USA - Nationwide: A Transportation: Shipping/Maritime: Finance Overview

The US ship finance market has experienced notable change over the past year, shaped by new regulatory developments, evolving lender profiles, and ongoing geopolitical uncertainty. This overview examines some of the principal trends affecting maritime finance in the United States in 2026 and their practical implications for shipowners, lenders and practitioners.

Current Economic Conditions and Market Activity

The US ship finance sector has shown continued activity. Established, well-capitalized shipowners continue to access capital with relative ease, with traditional banks and private credit lenders alike competing to offer attractive financing packages to top-tier borrowers. Mid-market and smaller operators, however, may face financing gaps from traditional banks and may need to look more to private credit lenders and other alternative sources of capital for their business needs.

This lending environment has contributed to growth in alternative financing channels. Direct lenders, including private credit funds and institutional investors, have expanded their presence in ship finance and now compete directly with traditional banks. Although some private credit funds have recently faced increased demands from their investors for redemptions, private credit funds making loans to the maritime sector do not yet appear to have been affected, with many credit funds raising unprecedented amounts of investor capital for ship finance loans.

Regulatory Developments

US regulatory and legislative developments have been a defining feature of ship finance in 2025 and 2026. The introduction and subsequent suspension of the US Trade Representative (USTR) port fees targeting Chinese maritime interests attracted considerable industry attention in 2025. In February 2026, the Trump administration issued America’s Maritime Action Plan (MAP), which proposes a range of initiatives including a new port fee on foreign-built commercial vessels entering US ports.

These proposed port fees have practical implications for ship finance structures. The USTR framework appeared particularly unfavorable to Chinese sale-leaseback arrangements, which have become a common financing mechanism globally. In response, some shipowners have begun exploring refinancing options to transition from sale-leaseback structures into traditional debt facilities to avoid potential additional costs when calling on US ports. Industry participants should pay close attention to whether the USTR port fees come back into effect and whether and to what extent port fees contemplated by the MAP are implemented.

Recurring government shutdowns have also affected US-flag vessel financing. The National Vessel Documentation Center, which processes vessel documentation and records US ship mortgages, has paused processing of certain filings during shutdown periods, affecting the timing of certain US-flag secured financings.

Environmental and Climate-Related Compliance

Climate-related compliance regimes present an increasingly complex landscape for ship finance participants. A divergence has emerged between jurisdictions, with the European Union (EU) proceeding with initiatives such as the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and FuelEU Maritime, and with the United States under the Trump administration seeking to oppose many new climate-related regulations. One relevant example of this shifting and conflicted regulatory landscape came up in October 2025, when the International Maritime Organization (IMO) delayed a vote on its proposed Net-Zero Framework by one year. This regulatory fragmentation and delay creates challenges for shipowners and lenders operating across multiple jurisdictions, as vessels trading internationally may face differing compliance obligations.

Uncertainty surrounding environmental regulations has also affected ordering and financing decisions for newbuild vessels, particularly those utilizing alternative fuels. Lenders face difficulty assessing the long-term value and compliance status of vessels when the applicable regulatory framework remains unsettled. Shipowners similarly face difficult decisions regarding fleet renewal and technology investments without clear guidance on future requirements.

US offshore wind development has faced particular uncertainty following a series of executive and federal regulatory actions and subsequent litigation. On 20 January 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum withdrawing all areas of the Outer Continental Shelf from wind energy leasing and directing federal agencies to pause wind energy permitting. In December 2025, the Department of the Interior suspended leases for five large-scale offshore wind projects under construction, citing national security concerns. These actions have been challenged in federal court and are subject to ongoing litigation. This ongoing litigation and regulatory uncertainty has affected financing for offshore wind projects and related ship finance transactions, as lenders, investors and shipowners assess the durability of federal approvals and the risk of further executive intervention.

Geopolitical Challenges and Sanctions Compliance

Geopolitical developments continue to affect the US ship finance market. The ongoing conflicts involving Ukraine and Iran have significantly disrupted shipping and energy markets, with consequences for vessel financing and operations. Sanctions and price caps imposed by the United States, other G7 nations and the EU on Russia and Iran have reshaped tanker financing and contributed to the emergence of a “shadow fleet” of vessels operating outside conventional financing and insurance channels.

These conflicts have also caused disruptions in key shipping lanes, including the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Black Sea, with risks to seafarers, vessels and trade flows. For ship finance practitioners, these disruptions heighten due diligence requirements and call for careful risk assessment in transactions involving vessels that may transit affected regions.

Sanctions compliance remains a key concern for the industry. The United States continues to use sanctions as a primary foreign policy tool, and the industry has experienced rapid policy shifts including the temporary lifting of certain sanctions on Russian seaborne oil in response to supply disruptions arising from the Iran conflict. These policy changes create compliance challenges for shipowners and lenders navigating evolving requirements.

The Iran conflict also prompted a rare temporary waiver of the Jones Act. In March 2026, the Trump administration issued a 60-day waiver of the Jones Act’s cabotage requirements, allowing foreign-flagged vessels to transport oil, liquefied natural gas, fertilizer and certain other commodities between US ports in response to supply disruptions arising from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. While the waiver was limited in scope and duration, it sparked concern among Jones Act industry participants including domestic shipbuilders, vessel owners and maritime labor unions that it could set a precedent for weakening Jones Act protections in the US cabotage trade. For ship finance practitioners, the waiver underscores the potential for rapid policy shifts affecting US-flag vessel financing, and highlights the importance of monitoring legislative and executive developments that could affect the long-term value of Jones Act-eligible assets.

For those navigating this environment, several practical considerations arise. First, financing structure selection warrants close attention given the potential implications of the Maritime Action Plan and related trade measures. Second, sanctions compliance programs and counterparty due diligence processes are important given the pace of change in US sanctions policy. Third, environmental compliance planning should account for regulatory divergence and uncertainty across jurisdictions.

As the ship finance market continues to develop, practitioners and industry participants will need to monitor the interplay between regulatory developments, geopolitical events and market conditions. The coming year is likely to bring further change, and careful attention to these factors will be important for those operating in the US ship finance market.