Data from ongoing Jones Act waiver shatters China fearmongering
by Jonathan Helton, Grassroot Institute
Defenders of the federal maritime law known as the Jones Act contend that the threat of Chinese expansion is a reason to keep its protectionist regulations in place. If the Jones Act were pared back, they say, Chinese vessels would take over U.S. shipping lanes.
Unfortunately for them, this argument does not hold water — in fact, recent events strongly indicate that reforming the Jones Act could benefit Americans across the country.
The 1920 law mandates that ships delivering goods from one U.S. point to another be flagged and built in the U.S. and mostly owned and crewed by Americans. But the law has been suspended for shipments of fuel and fertilizer since March 17.
President Trump initially waived the law for 60 days, citing national security reasons related to the conflict in Iran. He later extended the waiver for another 90 days. On Aug. 10, he extended it for yet another 90 days, although this time with more conditions and a more limited list of fuels and fertilizers that qualify for the waiver.
Allowing certain shipments to move freely around the country has produced real-world data showing how the Jones Act restrictions have been limiting U.S. shipping patterns.
As of Sept. 17, 200 ships have used the waiver to complete 259 voyages delivering gas, oil and other commodities within the U.S. — trips that would not have happened without it.
Perhaps more noteworthy is that just seven of the voyages completed under the waiver, or less than 3 percent, were made by ships owned by a Chinese company. Meanwhile, ships owned by companies based in Denmark, Greece, Japan and Singapore made up 50 percent of the waiver movements as of Aug. 31. Shipping companies from a smattering of other countries, such as Switzerland and Monaco, have completed about 20 percent of the voyages.
But even domestic companies operating ships that don’t meet all four of the Jones Act’s requirements have benefited from this unprecedented waiver period: About 25 percent of shipments under the waiver have been moved by carriers headquartered in the U.S.
Moreover, these waiver shipments have given U.S. companies, consumers and farmers more access to U.S.-made products.
Nine shipments of anhydrous ammonia — a key fertilizer component — traveled between ports on the Gulf Coast. These shipments would have been impossible without the waiver because not a single liquified petroleum gas tanker exists in the Jones Act fleet. For the same reason, the waiver has also benefited outlying areas such as Puerto Rico, allowing bulk shipments of propane that would be impossible under normal circumstances.
Similarly, Hawaii received one shipment of fuel from Houston in May and two others from the Gulf Coast at the end of July. The state also received a shipment of propane under the waiver, which fulfilled more than half of its propane needs so far this year.
The results of the waiver period so far show clearly that U.S. companies would buy more domestic products if Jones Act supply restrictions weren’t in the way.
Still, Jones Act defenders insist that amending the law would advantage China over U.S. interests. The waiver data belies this claim, but there are also other reasons to doubt it.
For instance, Hawaii frequently receives goods from ships that are not subject to the Jones Act. Those goods most often travel to Hawaii on ships owned by companies headquartered in Japan, Singapore and Greece. A mere 7 percent arrive in Honolulu on vessels owned by Chinese or Hong Kong corporations.
Furthermore, the U.S. Virgin Islands, which has never been subject to the Jones Act, receives U.S. cargo primarily on ships owned by the U.S.-based carriers Crowley and Tropical Shipping.
So even shipping within U.S. borders conducted legally outside the purview of the Jones Act is not dominated by Chinese companies.
Rather than use China as an excuse to preserve a harmful status quo, lawmakers could address security concerns by opening domestic shipping only to ships associated with U.S. allies.
This would still expand transportation options for American businesses and consumers, as well as bolster U.S. partnerships with European and East Asian allies.
With the current waiver set to expire Nov. 15, Congress and Trump should look to reform the law to better serve the American people.
---30---
Commentary originally published Oct. 5, 2026, in The Hill under the headline “Jones Act waiver period disproves China fearmongering, shows benefits of reform.”