Skip to content
Iran Conflict 2026
20APR

Majlis codifies Hormuz toll in law

2 min read
10:10UTC

The blockade that began as a military measure is becoming domestic legislation, with projected revenues reaching $800 million per month.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Iran is converting a wartime blockade into permanent law, making reversal a sovereignty question.

Iran's Majlis began drafting legislation on 31 March to codify the IRGC's Hormuz toll into permanent domestic law. 1 A vote was expected before the end of March but cannot proceed until parliament reconvenes. At projected scale, revenue estimates reach $600 million to $800 million per month from oil tankers and LNG carriers combined.

The legislative step matters because it changes the nature of what the toll is. An operational wartime measure can be reversed by the military that imposed it. A law can only be reversed by the parliament that passed it, with Guardian Council approval, after a political process that no Iranian politician has incentive to initiate. Shadow fleet vessels already account for 80% of Hormuz transits , and the toll is being paid by state-backed Chinese container ships. The infrastructure is built. Legislation is the lock.

The last time a state imposed transit fees on a major international waterway was the Ottoman Empire's Bosphorus tolls, abolished by the 1936 Montreux Convention. Iran's version is being codified in real time during an active war. The NPT withdrawal bill remains frozen in the same parliament : the Majlis has not sat in 31 days, with no reconvening date announced. When it does sit, both bills advance simultaneously.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Iran's parliament is writing a law to permanently charge ships a toll to cross the Strait of Hormuz. The law has not passed yet because parliament has not met in over a month. The difference between a wartime toll and a permanent law is significant. A wartime toll can end when the war ends. A law can only be changed by parliament, which means it could last for decades regardless of how the war ends. The last time a country charged transit fees on a major international waterway was the Ottoman Empire, which charged Bosphorus tolls until a 1936 international agreement abolished them. Iran is trying to do the same thing in 2026.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    If enacted, this would be the first domestic law codifying a sovereign charge on an international strait in modern maritime history, challenging UNCLOS innocent passage rights.

    Long term · 0.85
  • Consequence

    Reversing the toll post-war becomes a sovereignty dispute requiring treaty revision rather than a military question, making it functionally permanent.

    Medium term · 0.8
  • Risk

    When parliament reconvenes, both the toll bill and the NPT withdrawal bill advance simultaneously, presenting the international community with two irreversible legislative facts at once.

    Short term · 0.7
First Reported In

Update #53 · Trump drops Hormuz goal; toll becomes law

NBC News / Lloyd's List· 31 Mar 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Global South governments (Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa)
Global South governments (Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa)
Neutrality was possible when the targets were military. 148 dead schoolgirls made it impossible — no government can explain that away to its own citizens.
Trump administration
Trump administration
Oscillating between claiming diplomatic progress and threatening escalation, while deploying additional ground forces to the Gulf.
Israeli security establishment
Israeli security establishment
Fears a rapid, vague US-Iran agreement that freezes military operations before the IDF achieves what it considers full strategic objectives. A senior military official assessed the campaign is 'halfway there' and needs several more weeks.
Iraqi government
Iraqi government
Iraq's force majeure is the position of a non-belligerent whose entire petroleum economy has been paralysed by a war between others — storage full, exports blocked, production being cut with no timeline for resumption.
Russia — Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia
Russia — Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia
Moscow calibrated its position between Gulf states and Iran: abstaining on Resolution 2817 rather than vetoing it, signalling it would not block protection for Gulf states, while refusing to endorse a text that ignores the US-Israeli campaign it regards as the conflict's proximate cause. Russia proposed its own ceasefire text — which failed 4-2-9 — allowing Moscow to claim the peacemaker role while providing Iran with satellite targeting intelligence, a duality consistent with its approach in Syria.
France — President Macron
France — President Macron
France absorbed its first combat death in a conflict it has publicly declined to join. The killing of Chief Warrant Officer Frion in Erbil forces Macron to choose between escalating involvement and accepting casualties from the margins.