The recent victories of Democrats in both chambers of Congress during the midterm elections have sparked new discussions about the direction of U.S. maritime policy. This shift may affect tariffs, shipbuilding, the Jones Act, offshore energy, and military operations in the Middle East under the Trump administration.
With the elections resulting in a Democratic Congress, President Donald Trump will face increased challenges during the last two years of his presidency. This will allow lawmakers to better scrutinize administration policies, conduct investigations, and shape federal spending priorities.
For the maritime industry, this transition comes at a critical moment. The Trump administration has plans to revitalize American shipbuilding and grow the U.S.-flag fleet, while its trade policies and military tensions with Iran have created instability in global shipping.
On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance directly attributed the election losses to the ongoing conflict with Iran.
“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance posted on X.
The election raises questions about which maritime initiatives will receive bipartisan support, which may face more scrutiny, and how effectively the administration's plans can proceed without Congress's backing.
Here are some key shipping issues currently at play.
Iran and the Strait of Hormuz
One of the most urgent matters for the incoming Congress is the future of U.S. military operations against Iran, especially after Vance’s comments on the political impact of the war.
The conflict has significantly disrupted commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, with multiple attacks on merchant ships, restrictions on maritime traffic, and rising costs for tankers and war-risk insurance.
The U.S. continues to enforce a naval blockade against Iranian maritime trade, while Iran threatens and attacks shipping in the area.
According to Reuters, negotiations between Washington and Tehran to end this conflict remain stalled. Iranian officials demand the end of the U.S. blockade, relief from oil sanctions, and the release of frozen funds as conditions to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
With Democrats in control, Congress may intensify scrutiny on the administration's military strategy, the legal justifications for its continued actions, and the economic impacts of the ongoing conflict.
Congress also oversees defense funding, which could lead to measures that aim to limit military operations or demand further authorization.
However, Trump retains significant power as commander-in-chief, and any bill aimed at restricting military actions could face a presidential veto.
Tariffs and Trade Policy
Another major area likely to come under scrutiny is Trump’s tariffs.
The administration implemented broad import duties on U.S. trading partners, creating uncertainty in international trade and affecting cargo volumes, sourcing, and container shipping demand.
After a Supreme Court ruling in February invalidated some tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the administration shifted to relying on other trade authorities, including Sections 232 and 301, to maintain and expand its tariff agenda.
Democrats have expressed intentions to challenge these policies.
Senator Ron Wyden, a leading Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, has called for reversing tariffs on Canadian goods and restoring a more substantial congressional role in trade policy.
Congressional committees may investigate tariff exemptions, trade agreements, and the impact of import duties on U.S. businesses and consumers.
For shipping, this will have repercussions on containerized imports, agricultural and industrial exports, and supply chains that have already adjusted to previous tariff changes.
However, Democratic control doesn’t automatically remove existing tariffs. Trump still has the power to veto, and federal trade laws offer the executive branch considerable leeway to impose duties.
U.S. Shipbuilding and the Maritime Action Plan
The future of the administration’s Maritime Action Plan is another critical question.
Launched in February, this plan aims to rebuild U.S. commercial shipbuilding capacity, modernize shipyards, enhance maritime workforce training, and increase the number of U.S.-flagged vessels in international trade.
Several key proposals will need congressional legislation or funding, including incentives for shipbuilding, a Maritime Security Trust Fund, and financial support for American merchant ship construction and operation.
The administration also suggested a universal fee on foreign-built commercial vessels entering U.S. ports, based on the weight of the cargo imported. According to the plan, a fee of one cent per kilogram could raise around $66 billion over a decade.
Unlike existing measures targeting Chinese shipping, this proposal would apply to foreign-built vessels regardless of their country of origin.
How Congress handles the proposed fee, its revenue generation, and the maritime programs it would support remains uncertain.
At the same time, expanding the U.S. maritime industrial sector has garnered interest from both parties, especially due to growing concerns about China's dominance in commercial shipbuilding.
Legislation like the SHIPS for America Act and related proposals to grow the U.S.-flag fleet may continue on the legislative agenda, but their funding and execution could be hotly debated.
Navy Shipbuilding and Military Sealift
The change in congressional leadership will also impact naval construction and military sealift operations.
Congress is responsible for approving annual defense authorizations and appropriations, which include funding for warships, submarines, military support ships, and shipyard upgrades.
These decisions are becoming increasingly important as commercial shipyards expand into defense work, such as Hanwha Philly Shipyard’s recent shift to dual-use construction.
Congress may evaluate Navy procurement priorities, delays in shipbuilding, industrial capacity, and the balance between building commercial and military vessels.
The Maritime Administration’s Ready Reserve Force and other military sealift programs could face more scrutiny as well.
The recent activation of the National Security Multi-Mission Vessel Empire State VII for a confidential military mission raises questions about using maritime training vessels for defense purposes, particularly as the administration aims to increase the number of qualified merchant mariners.
Funding for the Maritime Security Program and the Tanker Security Program, which ensures access to privately operated U.S.-flag vessels for national defense, will also be subject to congressional decisions.
Jones Act Waivers
The Jones Act is another area where increased congressional oversight could directly affect domestic shipping.
This law requires cargo transported between U.S. ports to be carried by vessels that are U.S.-built, U.S.-owned, and U.S.-crewed.
While the law has long had bipartisan support, the administration's use of emergency waivers during the conflict with Iran has caused contention among maritime unions and domestic vessel operators.
The current waiver, which allows certain foreign-flagged ships to transport energy and other qualifying goods between U.S. ports, is set to expire on November 15.
Recently, nine maritime labor organizations have raised concerns about the waiver's legality, including adherence to reporting requirements and restrictions on using foreign ships.
Their letter, sent on October 27, was addressed to Democratic leaders in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, including Ranking Member Rick Larsen and Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee Ranking Member Salud Carbajal.
Both lawmakers stand to play more significant oversight roles under the new congressional majority.
China-Linked Port Fees
Proposed fees targeting vessels linked to China also face an uncertain future, even though they remain primarily under the executive branch's authority.
The U.S. Trade Representative suggested extending the current suspension of Section 301 maritime measures until January 9, 2027, while negotiations between Washington and Beijing continue.
These fees have drawn opposition from shipping firms, ports, agricultural exporters, and manufacturers who are worried about rising transportation costs.
Nonetheless, the issue crosses party lines. Some Democratic lawmakers support forceful trade measures against China’s maritime and shipbuilding sectors, while others are concerned about their economic ramifications.
Congress might revisit these fees as part of broader trade discussions or oversight, but the USTR would retain significant power over their application.
Offshore Wind, LNG and Energy Shipping
Federal offshore energy policy is another area where the new Congress could influence maritime investment.
The Trump administration has enforced policies that restrict offshore wind development, leading to permitting delays and legal challenges for East Coast projects.
Democratic lawmakers tend to back offshore wind initiatives, including the related investments in ports, shipyards, and specialized vessels.
Congress could leverage appropriations, new legislation, and oversight meetings to challenge federal permitting decisions and advocate for offshore wind infrastructure.
Still, the administration would keep substantial authority over offshore leasing and permitting.
Policies regarding oil and gas could also receive similar scrutiny from Congress, covering federal offshore drilling initiatives, LNG export approvals, and environmental regulations.
For shipping sectors, these decisions could impact demand for LNG carriers, offshore support vessels, wind installation ships, and other specialized marine assets.
Russia Sanctions and the Shadow Fleet
The election also raises questions regarding congressional oversight of sanctions, especially those targeting Russian oil exports and vessels involved in sanction violations.
Congress passed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act in September, which established additional sanctions and trade measures.
With Democrats in charge, Congress could investigate how the administration is implementing these sanctions, including licensing decisions, exemptions, and actions against vessels transporting sanctioned oil.
This issue has gained more importance following recent controversies over possible Russian oil imports into the United States.
For tanker operators, insurers, and traders, any changes in sanctions enforcement could affect vessel operations, cargo movements, and compliance obligations.
Coast Guard and Port Infrastructure Funding
Funding for maritime infrastructure and the U.S. Coast Guard may also change under the new Congress.
The Coast Guard is undertaking significant modernization efforts, including fleet updates, acquisition reforms, and new capabilities as part of its Force Design 2028 initiative.
Congress's appropriations will significantly influence funding for cutters, polar icebreakers, shore facilities, and maritime security operations.
Meanwhile, funding for federal port infrastructure and dredging projects will depend on decisions made by Congress.
The Maritime Administration’s Port Infrastructure Development Program and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers navigation initiatives may see alterations in funding priorities, environmental requirements, and project selection criteria.
Lawmakers could scrutinize the administration’s efforts to simplify the permitting process for maritime infrastructure, especially recent changes to the federal review process for deepwater ports.
Ocean Shipping Regulation and Emissions
The new congressional leadership might also reassess federal regulations affecting international shipping.
The Federal Maritime Commission regulates practices related to ocean carriers, encompassing issues like detention and demurrage fees, service contracts, and competition-related concerns.
Congress might revisit the implementation of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 or propose new measures related to carrier practices and protections for American exporters.
The policy on international shipping emissions is another area that could draw oversight attention.
The International Maritime Organization is set to resume negotiations on its proposed Net-Zero Framework shortly, following last year's postponed adoption.
The Trump administration has resisted proposed financial mechanisms for emissions within the framework.
Although the White House maintains authority over the U.S. stance at the IMO, Congress may question the administration’s approach and consider domestic legislation or funding related to maritime decarbonization, alternative fuels, and vessel emissions.