President Trump Made The Right Decision Opposing Any Fee To Strait of Hormuz Transit

Will Mitola  |   April 13, 2026

Club for Growth President David McIntosh issued the following statement in support of President Donald J. Trump’s opposition to Iran collecting any fee for transiting the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump wrote on Trust Social, “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! President DONALD J. TRUMP”

“President Trump knows that allowing Iran to collect a fee for safe transit of the Strait of Hormuz would be expensive and set a dangerous new precent. We thank President Trump for his clear and concise opposition to a clearly misguided policy. The imposition of a $2 million fee per ship transiting the Strait of Hormuz would completely breaks the principle of free trade and free navigation across the open seas, which America has defended for decades as a cornerstone of global commerce and stability. AnyThis fee would impose a huge new tax on Americans and the world. And it would invite copycat shipping tolls in other strategic chokepoints, including the Strait of Malacca – one of the world’s busiest and most strategically important maritime corridors.”¹

BACKGROUND

A $2 million per-ship Hormuz transit fee would likely add about $1 per barrel on a large crude tanker and as much as $2 per barrel on a mid-sized cargo, against roughly 20 million barrels per day of crude oil and oil products that transited the Strait of Hormuz in 2025.² That implies a potential Iranian take of roughly $7 billion to $15 billion a year, depending on vessel mix and pass-through assumptions. Even at the low end, that would be more than four times the Obama administration’s $1.7 billion cash settlement with Iran in 2016; at the high end, it would be nearly nine times as large.³

Americans would feel the consequences quickly. A roughly $1 to $2 per barrel increase in crude translates into about 2.4 to 4.8 cents per gallon before any additional refining, shipping, insurance, or broader market risk premiums are added.⁴ That direct fuel impact would be only the beginning. In March 2026, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said near-term inflation expectations had risen in recent weeks, likely reflecting the substantial rise in oil prices caused by supply disruptions. The International Energy Agency has also warned that disruptions through Hormuz affect not only oil and gas, but also fertilizer, aluminum, chemicals, and wider industrial supply chains, raising costs across transportation, food production, manufacturing, packaging, and construction.⁵

If the world accepts a toll regime in Hormuz, other governments will be encouraged to try the same tactic in other strategic shipping chokepoints. Once the principle of free passage is weakened, copycat shipping taxes become more likely and global trade becomes more vulnerable to political extortion. The open seas cannot become a toll road for rogue regimes.¹

Claims that such revenues would merely help “rebuild infrastructure” should not be accepted at face value. Money is fungible. A large new revenue stream for Tehran would ease fiscal pressure on the regime and could free resources for military reconstitution, proxy activity, or nuclear-related work. That risk is not abstract: the IAEA reported in February 2026 that it still could not conclude there had been no diversion of declared nuclear material from peaceful activities at some Iranian facilities, and Reuters reported on April 8, 2026, that Iran still held a large stockpile of highly enriched uranium that remained a central concern in current negotiations.⁶

There is also a monetary and sanctions angle. Recent reporting indicates that Iran has explored or demanded some toll-related payments in cryptocurrency or Chinese yuan, which would make sanctions enforcement harder and reduce transparency into the flows. A forced non-dollar Hormuz toll would not end dollar dominance overnight, but it would create a dangerous proof of concept: strategic energy flows can be taxed, settled, and intermediated outside the U.S. financial system. That is why the petrodollar argument is best framed not as an immediate collapse of the dollar system, but as a sanctions-evasion and de-dollarization precedent in one of the world’s most important energy corridors.⁷

The international community should join President Trump’s calls to reject this outright. Iran should not be rewarded for threatening global commerce, and American families should not be forced to pay more for gas, food, cars, housing, and everyday goods to legitimize a coercive toll on free navigation.

Endnotes

  1. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “World Oil Transit Chokepoints” (Mar. 3, 2026), describing the Strait of Malacca as the primary chokepoint in Asia and Oceania and the largest chokepoint in the world in terms of oil transit volume in 1H25; see also Asia Times, “US has left Malaccan states no choice but to charge tolls” (Apr. 9, 2026), as an example of the copycat-toll argument already being aired.
  2. International Energy Agency, “IEA Member countries to carry out largest ever oil stock release amid market disruptions from Middle East conflict” (Mar. 11, 2026), stating that an average of 20 million barrels per day of crude oil and oil products transited the Strait of Hormuz in 2025. The $7 billion to $15 billion range reflects a $2 million fee spread over representative tanker sizes and annualized across that flow level.
  3. The Obama administration’s 2016 settlement with Iran totaled $1.7 billion ($400 million in principal and $1.3 billion in interest). The comparison here is to that specific cash settlement, not to broader sanctions relief under the JCPOA.
  4. A $1 per barrel increase equals roughly 2.38 cents per gallon, and a $2 increase equals roughly 4.76 cents per gallon, using 42 gallons per barrel.
  5. Federal Reserve, Transcript of Chair Powell’s Press Conference (Mar. 18, 2026) (“Near-term measures of inflation expectations have risen in recent weeks, likely reflecting the substantial rise in oil prices caused by the supply disruptions.”); International Energy Agency, “New IEA report highlights options to ease oil price pressures on consumers in response to Middle East supply disruptions” (Mar. 20, 2026).
  6. International Atomic Energy Agency, NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran, GOV/2026/8 (Feb. 27, 2026), especially paragraphs 15-20; Reuters, “Iran has indicated it would turn over enriched uranium, White House says” (Apr. 8, 2026). This supports the point as a strategic risk, not as proof of a definite future Iranian decision.
  7. Incorporated from the user-provided Hormuz draft. On the broader monetary point, the Cleveland Fed notes that the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency by a wide margin; the Atlantic Council’s Dollar Dominance Monitor says the dollar continues to dominate reserve holdings, trade invoicing, and international transactions; IMF and Federal Reserve research similarly describe the dollar as the dominant currency in global trade pricing and reserves. Recent Reuters and Bloomberg reporting that some Hormuz toll-related payments may be sought in crypto or yuan supports the sanctions-evasion concern, but not a definitive claim that the global oil system is being broadly replaced overnight.