White House Releases America's Maritime Action Plan

The White House has released the Trump Administration's much-anticipated Maritime Action Plan (MAP), a sweeping federal blueprint aimed at reversing the long‑term decline of U.S. shipbuilding, strengthening the Maritime Industrial Base (MIB) and restoring U.S. maritime competitiveness. Issued on February 16, 2026, pursuant to the executive order on "Restoring America's Maritime Dominance" (April 9, 2025), the MAP outlines coordinated policy actions, funding proposals and legislative priorities that would materially affect commercial shipbuilding, maritime labor markets, federal procurement and trade.

For stakeholders in shipbuilding, shipping, ports, infrastructure, logistics, defense, energy, technology and finance, the MAP signals a significant shift in federal maritime policy with meaningful commercial, compliance and investment implications.

Executive Summary

The MAP is organized around four strategic pillars:

1. Rebuilding U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity and Capabilities
2. Reforming Workforce Education and Training
3. Protecting the Maritime Industrial Base
4. Supporting National Security, Economic Security and Industrial Resilience

Across these pillars, the Trump Administration proposes to 1) expand domestic shipbuilding capacity, 2) incentivize investment in maritime infrastructure and U.S. shipyards, 3) modernize procurement practices, 4) grow the U.S.‑flag fleet and maritime workforce, and 5) establish new funding mechanisms, including fees on foreign‑built vessels and imported merchandises delivered by land. If implemented, these initiatives would directly affect shipyard investment decisions, vessel financing, port development and compliance obligations under U.S. trade and procurement regimes.

Why the MAP Matters

The MAP was developed under a stark reality: Less than 1 percent of new commercial vessels are built in the U.S., and only a tiny number of domestic shipyards have large‑scale construction and repair capability. The Trump Administration frames the status quo as unacceptable – both an economic vulnerability and a national‑security risk, especially in times of crisis or conflict.

Accordingly, the MAP is both industrial policy and security strategy that seeks to restore U.S. ability to build, crew, repair and operate commercial and auxiliary vessels at scale, as well as reduce reliance on foreign shipyards and supply chains.

Pillar I: Rebuilding U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity and Capabilities

The MAP places shipbuilding at the center of maritime revitalization. Key initiatives include:

• Shipyard Modernization. Federal support for upgrading dry docks, heavy‑lift infrastructure, digital shipyard technologies and port‑to‑yard connectivity.
• Stable Demand Signals. Expanded use of multiyear and multivessel procurement to reduce production volatility and support long‑term capital investment.
• Commercial and Government Vessels. Alignment of naval, auxiliary and commercial construction to sustain a resilient, surge‑capable industrial base.
• Repair and Maintenance Capacity. Recognition that domestic repair capability is critical to fleet readiness and operational resilience.

Financing and Incentives

The MAP emphasizes expanded use of existing financing tools, including Title XI loan guarantees, Capital Construction Funds, Defense Production Act authorities and Small Shipyard Grants. Notably, it proposes new shipyard‑specific capital improvement financing, allowing shipyards to reinvest earnings on a tax‑deferred basis – potentially reshaping how yard modernization is funded.

Proposed Universal Fees on Foreign‑Built Vessels

One of the MAP's most consequential proposals is a universal fee on foreign‑built commercial vessels entering U.S. ports, assessed on imported tonnage and applicable regardless of flag or country of build. The Trump Administration estimates that such a fee could generate tens of billions of dollars over a decade, with proceeds directed toward maritime security and industrial revitalization.

Though the MAP does not define fee rates (a possible range of 1 cent to 25 cents per kilo is mentioned for waterborne cargo), tonnage methodology, exemptions or collection mechanics, the proposal signals a willingness to use origin‑neutral, demand‑side cost measures to reinforce domestic shipbuilding and fund long‑term maritime programs. If enacted, the fee will affect shipping economics, charter structures and trade compliance and would be a flash-point of legislative debate and commercial scrutiny in the U.S. and abroad.

Pillar II: Reforming Workforce Education and Training

The MAP identifies skilled labor shortages as a binding constraint on shipbuilding expansion. Proposed reforms include expanded mariner and shipyard training programs, streamlined U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) credentialing, increased use of simulators and enhanced military‑to‑mariner pathways. The plan also calls for urgent modernization and major investment in the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy – including a 20 percent increase in cadet enrollment and 30 percent increase in faculty – and continued oversight of state maritime academies.

Pillar III: Protecting the Maritime Industrial Base

Pillar III aims to protect and revitalize the MIB by aligning trade policy, federal procurement and market incentives with national security needs. It addresses issues from fragmented acquisitions and foreign-dominated shipping by reinforcing U.S.-flag and U.S.-built vessel requirements, reforming procurement to reduce costs and delays, and improving demand predictability for domestic shipyards. Key actions include multiyear contracting, streamlined management, increased use of commercial designs and tackling unfair foreign practices, particularly by China, including assessing a fee of 0.125 percent on the value of foreign merchandise entering the U.S. by land. These steps are intended to stabilize the industry, retain skilled labor and strengthen national defense readiness.

Pillar IV: Supporting National Security, Economic Security and Industrial Resilience

Pillar IV connects maritime policy to national and economic security by focusing on fleet readiness, supply chain resilience and strategic capacity. With current U.S.-flagged fleets falling short, it emphasizes rebuilding shipbuilding capability, expanding the fleet and adopting advanced technologies such as automation and digital engineering. Initiatives include diversifying supply chains, reducing foreign reliance and establishing a privately owned Strategic Commercial Fleet and Maritime Security Trust Fund for sustained funding and workforce development, and increased funding for the Maritime Security Program. Early investments in areas such as autonomous systems and Arctic operations aim to secure long-term advantages and ensure the maritime sector can support commerce and defense.

Key Takeaways for Clients

• Greater Federal Involvement: The MAP envisions an enhanced, sustained federal role in shipbuilding, shipping and maritime labor markets.
• Investment with Conditions: Expanded incentives may unlock capital, often tied to domestic‑content, workforce or operational requirements.
• Cost and Trade Implications: Proposed fees on foreign‑built vessels and expanded cargo preference will materially affect shipping economics.
• Regulatory Change Ahead: Deregulatory efforts will coexist with new compliance regimes, particularly around autonomy and workforce programs.
• Early Engagement Matters: Stakeholder input will shape program design, exemptions and implementation timelines.
• Whole-of-Government Approach to Implementation: The MAP calls for coordination between the executive and legislative branches to accomplish its goal of restoring American maritime dominance. Here are some key players in implementing the reforms:
  • U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). USTR likely will play a central role in designing and implementing the port fees system outlined in the MAP. The proposed fee system closely parallels the port fees the Trump Administration imposed in 2025 based on USTR's Section 301 investigation of China's maritime policies. For more information on the Section 301 fees – which have been paused for now – see Holland & Knight's previous client alerts from November 2025, October 2025, June 2025 and March 2025. Over the coming weeks and months, USTR is expected to assist in designing the port fees system described in the MAP. The agency will look to stakeholders for guidance on how to best structure the fees to meet the Trump Administration's goals while minimizing disruptions for U.S. companies. Stakeholders should consider outreach to USTR to provide feedback and assistance to the agency as it undertakes its work on these critical issues. 
  • Maritime Administration (MARAD). The MAP positions MARAD as the federal government's primary execution arm for maritime policy within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Building on its statutory mission, MARAD would serve as the central hub for shipbuilding and fleet expansion, coordinating investment, cargo preference, workforce initiatives and national security readiness. The plan would expand funding for existing MARAD programs – particularly those supporting shipyard investment – and broaden eligibility for the Federal Ship Financing Program (Title XI). As operator of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and administrator of federal and state maritime training programs, MARAD is also positioned to play a pivotal role in developing the workforce needed to sustain long‑term maritime revitalization.
  • Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). The FMC is the independent agency responsible for regulating the U.S. international ocean transportation system pursuant to the U.S. Shipping Act of 1984, as amended. The FMC plays a critical role in oversight of commercial competition among ocean common carriers, marine terminal operators and ocean transportation intermediaries. Recognizing the importance of the FMC's mandate, the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the FMC Reauthorization Act of 2025, which increases the FMC's budget through fiscal year 2027. The Reauthorization Act is currently under consideration by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce. The Trump Administration's forthcoming legislative proposals could take advantage of the FMC's increased budget by expanding the FMC's existing authority to provide for increased oversight of the international commercial fleet and ocean-linked supply chains as America seeks to reemphasize its place in the shipping industry.
  • U.S. Department of War (DOW). DOW plays a coordinating role across multiple strategic initiatives of the MAP. DOW is tasked with collaborating on mariner training and workforce development – including leveraging the DOW Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program and expanding grants tied to shipbuilding contracts – to address labor shortages in the shipbuilding industry. DOW is further directed to work alongside DHS and USCG to secure Arctic waterways through continued training exercises, improvements to satellite communications via commercial and military partnerships, and investments in icebreaker fleets and high-latitude operational infrastructure. Additionally, DOW must partner with DOT to ensure accurate budget forecasting and prioritize funding for maintenance, modernization and recapitalization of the inactive reserve fleet – including finalization of design requirements for the Vessel Construction Manager program – while also funding the Maritime Security Program and Tanker Security Program to authorized levels to guarantee access to assured sealift capacity.

Congressional Action

Though many of the deregulatory and agency actions outlined in President Donald Trump's proposal can take place without congressional action, Congress must enact legislation to effectuate much of the MAP blueprint. The Trump Administration acknowledges this and points to two bills that have already been introduced in the 119th Congress: 

• The Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security for America Act (SHIPS) (S.1541). This comprehensive bill focuses on all aspects of the federal government as it relates to the maritime industry, workforce and ports, and reforms and initiatives needed to propel maritime revitalization in the U.S. The bill was referred to the Senate Commerce Committee.
• Building Ships in America Act of 2025 (S.1536). This more narrow bill focuses on tax policy to support the U.S. maritime industry. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance.

Both of these bills enjoy substantial bipartisan support, as many in Congress realize the significant national security concerns with the current state of U.S. shipbuilding. In fact, the SHIPS Act has seven Democrats as cosponsors of the legislation, signaling that this bill has enough support to pass the Senate if brought to the floor for a vote. Though the House remains under a slim Republican majority, given the bipartisan support for this legislation, it should also swiftly pass in that chamber if brought for a floor vote.

However, President Trump signaled in his MAP proposal that his administration is compiling a new legislative package for consideration that will be released in his fiscal year 2027 president's budget request that is expected in early March 2026. Once the new legislative proposal is released, Holland & Knight will compare this to the existing legislative proposals for changes and provide additional analysis.

Conclusion

America's MAP represents the most ambitious U.S. maritime policy initiative since President Franklin Roosevelt's Liberty Ship and Victory Ship initiatives. Though many elements remain subject to congressional action and federal regulatory agency development, the Trump Administration's direction is clear: A long‑term effort to rebuild U.S. shipbuilding and maritime infrastructure and capacity is a pillar of American economic and national security policy.

Clients should begin assessing their own exposure, opportunities and engagement strategies, both short- and long-term, as MAP moves forward in Congress and throughout the Trump Administration.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.