Iran is pushing ahead with contested Hormuz tolls as the wider conflict disrupts oil and container flows. Tankers are moving in the dark, while empty boxes pile up in the wrong places.
Lloyd’s List says the new body will approve transits and process payments, while a separate data analysis from the same outlet describes a de facto “toll booth” regime: vessels must submit documentation, obtain clearance codes, and accept IRGC-escorted passage through a controlled corridor.
For ship operators, the toll itself is only part of the problem. Any payment or formal clearance involving Iranian authorities — particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — could create sanctions and compliancerisks for companies operating inUS, UK, or EU jurisdictions.
Iran International, citing CNN, reported last week that Tehran has introduced new requirements for ships transiting Hormuz. Vessels are being asked to submit information ahead of passage as Iran moves to formalise control over the waterway, despite US objections.
Lloyd’s List goes further. Its analysis says documentation is routed through intermediaries to the IRGC Navy’s Hormozgan Provincial Command for sanctions screening and “geopolitical vetting.” Ships, the report adds, must use a designated corridor and secure clearance codes before passage.
The legal basis for all of this remains sharply contested. The Strait of Hormuz connects the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the wider Indian Ocean, and the principle of transit passage through international straits sits at the heart of global shipping law. Attaching clearance and toll requirements to that passage is almost certain to draw continued pushback from the US and other maritime powers.
Operational data shows the new system is taking shape even as ships continue to haul cargo out of the Gulf under dangerous conditions.On Monday, Reuters reported that three crude tankers had exited Hormuz with their trackers switched off. Reuters describes these “dark transits” as a growing effort to keep Middle East oil exports flowing while limiting exposure to Iranian threats. ADNOC and its customers have recently moved several tankers through the strait to clear cargoes stranded in the Gulf by the conflict.
An earlier Reuters report on 7 May noted that UAE crude was already being moved through Hormuz with tracking signals hidden, as buyers and sellers worked to keep shipments going despite the security risk.
The root cause is geographical: Asia–Europe services that avoid the Red Sea and the Gulf are now routed around the Cape of Good Hope, adding 10 to 15 days to transits compared with pre-crisis times. Every extra day at sea slows the cycle of unloading, emptying, repositioning, and reusing a box.
The result is a lopsided equipment balance — one that favours Asia and squeezes Europe. Containers arrive in European ports, get emptied, then sit in terminals waiting to be filled for the return leg. Meanwhile, carriers are scrambling to reposition empties back to Asia to meet Chinese export demand.
TrasportoEuropa reports that North European hubs such as Rotterdam and Antwerp were running at 75% to 85% yard utilisation in April 2026.
In Italy, vessels have had to wait three to five days during peak periods before entering an Adriatic port.
The Sogese report also flags a growing gap between benchmark freight rates and what shippers actually pay. The Shanghai–Genoa base rate sits at around $2,800–$2,900 for a 40-foot container, but war-risk and emergency surcharges on Middle East-linked routes can pile on another $2,000–$4,000 per unit.
The Cape route also burns up to 40% more fuel than the direct path. With oil prices still elevated, that extra fuel cost is being passed down the chain through energy surcharges and higher real transport rates.Diplomacy has not removed the risk
The political backdrop remains unstable: AP reported on Sunday that US President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s response to the latest US proposal to end the war, calling it “totally unacceptable.” On Friday, US forces fired on and disabled two Iranian oil tankers after an exchange of fire with Iranian forces in the strait.
The Guardian reported that Iran’s counter-proposal demanded the lifting of US sanctions, an end to the naval blockade of Hormuz, and a halt to the war. It also noted renewed drone incidents and continued concerns over secure shipping through the waterway.
That leaves shipping companies, insurers, and cargo owners juggling two overlapping risks: the physical danger of moving through a contested waterway, and the legal exposure of dealing with a clearance or payment system that Washington does not recognise.
