By Tom Fairless
Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz is squeezing consumers and businesses around the world. But the costs of a new toll system demanded by Tehran would fall heavily on Persian Gulf states, economists say, suggesting that the U.S. and other world powers might have few economic incentives to oppose it.
Iran is pushing the U.S. to formally recognize its right to charge oil tankers a transit fee, potentially around $1 per barrel of oil, or as much as $2 million a vessel, as part of negotiations to end the war.
A tollbooth in Hormuz would violate international law and mark another step toward the fragmentation of global trade, analysts said. The strait is the primary export route for a nearly a quarter of the world's seaborne oil and one-fifth of the world's seaborne natural gas, according to Capital Economics. Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven advanced economies published a joint statement in late March calling for the immediate restoration of safe and toll-free passage.
President Trump, however, has sent mixed signals. He has referred to a potential tolling joint venture with Iran as a "beautiful thing" that could change global rules if it helps secure a long-term peace deal. But Thursday night, Trump said on social media: "There are reports that Iran is charging fees to tankers going through the Hormuz Strait -- They better not be and, if they are, they better stop now!"
Despite the U.S.-Iran cease-fire, the strait remains effectively closed by Tehran, said Sultan Al Jaber, the head of Abu Dhabi's state-owned oil company in the United Arab Emirates. Iran has told mediators that under that truce, it would restrict traffic in the strait to around a dozen ships a day and charge a toll for safe passage.
On April 7, the day before the cease-fire was announced, 11 vessels transited the strait -- four inbound and seven outbound -- down from more than 100 a day before the war, according to Windward, a maritime AI company. The next day, just four ships were allowed to pass, the fewest so far in April, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
Economists say that a $1-a-barrel toll would have little impact on oil prices or the world economy. Since oil is a globally priced commodity, producers in the Persian Gulf, such as Kuwait and the U.A.E., couldn't simply add a surcharge because in the longer term they compete with oil from regions that don't have to pay the toll, such as the U.S. That means Gulf producers would need to eat the cost.
This fact could make a toll more likely as an outcome of the cease-fire talks that are set to start this weekend, said Guntram Wolff, economics professor at Belgium's Université Libre de Bruxelles. "This could be the mother of all deals."
Gulf states would likely end up paying around 80% to 95% of the total cost of the tolls, or as much as $14 billion a year on oil shipments alone if the toll is $2 a barrel, according to Wolff's calculations. Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank in London, estimates that Gulf states might bear 80% of the costs of the tolls.
With tolls of $1 to $2 a barrel, the world oil price would rise by only around $0.05 to $0.40 a barrel, relative to the prewar level, calculates Wolff. That is a fraction of the rise of about $35-$40 a barrel since the beginning of the war.
Despite the cost, Gulf exporters might still favor a deal with Tehran on tolls since they would benefit massively from being able to transit the strait again.
"The marginal cost of production in many Gulf states is very low and in some cases below $20 per barrel," said Neil Shearing, chief economist at Capital Economics in London. "Even if the tax were borne entirely by producers, it would have only a limited impact on output decisions."
Hamid Hosseini, a spokesperson for Iran's Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Products Exporters' Union, said on Wednesday that Iran is collecting a tariff of $1 a barrel of oil for tankers passing through the key shipping lane and receiving the payments in cryptocurrency to ensure that they can't be traced or confiscated due to sanctions.
Hosseini said Arab exporters in the Persian Gulf would get preferential treatment to cross if they pay in China's currency. "If a buyer of crude from the Persian Gulf pays money for crude in yuan, that will help them pass Hormuz," he said.
The cost isn't the only consideration, however.
Approving a toll system for Hormuz would roll back the freedom of navigation that has been a bedrock of U.S. strategic global positioning for at least 150 years, said Jacob Kirkegaard, nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, D.C.
It would set a global precedent, potentially inviting countries around the world to impose similar fees on trade through global chokepoints -- a form of institutionalized piracy. Denmark, for example, could theoretically reimpose the transit tolls that for centuries were a principal revenue earner for the Danish crown, Kirkegaard said.
"This would very directly attack the basic underpinnings of global commerce," he said.
Toll revenues would also enrich Iran's regime by billions or even tens of billions of dollars a year, depending on their level. Tehran might later decide to significantly increase the fees, which could start to weigh on global output. Questions about the level of the toll could introduce a new source of geopolitical risk into global energy markets and the world economy. Meanwhile, Gulf states would likely invest in oil pipelines to bypass the strait.
Crucially, a Hormuz toll system would likely be opposed by China, a key ally of Iran. On March 31, China called on parties in a joint declaration with Pakistan "to restore normal passage through the Strait as soon as possible."
"The biggest trading nation in the world has no interest in going back to the 18th and 19th centuries now that its entire economy is predicated on exports," said Kirkegaard.
Write to Tom Fairless at tom.fairless@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
April 09, 2026 21:00 ET (01:00 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Comments