruling on whether the fees are fair to European car-carrier operators.

Grimaldi is not alone, and the other side is pushing too

Grimaldi’s filing follows similar concerns from Atlantic Container Line (ACL), gCaptain reported. ACL runs combination ships that carry containers and rolling cargo across the North Atlantic. Its complaint is that “ACL’s unique ships were mistakenly classified by USTR as vehicle carriers even though only 1% of its cargo is automobiles.” ACL’s CEO said: “Our largest US container and heavy machinery customers were panicking that we would redeploy our ships out of the US trade to the booming China trade.”

That last line matters for forwarders who never touch a car. ACL’s point is that the vehicle-carrier label catches ships that move heavy machinery, project cargo and containers too. If the fee returns, the cost lands on more than auto shipments.

There is pressure from the other direction. In June, Senators Mark Kelly and Elizabeth Warren urged USTR to restore the charges, and maritime labour groups also want the fees back, gCaptain reported. USTR is being asked to do two opposite things at once. That is why we do not expect a clean, permanent answer for car carriers in the next ten weeks.

Fleet plans point the same way

The day before Grimaldi filed, Wallenius Wilhelmsen, which runs about 130 vessels across 15 trade routes, ordered four 9,900-CEU dual-fuel LNG car carriers from China’s Jinling Shipyard, gCaptain reported. It holds options for four more in 2031 and four in 2032, worth about $1.5 billion if all are taken up. Deliveries start in mid-2030. Its chief operating officer for shipping services, Xavier Leroi, said the company wants “the capacity, flexibility and efficiency needed to support our customers well into the next decades.” Our read: the largest operators are still building in China despite the fee threat. They are betting the Annex III fee is either negotiated away or priced into rates by the time those ships arrive.

What this means for forwarders

Our view is that the risk is not in November. It is in the weeks either side of 9 January.

Here is what we would do now if we moved vehicles, machinery or project cargo on US trades:

  • Check sailing dates against 9 January. Any foreign-built vehicle carrier calling the US after that date could face the fee if the pause lapses. Bookings in late December and early January are where the exposure sits.
  • Read the surcharge clauses. Ask carriers in writing whether a fee restart would be passed through, how, and from which date. Get the answer before the booking, not after.
  • Do not assume every RoRo ship is safe because it is not Chinese. Annex III targets foreign-built vehicle carriers in general, not only China-built ones. ACL’s complaint shows how broad the label can be.
  • Have a backup for high-and-heavy cargo. If an operator does shift tonnage, as Grimaldi has warned it might, the gap shows up first on thinner routes and in export bookings. Flat-rack and breakbulk options on container lines are worth pricing now.
  • Tell shippers early. A carmaker or machinery exporter planning Q1 shipments should know the 9 January date exists.

We do not think Grimaldi will pull ships in the next few months. A carrier with 86% of its US-trade cargo tied to US carmakers does not walk away from that lightly. But the threat gives carriers cover to price the risk. That shows up as conditional surcharges: a fee that only bites if the government fee comes back.

Our prediction

Our prediction: USTR finalises the suspension to 9 January before 10 November. No material fees are collected from Chinese carriers for calls in November. If fees are actually collected on more than a handful of calls after 10 November, we were wrong, and forwarders should expect carrier surcharges to follow within weeks.

A second call, also ours: by mid-December, at least one major carrier will publish a conditional surcharge tied to a possible fee restart on 10 January.

A third call, on Grimaldi’s request: USTR will not grant a permanent suspension of the Annex III vehicle-carrier fee before 9 January 2027. If it does, the January risk for car carriers falls away and our second call becomes less likely.

Sources