HR-4183-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Sponsored by Dusty Johnson (R-SD)
What it does
This bill would authorize $49.2 million in funding for the Federal Maritime Commission for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. It also updates definitions of "controlled carrier" to cover ocean carriers linked to nonmarket economies or countries under U.S. trade watch lists, creates a new complaint process for shipping exchange market manipulation, restructures advisory committees on ports and carriers, adds nondisclosure protections for FMC investigation records, and requires a rulemaking on containerized freight price indexes.
Who benefits
Shippers and importers who rely on ocean freight, who gain a formal complaint process against alleged market manipulation by shipping exchanges; port authorities, marine terminal operators, and maritime labor unions, who gain dedicated seats on a new National Port Advisory Committee; the Federal Maritime Commission itself, which receives continued and slightly increased funding and expanded investigative and nondisclosure authority.
Who is hurt
Ocean carriers linked to nonmarket economies (such as Chinese state-linked shipping firms) or countries on U.S. trade watch lists, who face heightened regulatory scrutiny as "controlled carriers"; shipping exchanges, which face new investigation and complaint exposure; parties seeking public access to FMC investigation records, which the bill allows the Commission to withhold absent a majority vote to disclose.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue the bill modernizes maritime oversight to address supply-chain disruptions and alleged foreign carrier manipulation seen during recent shipping crises, closing gaps identified after the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022. They contend the expanded definition of "controlled carrier" and new shipping exchange complaint process give the FMC tools to police anticompetitive practices by carriers linked to nonmarket economies, protecting U.S. shippers and importers from price manipulation.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue the nondisclosure provision lets the Commission withhold investigation records from the public absent an internal majority vote, reducing transparency and accountability for regulatory decisions affecting billions in trade. They contend singling out carriers linked to nonmarket economies or watch-listed countries for enhanced scrutiny could invite retaliatory trade measures and may be difficult to administer fairly given the breadth of the "otherwise significantly linked" standard.