FMC Reauthorization Bill Targets Foreign Shipping Carriers, Increases Oversight, and Restricts Public Disclosure

The Federal Maritime Commission Reauthorization Act of 2025 is set to give the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) a serious power-up, authorizing $49.2 million in funding for both 2026 and 2027 while dramatically expanding who the agency can regulate. This bill is all about tightening the reins on global shipping, especially carriers connected to certain foreign governments, with the goal of smoothing out our messy supply chains and tackling unfair fees that drive up the cost of everything from electronics to lumber.

The New Rules of the High Seas

If you’re a small business owner who imports goods, or just someone who’s tired of hearing about port congestion, this is relevant. The core change here is the expansion of the term “controlled carrier.” Previously, this mainly meant shipping lines directly owned by a foreign government. Now, the FMC’s net is much wider, covering any ocean carrier financially or legally linked to countries designated as non-market economies or those on a U.S. trade priority watch list (SEC. 5). This is a big deal because it subjects these carriers to much stricter scrutiny and regulation. The idea is to level the playing field for U.S. companies against those carriers that might be benefiting from foreign state subsidies or influence, which can distort pricing and competition.

Fixing the Fee Frenzy and Congestion

One of the most frustrating parts of the recent supply chain chaos has been the endless stream of detention and demurrage fees—those charges levied by carriers and terminals when containers aren’t picked up or returned fast enough. The bill mandates that the FMC study and report on port congestion and supply chain bottlenecks, focusing specifically on these practices (SEC. 1). Crucially, it establishes new processes for the FMC to review and potentially prohibit these fees if they are found to be unfair or unreasonable. For a local furniture importer, this could mean the difference between a profitable quarter and one swallowed by unexpected, unmanageable fees, which ultimately affects the price you pay for that new couch.

Your Complaint Just Got a Direct Line

Recognizing that market manipulation in the shipping industry can impact global prices, the bill creates a formal process for anyone—a shipper, a terminal operator, or even a concerned citizen—to submit information about alleged market manipulation by registered shipping exchanges (SEC. 6). The FMC is required to accept this information and promptly investigate it, reporting any findings of wrongdoing directly to Congress. This is a significant tool for transparency, allowing the industry to flag unfair pricing practices that might be driving up costs for consumers.

The Trade-Off: Less Transparency in Investigations

Here’s the catch that needs attention: while the bill increases oversight, it also restricts public access to the FMC’s investigative work (SEC. 10). The Commission is generally prohibited from disclosing information or documents developed during an investigation. Disclosure is only allowed if a majority of the Commission votes that the information is relevant to a specific administrative or judicial proceeding. This provision raises a flag because it limits public and industry transparency. If a major carrier is being investigated for practices that affect everyone’s shipping costs, the public and the affected businesses might not be able to see the evidence or reasoning behind the FMC’s actions, making it harder to hold the agency or the carriers accountable.

What It Means for the Everyday Person

Ultimately, this bill is an attempt to use regulatory muscle to bring down the cost and chaos of global shipping. If the FMC successfully uses its expanded authority to curb unfair foreign practices and crack down on unreasonable fees, the benefits could trickle down through more stable supply chains and potentially lower prices on imported goods. However, the trade-off is clear: we gain more regulatory power over foreign carriers, but we lose some visibility into how that power is being exercised, thanks to the new restrictions on investigative disclosures.