The Iranian parliament approves the fee law for the Strait of Hormuz, with officials stating that ships without Iranian authorization will no longer have free passage rights.

On Monday, the U.S. stock market’s midday trading session in Eastern Time on the 30th: Iran’s parliament has approved a bill to charge fees for the Strait of Hormuz, signaling that Iran’s control measures over this globally important energy corridor are becoming further institutionalized.

Against the backdrop of ongoing tensions in the Middle East, this move will inevitably make the market more highly alert to risks to oil supply and global shipping safety. After news of the Iran parliament’s approval of the bill came out, Brent crude futures held their gains of 2.3%, staying near $107.70.

Earlier on Monday this week, according to CCTV News, Aradin Broujedi, a member of Iran’s Islamic Parliament’s committee on national security and foreign policy, said that, given the current international security situation and external threats, Iran is seriously considering withdrawing from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and plans to implement stricter access and charging rules for vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

According to CCTV, Broujedi said that countries such as Turkey, Egypt, and Panama will charge passage fees for ships. “This is an internationally accepted practice,” and Iran, over the past several decades, has “offered discounts” to transit ships.

On Monday, the rollout of Iran’s related charging bill means that Iran is turning its previously temporary, informal charging practices into a legally effective institutional arrangement.

From “blocking threats” to a “charging system,” Iran’s strategy for the Strait of Hormuz is undergoing a key shift—from an extremely disruptive interruption to a “controllable but high-cost” passage model.

This means the global energy market is no longer facing a single risk of supply disruption, but a longer-term, more institutionalized era of geopolitical premiums: the route is still in operation, but costs are higher, rules are more complex, and political variables are stronger. Under this framework, the upside elasticity of oil prices and the market volatility center may be repriced.

Charging system rolled out: moving from “gray operations” to formal legislation

According to reports from Xinhua News Agency and other media, Iran launched a legislative process in late March, proposing to charge vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz to strengthen its “sovereignty, regulatory authority, and security assurance responsibilities” over the waterway.

At the operational level, the shipping industry has already felt the “prototype” of similar charges: some vessels need to submit navigation information to the Iranian side through intermediary channels, and even pay high fees in exchange for “safe passage.”

Now that Iran’s parliament has formally approved the related bill, this means the mechanism will be institutionalized, including:

• Vessels must obtain permission from the Iranian side in order to pass
• Pay passage and security service fees
• Accept stricter regulation of the waterway

According to CCTV News, Broujedi said Iran has paid enormous costs over the past decades to maintain the security of the strait, and in the future it will recoup the related expenditures through institutionalized means and strengthen regulation of the waterway. He said that as the relevant motions advance through parliament, vessels that have not been authorized by the Iranian government will no longer enjoy the freedom of passage in this critical area.

The Strait of Hormuz has become a core variable in the conflict

This policy upgrade is taking place as the Middle East conflict continues to intensify. Since the U.S. and Israel launched military strikes against Iran, the Strait of Hormuz once came close to a “de facto blockade,” with only a limited number of ships being allowed to pass.

As the only route connecting the Persian Gulf to the open sea, the Strait of Hormuz carries about 20% of global oil transport, and is indeed an energy “throat.”

Iran’s strengthened control and the introduction of a charging system essentially combine military and economic means. On the one hand, it increases fiscal revenue through charges; on the other hand, it strengthens the screening and control of shipping traffic flow, while also creating strategic leverage against Western countries.

The U.S. has already made clear its position against Iran’s “permanent control and charging” approach, highlighting the geopolitical sensitivity of this move.

According to Xinhua News Agency, U.S. Secretary of State Rubio said on Monday that the U.S. would never allow Iran to permanently control the Strait of Hormuz or set up a charging system, etc. Speaking during an interview with U.S. media that day, Rubio said the U.S. aims to achieve its military action objectives against Iran “within weeks, not months.”

Rubio said: “Trump favors diplomatic channels. These efforts at negotiation are still in their early stages. Some negotiations are underway, including through intermediaries.” He also said: “But we also have to be prepared for the possibility that negotiations fail.” Iran “is sending threats—about permanently controlling the Strait of Hormuz, establishing a charging system, and so on. That absolutely cannot happen.”

Legal and regulatory disputes: can international waterways be charged for passage?

Regarding the legality of charging, there are clear differences in views within the international community.

Iranian officials have likened it to:

• Turkey’s management of the Bosporus Strait
• Egypt’s charging fees for the Suez Canal

But some experts in international law point out that the Strait of Hormuz is an international waterway, and under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the “right of transit passage” should be ensured and substantive obstacles or discriminatory charges should not be imposed.

This dispute implies that shipping companies may face legal and compliance risks; paying fees could touch on sanctions-related issues; and refusing to pay would face safety risks.

Shipping and energy trade are being forced to weigh “security” against “compliance.”

Risk warnings and disclaimer terms

        The market is risky; investment should be done with caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, and it does not take into account any specific investment goals, financial situations, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article align with their specific circumstances. Investing based on this is your own responsibility.