The report follows recent suggestions that a fee system could be managed to oversee traffic and fund the security of the Strait. However, analysts at Capital Economics argue that such a move would fundamentally alter international maritime law.
"The Strait of Hormuz is governed by the principle of 'transit passage' under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea," the report states. "Imposing a toll would essentially mean that Iran, or any managing authority, is asserting sovereign ownership over international waters. It shifts the Strait from a global common to a national asset."
The financial impact of a toll would be felt globally and almost instantly. According to Capital Economics. Since roughly 20-30% of the world's total oil consumption passes through the Strait, even a nominal fee would act as a global carbon tax, keeping energy prices artificially high despite the current drop in crude oil. Insurance premiums for tankers are already at historic highs. A toll would add another layer of operational cost, likely being passed down to the end consumer in the form of higher prices for goods.
The firm warns that allowing a toll in Hormuz could set a dangerous precedent for other strategic waterways, such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Malacca.
"If the international community accepts a toll in Hormuz as a price for peace, it risks a 'Balkanization' of global shipping lanes," says a lead economist at the firm. "We could see a future where global trade is taxed at every major chokepoint, adding billions to the cost of international commerce."
The timing of the report is crucial, as U.S. and Iranian delegations prepare to meet in Pakistan. While President Trump has mentioned "managing traffic" in the Strait, the technicalities of that management—and who pays for it—remain the most contentious points on the agenda.
