Federal Maritime Commission — International Ocean Shipping Regulation

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is the independent federal agency that regulates international ocean transportation to and from the United States. Operating under the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. §§ 40101–41309) — substantially reformed by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA 2022) — the FMC licenses ocean freight intermediaries, oversees the rates and practices of ocean common carriers and marine terminal operators, investigates unfair shipping practices, and protects U.S. exporters and importers from discriminatory or unreasonable charges. The FMC regulates the 90% of U.S. trade that moves by ocean container — approximately $1.5 trillion in goods annually. Its jurisdiction is sharply distinct from the Jones Act (domestic waterborne commerce) and the Coast Guard (vessel safety): the FMC focuses on the commercial terms under which goods move on international ocean trade routes. The COVID-era port crisis of 2020–2022, which saw container shipping rates increase tenfold and demurrage/detention charges balloon as importers faced waits of weeks at congested terminals, was the political catalyst for OSRA 2022 — the most significant legislative expansion of FMC authority in decades.

Current Law (2026)

Legal Authority

• 46 U.S.C. § 40101 — Shipping Act applicability (applies to common carriers, marine terminal operators, and ocean transportation intermediaries in foreign commerce with the United States)
• 46 U.S.C. § 40103 — NVOCC exemptions (FMC may exempt NVOCCs from certain tariff requirements)
• 46 U.S.C. § 40501 — Tariff requirements (ocean carriers must file tariffs and charge only the rates on file)
• 46 U.S.C. § 41101 — Prohibited acts by carriers and terminal operators (prohibiting unfair or unjustly discriminatory rates or practices)
• 46 U.S.C. § 41105 — Unreasonable refusal to deal (OSRA 2022 addition: ocean carriers cannot unreasonably refuse to deal or negotiate with U.S. exporters or importers; cannot impose unreasonable demurrage or detention charges)
• 46 U.S.C. § 42301 — Foreign Shipping Practices Act (FMC may investigate and take action when conditions abroad disadvantage U.S.-flag carriers)

Key Mechanics

The FMC regulates international ocean shipping under an antitrust exemption framework: major carrier alliances (Gemini, Ocean Alliance, Premier Alliance) are exempt from U.S. antitrust law for joint vessel operations and port scheduling under the Shipping Act, but must file tariffs publicly, abide by non-discrimination rules, and comply with the FMC's conduct requirements. Ocean carriers and marine terminal operators must file rates with the FMC before charging them; shippers may negotiate confidential service contracts as an alternative to published tariff rates. NVOCCs (non-vessel-operating common carriers, i.e., freight forwarders acting as carriers) must be licensed by the FMC and post financial responsibility. OSRA 2022 added prohibitions on unreasonable refusal to deal, unreasonable detention and demurrage charges, and practices that disadvantage U.S. exporters — and gave the FMC rulemaking authority to define what "reasonable" D&D charges look like through 46 CFR Part 541. Civil penalties reach $50,000 per violation per day; the FMC can also deny access to U.S. ports for carriers that systematically violate the Act.

How It Works

The FMC's core function is ensuring that international ocean shipping — dominated by a small number of large global carrier alliances — operates on transparent, non-discriminatory terms accessible to U.S. shippers. Unlike domestic markets where many providers compete for business, the major ocean trade lanes are served by a handful of carrier alliances (Gemini Cooperation — Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd, replacing the dissolved 2M; Ocean Alliance — CMA CGM, COSCO, Evergreen, OOCL; Premier Alliance — successor to THE Alliance after Hapag-Lloyd's departure; plus MSC operating standalone) that collectively control the vast majority of global container capacity. The Shipping Act of 1984 granted these alliances an antitrust exemption for certain cooperative activities, including joint vessel operations and port calls — making FMC oversight the primary check on carrier pricing power.

Tariffs and rate transparency: Ocean carriers must file their rates (tariffs) with the FMC and make them publicly available before charging. Shippers can negotiate service contracts (confidential bilateral agreements with specific rates and commitments) rather than paying published tariff rates — but contracts must be filed with the FMC. NVOCCs (freight forwarders who aggregate cargo) must be licensed by the FMC and post financial responsibility.

OSRA 2022 significantly expanded FMC authority in response to the COVID-era shipping crisis. The law made it an unlawful practice for ocean carriers or MTOs to unreasonably refuse to deal or negotiate with shippers, impose unreasonable detention or demurrage fees, or adopt practices that disadvantage U.S. exports. The FMC gained new authority to issue regulations defining reasonable D&D practices, a new dispute resolution process (informal mediation through the FMC), and expanded civil penalty authority.

Demurrage and detention are the commercial mechanism by which carriers and terminals incentivize shippers to move cargo quickly: demurrage is charged when a container sits at the terminal beyond the allowed free-time period; detention is charged when an empty container is not returned within the free-time window. During normal operations these charges are modest and serve a legitimate traffic-flow function. During the 2020–2022 port congestion crisis, carriers charged massive D&D fees even when congestion (not shipper conduct) caused delays — a practice OSRA 2022 and Part 541 specifically targeted.

Implementing Regulations

The FMC's key implementing regulations live at 46 CFR Part 541 — Demurrage and Detention (billing requirements and practices), 46 CFR Part 532 — NVOCC Negotiated Rate Arrangements, and 46 CFR Part 555 — Actions to Address Adverse Conditions Affecting U.S.-Flag Carriers.

46 CFR Part 541 — Demurrage and Detention (Billing Requirements and Practices):

• § 541.1 — Purpose: establishes minimum required information on D&D invoices and procedures that must be followed when invoicing for D&D charges
• § 541.2 — Scope: applies to any invoice issued by an ocean common carrier (OCC), marine terminal operator (MTO), or non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVOCC) for D&D charges; does not govern billing between OCCs and MTOs inter se
• § 541.3 — Definitions: demurrage and detention are defined as any charges (including "per diem" charges) related to use of marine terminal space or shipping containers — key clarification is that freight charges are excluded; the definition applies regardless of what label a carrier uses for the charge (some carriers call them "storage" fees)
• § 541.5 — Failure to include required information: the most powerful provision — if the billing party fails to include any required minimum information, the billed party has no obligation to pay the charge; this creates a strong structural incentive for accurate, complete invoicing
• § 541.6 — Invoice contents: a compliant invoice must include: (1) bill of lading number; (2) container number; (3) port of discharge (for imports); (4) the basis for why the billed party is liable; (5) invoice date; (6) invoice due date; (7) allowed free time in days; (8) free time start date; (9) free time end date; (10) for imports, the container availability date (when the shipper could first pick up the container — critical for measuring when free time actually began running); (11) for exports, the earliest return date; (12) specific dates for which charges apply; (13) rate per day and total amount charged
• § 541.7 — Invoice issuance timing: the billing party must issue the invoice within 30 calendar days from when the charge was last incurred; if the billing party misses that window, the billed party owes nothing; NVOCCs acting as billing parties have 30 days from receipt of their own invoice; the NVOCC can notify its billing party of a disputed charge, triggering a response extension
• § 541.8 — Fee mitigation, refund, or waiver requests: the billed party has at least 30 calendar days from invoice issuance to request mitigation, refund, or waiver; the billing party must respond within 30 days; if a mitigation request is pending, the invoice due date is automatically extended until 30 days after the billing party's decision

46 CFR Part 532 — NVOCC Negotiated Rate Arrangements:

• § 532.1 — Purpose: exempts NVOCCs from the tariff rate publication and adherence requirements of the Shipping Act when they use binding written negotiated rate arrangements (NRAs) with individual shippers
• § 532.2 — Applicability: applies to licensed NVOCCs (46 CFR 515.3) or registered NVOCCs (46 CFR 515.19) with adequate financial responsibility
• § 532.3 — NRA definition: a written, binding arrangement between an NRA shipper and an eligible NVOCC covering specific transportation service, cargo quantity, origin, destination, time period (up to 12 months, renewable), agreed rate, and service conditions
• § 532.4 — Public rules tariff: before entering NRAs, the NVOCC must provide free, electronic public access to its rules tariff — which governs terms not covered by the NRA (liability limits, cargo requirements, etc.)
• § 532.5 — NRA requirements: the NRA must be in writing, signed by both parties, specify cargo type and quantity, origin and destination, commodity rates, and service conditions; the NVOCC may not divulge the NRA rate to other parties except as required by law
• § 532.6 — Notice: NVOCCs using NRAs must include a prominent notice in their rules tariff that NRAs may be entered
• § 532.7 — Recordkeeping: 5-year retention from completion of performance

46 CFR Part 555 — Adverse Conditions Affecting U.S.-Flag Carriers:

• § 555.1 — Purpose: implements the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988, establishing procedures for FMC to act when foreign laws or carrier practices disadvantage U.S.-flag carriers in foreign trade
• § 555.3 — Scope: FMC acts when foreign laws, regulations, or practices cause adverse conditions for U.S. carriers that do not exist for foreign carriers in the U.S.
• § 555.4 — Petitions: any person may petition the FMC to investigate adverse foreign conditions; petitions must identify the foreign country, the specific conditions, and how U.S. carriers are disadvantaged
• § 555.5 — Investigations: FMC may also self-initiate investigations; upon finding adverse conditions, FMC can take remedial action including requiring foreign carriers to pay fees or denying them port access

Part 541's container availability date requirement (§ 541.6) is the most practically significant billing reform from OSRA 2022. Under prior practice, carriers sometimes charged demurrage even before the shipper could physically access the container — because the terminal had not yet made it available for pickup. The rule now requires the invoice to disclose exactly when the container became available, allowing shippers to challenge any charges that accrued before they could act.

46 CFR Part 535 — Ocean Common Carrier and Marine Terminal Operator Agreements Subject to the Shipping Act of 1984:

The Shipping Act of 1984 grants ocean carrier alliances and marine terminal operators a limited antitrust exemption — allowing them to coordinate vessel operations, pool capacity, and fix rates — subject to FMC review and oversight. Part 535 implements the agreement filing and review process that makes this exemption conditional on regulatory transparency:

• § 535.201 — Subject agreements: Part 535 covers any agreement by or among two or more ocean common carriers, or between ocean carriers and marine terminal operators (MTOs), that involves: setting rates or charges; pooling cargo, revenue, earnings, or losses; sharing vessel space, equipment, or port facilities; controlling, regulating, or preventing competition; or interchanging containers or equipment with terms affecting rates. Conferences, vessel-sharing agreements (VSAs), vessel operating agreements (VOAs), and space charter arrangements between competing carriers all qualify — the defining test is whether the agreement eliminates or reduces competition that would otherwise exist
• § 535.202 — Non-subject agreements: the following are exempt from Part 535 filing and review: mergers/acquisitions (governed by antitrust law); intracorporate agreements; contracts purely for the purchase of goods; agreements for terminal and stevedoring services from non-carriers; agreements between ocean carriers and shippers (those are service contracts, separately governed)
• §§ 535.301–535.312 — Categorical exemptions: FMC has pre-approved certain agreement types that need not undergo individual review: husbanding agreements (a carrier appoints a port agent, no rate impact); agency agreements (administrative representation by another party); equipment interchange agreements (agreed terms for exchanging containers or chassis between carriers — the ubiquitous inter-carrier chassis pools are governed here); vessel charter parties (when a carrier charters another carrier's vessel on commercially available terms); low market share agreements (agreements among carriers whose combined market share on any trade is ≤35%); and certain marine terminal services agreements (standard port service terms at a single terminal)
• § 535.401 — Filing requirements: all subject agreements must be filed with the FMC's Bureau of Trade Analysis before taking effect; filing must include the complete text of the agreement plus any related contracts or understandings; oral agreements that have been reduced to writing must also be filed; carriers may not implement any provisions of an unfiled agreement
• § 535.502 — Information Form: agreements between ocean carriers affecting rates or capacity must be filed with an Information Form disclosing: the trade route covered, the combined market share of the parties, a description of the competitive impact, and information about vessel operations — this enables FMC staff to assess whether the agreement is anticompetitive
• § 535.601 — Preliminary review: FMC has 45 days from the filing date to complete preliminary review; if FMC does not act within 45 days, the agreement becomes effective automatically; FMC may reject the agreement (for facial statutory violations), request additional information (which extends the review period), or allow the agreement to become effective; agreements involving carrier conferences (which set rates collectively) receive more intensive review than simple vessel-sharing agreements
• § 535.604 — Waiting period: the standard waiting period before an agreement becomes effective is 45 days from the filing date; FMC may shorten the waiting period upon request (§ 535.605) if the parties demonstrate competitive urgency; FMC may also extend the waiting period by requesting additional information — the clock stops until the information is provided
• § 535.702 — Monitoring reports: carriers operating under effective agreements covering major trade lanes must file periodic monitoring reports with the FMC — reporting data on rates charged, cargo carried, and how the agreement operates in practice; this ongoing monitoring is the mechanism by which FMC identifies whether an initially approved agreement has become anticompetitive over time

Part 535 is the regulatory spine of the carrier alliance system. The major alliances (Ocean Alliance, Premier Alliance, the new Gemini Cooperation, plus MSC's standalone network following the 2M dissolution in early 2025) each filed their carrier cooperation agreements under Part 535 and have maintained them through periodic modifications as alliance membership changed. The 45-day automatic effectiveness provision means FMC's actual role is not pre-approval but conditional authorization with ongoing monitoring — the agency can challenge an effective agreement in court if it finds the agreement substantially reduces competition in any port-to-port trade, but the burden shifts to the agency to prove harm rather than to the carriers to prove benefit.

Recent rulemakings: 89 FR 79846 (October 2024) — FMC final rule updating the Information Form requirements to capture additional data on carrier capacity coordination practices following OSRA 2022's mandate to study carrier alliance market power.

• 46 CFR Part 550 — Regulations to Adjust or Meet Conditions Unfavorable to Shipping in the Foreign Trade of the United States (23 sections — the FMC's implementing rules for Section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, codified at 46 U.S.C. §§ 301–307 and 42301–42307; these regulations give the FMC authority to take retaliatory or corrective action against foreign carriers and foreign-government-controlled shipping when another country imposes conditions that discriminate against U.S.-flag vessels or create competitive disadvantages for American shipping interests):

  • § 550.101 — Purpose: declares that conditions restricting U.S.-flag carriers in foreign trade — whether imposed by a foreign government directly or through state-controlled shipping enterprises — are contrary to the national interest and subject to Commission action; the provision reflects Congress's longstanding concern that flag-state discrimination can effectively exclude U.S. carriers from trade lanes in which they are nominally entitled to compete
  • § 550.102 — Scope: the Commission may act on its own motion or upon petition from any person harmed by unfavorable conditions; the Commission may also act in response to a referral from the President, the Secretary of State, or the Secretary of Transportation — reflecting that shipping discrimination is often a diplomatic issue as well as a commercial one
  • § 550.301 — Definition of unfavorable conditions: conditions are "unfavorable to shipping" when they are created by foreign governmental action and (a) are inconsistent with the Merchant Marine Act; (b) place U.S.-flag carriers at a competitive disadvantage in the trade; (c) are discriminatory against U.S.-flag vessels or U.S. shippers; or (d) adversely affect the movement of U.S. oceanborne trade; the definition is deliberately broad — it covers foreign port fees applied only to U.S. vessels, cabotage rules that exclude U.S. carriers, cargo reservation schemes that guarantee a percentage of national cargo to state-owned carriers, and other national discrimination measures
  • §§ 550.201–550.203 — Production of information: the Commission may issue orders requiring any person (including foreign carriers serving U.S. ports) to provide information relevant to its investigation; failure to provide required information can itself result in Commission sanctions — denial of permission to operate in the U.S. foreign trade
  • § 550.401 — Petitions: any person who has been harmed by, or who can reasonably expect harm from, conditions unfavorable to U.S. shipping may petition the Commission for relief; petitions must identify the specific conditions complained of, the affected trade, and the nature of the harm; the Commission must respond within 90 days
  • §§ 550.501–550.510 (Subpart E — Proceedings): Commission Section 19 investigations are formal adversarial proceedings before an Administrative Law Judge; the Commission may compel testimony and production of documents from carriers; foreign carriers whose operating conditions are under review receive notice and an opportunity to respond; the ALJ issues a recommended decision that the Commission may adopt, modify, or reject
  • Remedies: upon finding unfavorable conditions, the Commission may issue orders (a) denying entry to specific foreign-flag vessels in the United States; (b) restricting the import and export of cargo on those vessels; (c) imposing fees on foreign carriers from the discriminating country; or (d) suspending tariff rates; these remedies are escalating — the Commission typically begins with fees and escalates to vessel exclusions for persistent violations; the threat of these remedies is often sufficient to prompt negotiated resolution through diplomatic channels

  Part 550 is used infrequently but represents significant leverage in U.S. bilateral shipping negotiations. Notable Section 19 proceedings have involved Chinese shipping practices, Brazilian cargo preference laws, and Argentine port access restrictions. The Commission's Section 19 authority was strengthened by OSRA 2022, which expanded the definition of actionable unfavorable conditions and directed the FMC to coordinate Section 19 investigations with USTR and State Department trade remedies.

How It Affects You

If you import goods by ocean container: Demurrage and detention charges are your primary practical concern with FMC regulation. If you receive a D&D invoice, immediately check it against the Part 541 requirements: the invoice must include the bill of lading number, container number, free time period, container availability date (for imports), the specific dates charged, and your basis for liability. If any of those fields are missing or inaccurate, you have no legal obligation to pay the charge under § 541.5 — send a written notice to the billing party identifying the deficiency. You also have at least 30 days from invoice issuance to request mitigation, refund, or waiver. Document all communication in writing. For larger D&D disputes, the FMC offers an informal mediation program at fmc.gov that is faster and cheaper than litigation.

If you are a freight forwarder or NVOCC: Your operations sit at the intersection of multiple FMC rules. You must maintain your FMC license (46 CFR 515) and financial responsibility filing. If you use negotiated rate arrangements with shippers instead of tariff rates, ensure each NRA meets the Part 532 requirements (written, signed, cargo/quantity/rate/term specified) and maintain the original for 5 years. When you receive a D&D invoice from a carrier and pass it through to your shipper client, you have 30 days from receipt of the carrier's invoice to issue your own invoice to the shipper under § 541.7 — missing that window eliminates your ability to collect. You can also notify the carrier that your shipper has disputed the charge, which extends the payment timeline.

If you export goods by ocean container: OSRA 2022 specifically targeted carrier practices that disadvantaged U.S. exporters — particularly unreasonable refusals to carry export cargo and cargo rollovers (bumping booked export cargo in favor of more profitable import repositioning). Carriers cannot unreasonably refuse to deal or negotiate with U.S. exporters (46 U.S.C. § 41105). If you experience systematic refusal to carry export cargo or repeated cargo rollovers, this is potentially an OSRA 2022 violation you can report to the FMC. Detention charges for export containers are also covered by Part 541 — the invoice must disclose the earliest return date for empty containers.

If you are a U.S. ocean carrier in international trade: The Foreign Shipping Practices Act (Part 555) gives you a pathway when foreign ports or governments impose practices on your vessels that do not apply to foreign carriers serving U.S. ports. File a petition with the FMC identifying the specific country, the adverse practice, and the quantified disadvantage. The FMC's ability to impose fees or deny port access to the offending carriers gives the U.S. a reciprocal leverage tool in shipping trade disputes.

State Variations

The FMC's jurisdiction preempts state regulation of ocean carrier rates, practices, and tariffs in foreign commerce. States cannot impose conflicting requirements on ocean carriers' tariff terms or D&D practices. However, state consumer protection laws may apply to port agents and freight intermediaries, and some states have enacted laws protecting importers in specific contexts (California has addressed port congestion-related issues through its Air Resources Board and port authority agreements).

46 CFR Part 520 — Carrier Automated Tariff Systems:

Ocean common carriers (OCCs) and conferences must publish all rates, rules, and charges in FMC-compliant automated tariff systems before applying them to any shipment — a digital extension of the Shipping Act's foundational principle that carriers must charge only the rates on file.

• § 520.3 — All OCCs and conferences operating in U.S. foreign trade must publish their tariffs through an automated tariff system accessible to the public at no charge; a carrier may not assess a rate, charge, or rule not on file in the system at the time of shipment; the on-file-first rule is the bedrock transparency requirement that prevents carriers from demanding rates that shippers had no opportunity to review
• § 520.4 — Tariff contents: each tariff must disclose the geographic scope of service (ports and ranges served), all applicable rates and surcharges (including fuel surcharges, port congestion surcharges, peak season charges), commodity classifications, free time allowances, rules governing cargo acceptance and liability, and any rate adjustment mechanisms; surcharges must be described with the basis for their assessment
• § 520.5 — Standard terminology: FMC has established uniform terminology and geographic scope codes for tariff systems to allow shippers to compare rates across carriers; carriers must use the FMC's approved port and range codes when specifying geographic scope
• § 520.10 — Historical data retention: tariff data must be retained in accessible form for 5 years from the tariff's expiration date; tariff data, once effective, is immutable — carriers cannot retroactively alter historical tariff records; this immutability rule is the enforcement foundation, allowing FMC investigators to reconstruct what rate was on file at the time of a specific shipment
• § 520.11 — NVOCC financial responsibility: NVOCCs that publish tariffs (rather than using NRAs under Part 532) must maintain on file with the FMC a financial responsibility instrument — either a surety bond, club P&I letter of undertaking, or evidence of self-insurance; the financial responsibility requirement protects shippers if the NVOCC defaults on its obligations
• § 520.12 — Time/volume rates: carriers may offer rates conditioned on a minimum volume over a specified period (time/volume rates, or TVRs); TVRs must be published in the automated tariff system like any other rate; TVRs allow carriers to offer volume discounts in the tariff system without entering individual service contracts — a middle option between pure published rates and bilateral service contracts
• § 520.14 — Special permission: FMC may grant special permission for a carrier to implement a rate change outside normal tariff amendment procedures, or on shorter notice than the standard 1-day filing period; special permission petitions must demonstrate necessity (e.g., emergency surcharges, disaster response)

Part 520 is the structural backstop for the FMC's tariff transparency mission. The automated system requirement replaced the pre-digital era paper tariff filings with a searchable, publicly accessible online system — but the underlying principle (you can only charge what's on file) is unchanged from the original Shipping Act. The 5-year immutability requirement has proven critical in enforcement proceedings, allowing FMC investigators to establish what rate applied to a disputed historical shipment with certainty.

46 CFR Part 565 — Controlled Carriers:

When an ocean common carrier is owned or controlled by a foreign government, it poses a distinct competitive risk: the government owner can absorb below-cost rates indefinitely to capture market share or advance geopolitical interests, behavior that private competitors cannot match. Part 565 subjects these controlled carriers to heightened FMC rate scrutiny.

• § 565.2 — Definition: a "controlled carrier" is an ocean common carrier operating in U.S. foreign trade that is directly or indirectly owned or controlled by a foreign government; control means ownership of a majority of voting shares, the right to appoint a majority of directors, or any other arrangement that gives a government effective dominance over carrier decisions; China COSCO Shipping, for example, is a controlled carrier because of PRC government majority ownership
• § 565.3 — FMC classification: the FMC maintains a list of controlled carriers; FMC notifies a carrier when it is classified as controlled; classification triggers the heightened rate review requirements of the Part; carriers may petition for reclassification if ownership or control structures change
• § 565.5 — Exceptions: carriers from nations with which the U.S. has negotiated open competition bilateral shipping agreements are exempted from controlled carrier scrutiny if the agreement provides reciprocal access for U.S. carriers on equal terms; these agreements reflect a policy judgment that reciprocal open competition eliminates the predatory pricing risk that justifies heightened review
• § 565.6 — Just and reasonable rate standard: controlled carriers may not maintain rates that are below a just and reasonable level — meaning rates that are below the carrier's actual costs of transportation, including a reasonable profit; this cost-based floor prevents controlled carriers from using government subsidies to price U.S. private carriers out of trade lanes; the just and reasonable standard is unique to controlled carriers — ordinary OCCs can price as low as the market allows
• § 565.7 — Waiting period: controlled carrier rate filings have a 30-day waiting period before they become effective, compared to the standard 1-day waiting period for ordinary carriers; the extended waiting period gives the FMC time to review new rates before they take effect and potentially harm competitors — unlike ordinary carriers where rates are presumed acceptable until challenged
• § 565.8 — Special permission: a controlled carrier may petition the FMC for special permission to implement a rate on shorter notice than the 30-day period; the FMC grants special permission only when the carrier demonstrates that the rate meets the just and reasonable standard and that immediate implementation is necessary
• § 565.9 — FMC review, suspension, and prohibition: the FMC may review any controlled carrier rate filing and demand written justification within 20 days; if the carrier's justification is inadequate or the rate appears below cost, the FMC may suspend the rate pending investigation and ultimately prohibit the rate from taking effect; the FMC may also prohibit a rate already in effect if it is found to be below the just and reasonable standard
• § 565.10 — Suspension procedures: when the FMC suspends a controlled carrier rate pending prohibition, the carrier must either withdraw the rate or demonstrate cost justification; during the suspension period, the prior rate (or an alternative rate meeting the standard) applies; carriers may not circumvent suspension by filing slightly modified versions of the suspended rate
• § 565.11 — Presidential review: if the FMC issues a final prohibition order against a controlled carrier rate, the President of the United States may review and overrule the FMC's prohibition within 10 days — a statutory safety valve allowing the executive branch to subordinate FMC trade regulation to broader foreign policy considerations; presidential review requests are rare but reflect the inherently geopolitical nature of controlled carrier disputes

Part 565 is the FMC's primary tool for addressing state-owned carrier competition in U.S. trade lanes. China COSCO Shipping — the world's largest ocean carrier group by deadweight tonnage — has been the most prominent controlled carrier subject to FMC scrutiny. The 30-day waiting period and cost-justification requirement create meaningful friction for below-cost pricing, though critics argue that FMC review procedures are too slow to prevent predatory pricing episodes that can shift long-term market share.

Recent rulemakings: 89 FR 67112 (August 2024) — FMC updated its controlled carrier classification procedures and expanded the factors considered in "just and reasonable" cost assessments, reflecting new cost-accounting guidance for carriers with complex intragroup cost allocation.

Pending Legislation

No major Shipping Act amendments are pending in the 119th Congress as of 2026. Implementation of OSRA 2022 continues through FMC rulemakings. The FMC's unreasonable detention and demurrage rule (implementing 46 U.S.C. § 41105(a)) was finalized in 2024 and establishes factors for determining whether D&D practices are unreasonable — including whether charges accrued before the shipper could pick up or return the container.

Recent Developments

• OSRA 2022 implementation: The FMC continued finalizing implementing regulations under OSRA 2022 through 2024–2025. Key rules include the D&D reasonableness determination framework and new dispute resolution procedures. The FMC received over 3,000 informal complaints in 2022–2023, a record, driven primarily by importer D&D disputes.
• Container availability date rule: The 89 FR 14363 and 89 FR 41895 (2024) amendments to Part 541 reinforced the container availability date requirements and clarified how NVOCCs must handle disputed charges that flow through from ocean carriers.
• Carrier alliance market concentration: Following the dissolution of 2M (effective January 2025) and Hapag-Lloyd's departure from THE Alliance, the reshuffled alliance landscape (Gemini Cooperation, Ocean Alliance, Premier Alliance, plus MSC operating standalone) continues to control approximately 85% of global container capacity, keeping FMC market monitoring and antitrust exemption oversight politically active. The alliance structure's antitrust exemption under the Shipping Act is subject to periodic FMC review.