26th April 2025 – 2nd May 2025
LOCAL NEWS
1. The Propeller Club, Port of Limassol – AGM held on Tuesday, 29 April 2025 in Limassol
The Propeller Club of the United States, Port of Limassol, held its first Annual General Meeting (AGM) on Tuesday, April 29, 2025, at the Alasia Hotel in Limassol, bringing together key personalities from the Cyprus’ maritime sector. The event was attended by the Shipping Deputy Minister, Ms. Marina Hadjimanolis and Dr. Daniel Mangis, Chargé d’Affaires at the U.S. Embassy, who delivered the official welcome address.
The President, Mr. Polys V. Hajioannou, emphasized the significance of strengthening the U.S.–Cyprus maritime ties and attracting international investment. Mr. Hajioannou, once again underscored the critical importance of the “3rd Capital Link Cyprus Business Forum” that took place in April in New York City, in which our Union was the main sponsor. The aforementioned forum was described as a major success for both the political and maritime promotion of Cyprus. Therefore, according to Mr. Hajioannou, these kind of events should be held on a more frequent basis, thus strengthening both the Cyprus shipping presence in the international scene and the partner ties with the US.
The Secretary General, Dr. Loukas N. Barmparis led the official proceedings, which included the approval of financial statements, the re-appointment of auditors, and the re-election of all nine board members for a new two-year term.
The composition of the re-elected board is as follows:
President: Polys V. Hajioannou
Vice President “A”: George A. Tsavliris
Vice President “B”: Andreas Chrysostomou
General Secretary: Dr. Loukas N. Barmparis
Treasurer: Stavros Pantzaris
Board Members: Loukas Hamatsos, Marina P. Hajioannou, Costas Ioannidis, Riginos Tsanos
The AGM concluded with a keynote speech by Professor Emeritus George Prevelakis, who offered valuable insight into global geopolitical shifts. His speech, introduced by the Club’s Vice President A’, Mr. George A. Tsavliris, was followed by a lively Q&A session. The event came to an end with a cocktail buffet in the hotel gardens, offering attendees a chance to network. The Club reaffirmed its commitment to advancing the maritime sector through collaboration and continued engagement with industry stakeholders.
For more information on the event, please click here to review the relevant Press Release.
Related Article:
Attachment 1: Press Release - Propeller Club, Port of Limassol
INTERNATIONAL NEWS
2. Subject: Summary on the Port Fees announced by the Trump Administration
Further to our Union’s previous reports on the announcement of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) for the introduction of the new Port Fees Regime for vessels visiting US Ports, several media outlets and law experts have examined the content of the announcement, providing their opinion on several provisions of the new regime that may require clarification.
Following the more in – depth analysis of the provisions of the announcement, the main points can be summarized as follows:
Main Points:
Applicability: The fees apply once per vessel voyage (not per port call), with a limit of five charges annually per vessel.
Effective Dates:
- 17 April – 14 October 2025: No fees for any vessel (180-day grace period).
- 14 October 2025, onward: Fees are phased in annually through 2028.
Fee Eligibility: Primarily targets:
- Vessels built in China;
- Vessels operated or owned by Chinese entities;
- Foreign-built car carriers;
- Foreign-built LNG carriers (starting in 2030).
Fee Schedules (Annex I & II):
For Chinese vessel operators and owners:
- 14 Oct 2025 – $50/net ton;
- 17 Apr 2026 – $80/net ton;
- 17 Apr 2027 – $110/net ton;
- 17 Apr 2028 – $140/net ton;
Or, alternatively: - $120/container in 2025, rising to $250/container by 2028
Fees will be applied per net ton or per container – whichever is higher –.
For car carriers:
- Starting fee: $150 per Car Equivalent Unit (CEU) (from October 2025)
LNG carriers (Annex IV):
- Phase 2 begins in 2030 with a 1% fee, increasing to 15% by 2047
- Operators can obtain a 3-year exemption by ordering a U.S.-built LNG vessel
Exemptions and Special Provisions:
- Vessels under the following thresholds are exempt:
- ≤ 4,000 Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units (TEUs)
- ≤ 55,000 Deadweight Tons (DWT)
- Dry bulk carriers with individual capacity ≤ 80,000 DWT
- Exempt operations include:
- Great Lakes, Caribbean, and U.S. territories
- Bulk exports (e.g., coal, grain, wheat, soybeans)
- Vessels arriving in port empty or in ballast
Having the above in mind, bulk carriers are explicitly exempted when within the outlined capacity thresholds. Furthermore, all vessels that perform any of the above exempt operations (i.e. arriving in port empty or in ballast, exporting coal, grain, wheat, soybeans) are also exempted.
Remission Provisions:
Vessel owners who order U.S.-built vessels can apply for fee remission:
- Remission is based on net tonnage parity with the U.S.-built vessel
- If the U.S.-built vessel is not delivered within 3 years, fees become due immediately
Concluding, to determine fee liability for a bulk carrier calling at a U.S. port to load cargo:
- Date: No fees apply before 14 October 2025;
- Origin: If the vessel is not Chinese-built or operated, no fees apply beyond 2025 until 2030;
- Capacity: Bulk carriers ≤ 80,000 DWT are exempt, regardless of origin;
- Cargo Type: Bulk exports like coal, grain, and soybeans are exempt.
Thus, in most cases, bulk carriers calling to load cargo in the U.S. are excluded from the port fees under the current notice.
Questions and Uncertainties
- Who is considered the operator of the Vessel? When is there a Chinese “operator”?
Vessel Operator: According to Annex I of the Notice (pg.29), the term “vessel operator” means the entity which is identified as the operator of the vessel and whose name would appear on the Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement (U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form 1300) or its electronic equivalent.
Rather than defining the term “operator,” the USTR Notice cross-references CBP Form 1300, which refers, in the instructions for which party should be identified as the operator in the form, to the operator listed on the Certificate of Financial Responsibility (“COFR”) under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
The Link to CBP Form 1300 can be found below:
The Links to the COFR can be found below:
Certificate of Financial Responsibility (COFRs)
The Link to the COFR Regulations can be seen below:
The COFR regulations generally define an “operator” as “a responsible party who conducts, or has responsibility for, the operation of a vessel.” However, according to an opinion by Watson, Farley & Williams, where there are multiple operators, the parties can generally agree to designate any such responsible party as the operator listed on CBP Form 1300. This may be a factor in deciding which party to designate where there are multiple potential “operators” (e.g., owner, charterer, technical manager) some of which are Chinese and some of which are not.
- Who is considered the owner of the Vessel? Who is the “owner” in a Chinese lease financing?
Vessel owner: As can be seen in Annex I of the Notice (pg.29), the term “vessel owner” means the entity which is identified as the owner of the vessel and whose name would appear on the Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement (CBP Form 1300) or its electronic equivalent.
CBP Form 1300 does not include any definition of “owner.” In a Chinese lease financing, a special purpose vehicle (when organized outside China) owned or controlled by a Chinese leasing company will be the nominal owner of the vessel and will lease (by means of a bareboat charter) the vessel to the lessee. However, the lessee is considered the beneficial owner of the vessel, in that the lessee typically retains the economic burdens and benefits of the vessel, and the vessel is recorded on the lessee’s balance sheet for accounting purposes. According to Watson, Farley & Williams, it seems clear that the action would not extend fees to a vessel that is not otherwise Chinese-related, but financed by means of a traditional vessel mortgage-backed loan from a Chinese bank, despite the fact that a loan transaction is economically similar to a finance lease.
A past opinion of Watson, Farley and Williams, which can be found below, can be useful in determining the owner of the vessel in such cases.
Ship leasing – risk of reclassification in US proceedings - Watson Farley & Williams
According to the above-mentioned opinion, United States law adopts a ‘substance over form’ approach to whether a transaction is, as it is described, a lease or whether it is really a financing. This is embodied in the Uniform Commercial Code (‘UCC’) § 1-203, which has been adopted in similar form by all States, including New York, which is the source of law under which finance leases are recharacterised as loans.
This statute requires a US court to apply the so-called ‘bright line’ or ‘residual value’ test to determine whether a lease is a disguised financing. The first limb of analysis requires determining whether the consideration the lessee is required to pay the lessor for the right to use or possess the asset is an obligation for the term of the lease and is not subject to termination by the lessee, in the sense that the lessee essentially has a right to walk away. Any lessee purchase option is significant, as set out below. If that limb is satisfied, the court goes on to consider whether any one of the following factors are also present: (i) the lease term equals or exceeds the asset’s remaining economic life; (ii) the lessee is bound to become the owner of the asset or renew the lease for the remaining economic life of the asset; (iii) the lessee has an option to extend the lease for no or below market value consideration; or (iv) the lessee has an option to purchase the asset for no or below market value consideration.
Having the above in mind, subject to the term of the lease agreement, the lessor would not be treated as owner of the asset but rather as a creditor, and the lessee is considered the owner of the Vessel.
The announcement can be read in its entirety below:
301 Ships - Action FRN 4-17.pdf
3. European Commission adopted Amendment to VTMS Directive
On 28 April 2025, the European Commission published in the Official Journal of the EU an amendment to the Vessel Monitoring Directive (VTMIS – 2022/59/EC). This amendment introduces a new Delegated Directive updating the reporting obligations under both existing and future Mandatory Ship Reporting Systems (MRS).
The Delegated Directive is part of the Commission’s efforts to address shadow fleet activity and protect the Member States’ coastlines from environmental damages.
The Directive introduces a targeted amendment of point 4.X of Annex I to the VTMIS Directive which refers to reporting obligations under article 5 of the Directive. To recall, Article 5 requires Members States that are operating an area of mandatory ship reporting systems established under SOLAS Regulation 11 (V) to take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure that all ships entering the area comply with the reporting requirements.
The targeted amendment introduces the following reporting obligation under point 4.X:
- one or more insurance certificates issued by its provider and carried on board the ship, providing evidence of existence of insurance for maritime claims in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2009/20/EC, as well as civil liability certificates issued in accordance with:
- the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992, as amended (1992 Civil Liability Convention);
- the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 (2001 Bunkers Convention); and
- the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks, 2007 (2007 Nairobi WRC).
Member States are therefore allowed to require vessels sailing through MRS areas (without necessarily calling at port) to provide insurance information as above. However, according to ECSA’s informally statement, this amendment does not automatically amend the individual regulations that establish MRS areas in Member States waters, as this is an IMO responsibility.
Member States have 6 months to transpose the Directive into national law.
Following this amendment, the European Commission and Member States have also submitted a proposal to the IMO seeking an amendment to several existing Mandatory Ship Reporting Systems (MRS) in and around the European coastal States. The amendments will be discussed during the next Sub-committee on Navigation, Communications and Search and Rescue (NCSR) of IMO in May.
Members can find the Commission’s submission, attached. Please note that the document includes the list of MRS areas concerned.
Please tab here, for the adopted text.
Related Articles:
Attachment 2: ECSA C-14237 For information | ECSA SPC | European Commission adopted Amendment to VTMS Directive
Attachment 3: NCSR- EC Amendment of existing mandatory ship reporting systems
4. US TREASURY REPORT
The US Treasury Report for all actions reported is hereby attached.
Related Article:
Attachment 4: US Treasury Report for week 26/04/2025 – 02/05/2025
5. PIRACY REPORT
The Piracy Report for all actions reported is hereby attached.
Related Article:
Attachment 5: Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) Report, for the period between 02/04/2025 – 30/04/2025
Nothing important to report from the IMO, ILO and the House of Representatives.