Iran Demands $2 Million Per Ship to Cross the Strait of Hormuz

DUBAI — Iran has begun charging commercial vessels up to $2 million per voyage to transit the Strait of Hormuz, Bloomberg reported on March 24, transforming the world’s most critical maritime chokepoint into a wartime toll road controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The ad hoc fee regime, confirmed by an Iranian lawmaker on state television, marks the first time a nation has imposed unilateral transit charges on an international strait in modern maritime history — and Tehran’s parliament is now drafting legislation to make the toll permanent.

The charges carry consequences far beyond shipping invoices. Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, has already lost access to approximately 60 percent of its pre-war export capacity through the Gulf since Iran closed Hormuz on March 2. If codified into law, the toll would enshrine Iranian control over a waterway that carries roughly 20 percent of global oil supply, rewriting the rules of maritime commerce in the Middle East and threatening the energy security of every Gulf producer.

What Is Iran Charging Ships to Transit the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran is demanding payments of as much as $2 million per voyage from commercial vessels seeking passage through the Strait of Hormuz, according to Bloomberg, citing people familiar with the matter. The fees are being collected on an ad hoc basis by the IRGC Navy, which has controlled access to the strait since declaring it closed to enemy shipping on March 2. The payment mechanism remains unclear, including what currency is accepted, and the charges do not appear to follow a systematic schedule.

Some vessels have complied with the demand. Lloyd’s List has tracked more than 20 ships using a newly established “safe corridor” running through Iranian territorial waters in recent days, with the majority Greek-owned but others Indian, Pakistani, and Syrian-flagged. At least one tanker is understood to have paid the $2 million fee, according to the Dupree Report, though it is not known whether all transiting vessels face the same charge.

Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi confirmed the toll on state broadcaster IRIB, stating that “collecting $2 million as transit fees from some vessels crossing the strait reflects Iran’s strength.” He added that “now, because war has costs, naturally we must do this and take transit fees from ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz.” The comments represent the most explicit official acknowledgment of what shipping industry sources had been reporting for days.

IRGC Turns Back Containership as Permit System Emerges

The toll regime became visible on March 24 when the IRGC Navy turned back a containership attempting to pass through the strait without authorization. The St. Kitts and Nevis-flagged container ship Selen, sailing from the United Arab Emirates toward Pakistan, was forced to reverse course at the entrance to the waterway after what the IRGC described as “failure to comply with legal protocols and lack of a permit,” gCaptain reported.

The incident underscored a shift in Iranian enforcement from a blanket closure to what Tehran now calls a “selective blockade.” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has stated that “for other countries, ships can pass through the strait,” while the waterway remains closed to nations Iran considers hostile — a category that includes the United States, Israel, the United Kingdom, and increasingly the Gulf Arab states that have aligned with Washington since the war began on February 28.

The selective approach builds on an existing financial blockade that predates Iran’s naval enforcement. As a separate analysis of the insurance market’s role in sealing the strait demonstrates, the withdrawal of war risk coverage by major P&I clubs within days of the war’s outbreak achieved the commercial closure that Iran’s navy could not.

Ships hoping to use the pre-approved corridor are expected to communicate extensive details about vessel ownership and cargo destination to the IRGC in advance of transit, according to multiple shipping industry sources. The requirement amounts to a registration system that gives the IRGC veto power over every commercial movement through the strait, a level of control that no single nation has exercised over Hormuz in the waterway’s modern history.

Iran’s Parliament Moves to Formalize the Toll Into Law

While the $2 million fee is currently being demanded on a case-by-case basis, Tehran is moving to make it permanent. Iran’s parliament, the Majlis, is actively reviewing a legislative bill that would require all nations using the Strait of Hormuz for the transport of oil, liquefied natural gas, food, and other commodities to pay tolls and taxes to the Iranian government, Maritime Gateway reported.

Lawmaker Somayeh Rafiei confirmed that parliament was advancing the proposal, which frames the levy as compensation for Iran providing security along the shipping route. The legislation would formalize what is currently an irregular IRGC revenue operation into a sovereign toll with a legal framework, fee schedule, and enforcement mechanism.

Iran’s Acting President Mohammad Mokhber has publicly endorsed the concept. In a statement reported by Iran International, Mokhber said one of the most important opportunities created by the war was the possibility of reshaping Iran’s role in the strait, stating that “after the imposed war, by defining a new regime for the Strait of Hormuz, Iran will move from being under sanctions to a powerful position in the region and the world.”

The ambition is explicit: Iran wants to convert a temporary wartime measure into a permanent source of revenue and geopolitical leverage. For Arab oil producers in the Gulf, that prospect is existential. Even an informal toll raises issues of sovereignty, precedent, and the potential weaponization of a vital trade route for their energy exports, according to analysts tracking the OPEC fractures caused by the conflict.

Which Countries Are Paying Iran for Hormuz Access?

Several countries are in direct negotiations with Tehran to secure passage rights for their vessels. China, India, Pakistan, Iraq, and Malaysia are all in talks with Iran, according to Al Jazeera, with each seeking bilateral agreements that would allow their flagged ships to transit Hormuz without interference.

India has emerged as the most publicly resistant to the toll. New Delhi dispatched four liquefied petroleum gas carriers through the strait in late March, and the Indian government has stated that international laws guarantee freedom of navigation through the waterway. India’s shipping ministry rejected reports of any levy, insisting that “no one can charge a fee for use of the channel,” according to NewKerala.

Japan was granted safe passage through the strait on March 21, when Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi announced that Japanese ships would be allowed to transit. The concession came after weeks of diplomatic pressure from Tokyo, which imports approximately 90 percent of its crude oil through Hormuz and had been among the hardest-hit economies since the blockade began.

China, which imported roughly 1.5 million barrels per day of Iranian crude before the war, appears to have secured the most favorable terms. Chinese-flagged vessels have been transiting Hormuz with minimal disruption since the selective blockade began, according to CNBC vessel tracking data, though the financial terms of Beijing’s arrangement with Tehran have not been publicly disclosed.

The emerging two-tier system divides the world’s shipping nations into those willing to negotiate with Iran and those locked out entirely. For Saudi Arabia — whose oil exports must either pass through Hormuz or rely on the limited capacity of its Red Sea port at Yanbu — the toll represents a strategic catastrophe that no amount of money can solve, because Tehran has classified the Kingdom as an enemy.

Does International Law Allow Iran to Charge Shipping Fees?

The toll faces significant legal obstacles under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. UNCLOS, which 168 states have ratified, enshrines the principle of “transit passage” through international straits. Article 44 states that countries bordering such straits “shall not hamper transit passage,” and the right cannot be suspended for any reason, according to a Lawfare analysis published in March 2026.

Iran, however, signed UNCLOS in 1982 but never ratified it — a distinction that sits at the center of Tehran’s legal argument. By not ratifying the treaty, Iran contends it is not bound by its provisions, including the transit passage regime that prevents bordering states from charging tolls or restricting access to international straits.

Legal scholars are divided on the argument’s validity. The European Journal of International Law published an analysis noting that many provisions of UNCLOS are considered customary international law, binding on all nations regardless of ratification. Transit passage through international straits falls into this category, according to the Just Security analysis, meaning Iran may be violating international norms even without being a formal party to the treaty.

The practical reality is that legal arguments carry little weight when backed by the IRGC’s fast-attack boats, anti-ship missiles, and sea mines. Iran has demonstrated the military capability to enforce its toll regime, and the international community has so far been unable to reopen the strait by force. The US Fifth Fleet, Royal Navy, and coalition partners have maintained a naval presence in the region, but commercial shipping through Hormuz has collapsed regardless.

Saudi Arabia and Gulf Producers Face Existential Threat

For Saudi Arabia, the toll is not a question of cost but of access. Tehran has classified the Kingdom as an enemy combatant, meaning Saudi-flagged or Saudi-bound vessels are excluded from the transit regime entirely. This has forced Aramco to redirect export operations to Yanbu on the Red Sea coast — a port that handles a fraction of the capacity that flowed through the Gulf before March 2.

Aramco has cut oil supply to Asian customers for a second consecutive month, according to Bloomberg, as the Hormuz blockade eliminated the Eastern Province export terminals at Ras Tanura and Jubail from operational use. The Kingdom’s east-west pipeline, the Petroline, can move approximately 5 million barrels per day to Yanbu, but this falls short of the 7.5 million barrels per day that Saudi Arabia was exporting before the conflict.

The United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar face similar constraints. All four nations export the majority of their hydrocarbons through Gulf terminals that depend on Hormuz access. Iran’s selective blockade has created a situation in which Asian importers can receive Iranian and potentially Russian crude through the strait, while Gulf Arab producers are shut out of their own export routes.

The disparity is stark. Iraq, which maintains diplomatic ties with Tehran, may secure transit access, while Saudi Arabia — the world’s largest oil exporter — remains locked out. The energy crises cascading through Asia and the developing world are a direct consequence of this asymmetry.

Hormuz Shipping Has Collapsed by 95 Percent Since the War Began

The scale of the disruption is unprecedented. From March 1 to March 23, commodities carriers made just 144 crossings through the Strait of Hormuz — a 95 percent decrease from peacetime levels, according to CNBC vessel tracking data. Before the war, the strait handled approximately 60 to 80 transits per day, carrying 21 million barrels of oil and significant volumes of LNG, petrochemicals, and containerized goods.

The collapse began on March 2, when a senior IRGC official confirmed that the strait was closed and threatened any ship that attempted to pass. Insurance underwriters immediately suspended war-risk coverage for Hormuz transits, and major shipping companies including Maersk, MSC, and CMA CGM rerouted vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding 10 to 14 days and an estimated $500,000 to $1 million per voyage.

The number of transits has increased slightly in recent days as Iran transitions from a blanket closure to the selective blockade model. CNBC reported that the number of vessels transiting has “nearly doubled” from its lowest point, but this still represents a fraction of normal traffic. The ships making the crossing are predominantly from nations that have secured bilateral deals with Tehran or are operating under informal arrangements with the IRGC.

The oil market has responded accordingly. Brent crude surpassed $100 per barrel on March 8 for the first time in four years, rising to a peak of $126 per barrel before settling around $114 in late March, according to OPEC data. The surge outpaced every previous conflict-driven price spike in modern history, including the 1973 Arab oil embargo and the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

What the Toll Means for Oil Prices and Global Trade

If Iran succeeds in formalizing the Hormuz toll, the implications extend far beyond the current conflict. A permanent fee on strait transit would create a new cost layer for every barrel of oil, every LNG cargo, and every container ship that passes through the waterway. Even a fraction of the current $2 million per-voyage charge, applied systematically, would add billions of dollars annually to global energy costs.

Shipping analysts at major brokerages have already warned that the “war premium” on Gulf oil will persist long after the last missile falls. Insurance rates for Gulf voyages have increased by 400 to 600 percent since February, according to Lloyd’s of London data, and underwriters are unlikely to reduce premiums even if the strait nominally reopens under Iranian toll control.

The toll also introduces a geopolitical sorting mechanism. Nations that maintain friendly relations with Iran gain cheaper access to Gulf energy, while those aligned with Washington face either permanent exclusion or punitive fees. This creates incentives for energy-importing nations — particularly in Asia and Africa — to maintain neutrality in the conflict or tilt toward Tehran, fracturing the coalition that the United States has tried to build against Iran.

The International Energy Agency warned on March 23 that the Gulf energy crisis already surpasses the 1970s oil shocks in severity. IEA Chief Fatih Birol noted that the simultaneous disruption of oil, LNG, and containerized trade through a single chokepoint had no historical precedent, and that the toll regime adds a permanent cost structure to what was already the most expensive maritime disruption in decades. Shipping companies face a grim calculation: pay Iran’s fee, reroute around the Cape of Good Hope at an additional cost of $500,000 to $1 million per voyage and 10 to 14 extra days at sea, or anchor indefinitely and wait for a resolution that may never come.

For Saudi Arabia, the strategic calculus is straightforward. Every day that Hormuz remains under Iranian control is a day that the Kingdom’s energy infrastructure depreciates in value. The Trump administration’s offer to “share” the strait with Iran was rejected by Tehran, and military options to reopen the waterway by force carry risks that no Gulf state is willing to accept unilaterally. The toll may be illegal under international law, but unless the world’s navies are prepared to enforce that law, Iran’s IRGC holds the gate.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much is Iran charging ships to transit the Strait of Hormuz?

Iran is demanding payments of up to $2 million per voyage from commercial vessels seeking passage through the Strait of Hormuz, according to Bloomberg. The fees are collected on an ad hoc basis by the IRGC Navy, and the payment mechanism — including currency — remains unclear. Not all transiting vessels appear to face the same charge, with terms varying based on bilateral agreements between Iran and individual nations.

Is Iran allowed to charge tolls on the Strait of Hormuz under international law?

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, ratified by 168 states, prohibits bordering nations from hampering transit passage through international straits. However, Iran signed UNCLOS in 1982 but never ratified it, forming the basis of Tehran’s argument that it is not bound by the treaty’s provisions. Legal scholars note that transit passage rights are widely considered customary international law, binding on all nations regardless of ratification status.

Which countries have secured transit access through the Strait of Hormuz?

China, India, Pakistan, Japan, Iraq, Malaysia, and Syria have either secured or are negotiating transit rights with Iran. Chinese-flagged vessels have experienced the least disruption, while Japan was formally granted safe passage on March 21. India has pushed back publicly against the toll, with its shipping ministry stating that no nation can charge fees for passage through an international strait.

How has the Hormuz closure affected Saudi Arabia’s oil exports?

Saudi Arabia has lost access to its primary Gulf export terminals at Ras Tanura and Jubail, forcing Aramco to redirect shipments through the Red Sea port of Yanbu. The east-west Petroline pipeline can move approximately 5 million barrels per day, but this falls short of the Kingdom’s pre-war export capacity of 7.5 million barrels per day. Aramco has cut oil supply to Asian customers for a second consecutive month as a result.

Could the Hormuz toll become permanent?

Iran’s parliament is actively reviewing legislation that would formalize transit fees on all nations using the strait for oil, LNG, food, and commodity shipments. Acting President Mohammad Mokhber has endorsed the concept as a way to reshape Iran’s role from a sanctioned state to a regional power. If enacted, the toll would represent the first permanent sovereign charge on an international strait in modern maritime history.