Let It Go, Let It Flow – Jones Act Waiver Opens Up New Routes for Foreign-Flagged Ships on U.S. Waters

The White House gave the green light on March 18 for foreign-flagged tankers to move crude oil and refined products between U.S. ports by waiving the Jones Act, and has since extended the waiver to August 17. In two months, 60 waivers have been recorded, and a compelling story is emerging around what those vessels are moving and where. So far, more than 3 MMbbl of gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and heavy crude have moved from other states into California, and there is also a distinct flow of Gulf Coast (PADD 3) barrels to other parts of the country. In today’s RBN blog, we’ll dig into the new patterns that have emerged.

As a quick refresher, the Jones Act — formally Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 — requires that cargo moving between U.S. ports travel on vessels that are U.S.-built, U.S.-owned, U.S.-flagged and primarily U.S.-crewed (see Me and Mrs. Jones). The post-World War I law was designed to protect the domestic shipbuilding industry and to ensure a reliable U.S. merchant fleet for national defense and emergency response. Back in 2013-14, strong demand for Jones Act tankers and articulated tug barges (ATBs), along with a spike in charter rates, triggered a wave of new vessel orders. But by the time those ships hit the water, market conditions had shifted: U.S. crude production slumped mid‑decade and the 2015 repeal of the crude export ban reduced the need to move oil and refined products between domestic ports. Demand fell off, charter rates dropped sharply and newbuild orders dried up. Today, the Jones Act fleet stands at around 100 eligible vessels, a fraction of the roughly 400 ships in service back in 1950, and the total has been trending lower over the past decade.

A major complication of the Jones Act is that it adds a layer of cost to moving crude and products between U.S. ports. U.S.-built ships are more expensive to build due to limited shipyard capacity and competition, and operators also face higher labor and insurance costs. Those factors have kept the Jones Act fleet relatively small and discouraged new vessel construction, which in turn has pushed up charter rates and shipping costs, a key consideration in whether coastwise transport makes economic sense.

These cost dynamics directly shape how crude and products move around the country. While Jones Act vessels typically carry barrels between major hubs like Corpus Christi, Houston, New York Harbor and the West Coast (dashed dark-blue lines in Figure 1 below), or to inland destinations (dashed light-blue lines) and refining areas (green-shaded areas), higher costs can make indirect routes on foreign-flagged ships (dashed pink lines) more attractive. For example, it can be cheaper to move Gulf Coast crude through international routes such as Eastern Canada or even the Panama Canal than to ship it directly to the East Coast on a Jones Act vessel, despite the shorter distance. That cost structure has always limited how many domestic barrels move coastwise, and it’s a big reason why, when the Iran conflict pushed prices higher, the administration reached for a Jones Act waiver. The reasoning behind the waivers is pretty consistent. Operators point to a lack of available U.S.-flagged vessels, tight timing, complications tied to the Strait of Hormuz closure, and the need for flexibility. In short, they say the Jones Act fleet just wasn’t set up to handle a sudden reshuffling of domestic fuel flows during a geopolitical disruption.