16APR

Majlis approves Hormuz toll bill

2 min read

14:27UTC

A key Majlis committee approved the Hormuz toll bill, advancing legislation that would permanently ban US and Israeli vessels and require fees in Iranian rial from all other shipping. Once codified, the toll becomes reversible only through domestic political process ; no future ceasefire can unwind it.

← Back to Treasury kills the Russian crude waiver Jump to analysis ↓

ConflictDeveloping

Key takeaway

Committee approval advances legislation that would make Hormuz's contested status a matter of Iranian domestic law, not merely military posture.

The Majlis committee approved the Hormuz toll legislation on 1 April, advancing a bill that permanently bans US and Israeli vessels from the strait and requires fees in Iranian rial from all other shipping. The bill had been drafted in parliament on Day 25, moved to committee stage on Day 32, and has now cleared committee. Full parliamentary vote, Guardian Council review, and presidential signature remain.

There is a fundamental difference between the IRGC imposing a toll because it controls a strait and the Iranian parliament enacting a law that makes the toll a statutory requirement. The first is a military fact reversible by military defeat. The second is a legal instrument reversible only by domestic political process. Iran had already demanded Hormuz sovereignty as a formal peace condition ; the legislation converts that negotiating demand into permanent law.

The bill bans US and Israeli vessels explicitly and requires fees in Iranian rial, forcing buyers to transact in a sanctioned currency. The NPT withdrawal bill is advancing on the same legislative track . Both bills are designed to survive any Ceasefire: a Ceasefire can stop the shooting, but it cannot repeal domestic Iranian legislation.

The IRGC's toll system had already been operating since around Day 12, with Chinese state ships paying and crossing . Codifying the practice into permanent law removes any ambiguity about whether a future Iranian government could unilaterally rescind it. If Trump withdraws in two to three weeks without securing this bill's reversal, the US leaves behind a legal architecture that makes Hormuz permanently contested.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The Iranian parliament is voting on a law that would permanently charge ships money to use the Strait of Hormuz ; a narrow channel through which about one in five barrels of the world's oil passes. Right now, Iran is blocking the strait militarily during the war. This law would make that blockade permanent and legal under Iranian law, even after the war ends. American and Israeli ships would be banned outright. This matters because there is a big difference between Iran blocking the strait with soldiers, which can be reversed, and Iran blocking it with a law, which can only be reversed by Iran itself choosing to change the law.

Deep Analysis

Root Causes

The toll bill was drafted as a direct response to US and Israeli strikes on Iranian infrastructure . It converts an emergency military response into a permanent economic instrument, institutionalising the leverage Iran discovered it holds over global energy markets.

What could happen next?

Precedent
First instance of a state attempting to codify transit fees for an international strait into domestic law, potentially triggering a global UNCLOS legal challenge.
Long term · Assessed
Consequence
A ceasefire that leaves the Hormuz toll law in place fails to address the economic cause of the oil price spike.
Medium term · Assessed
Risk
Guardian Council and presidential signature stages create multiple veto points, but each ratification stage makes repeal politically harder.
Short term · Reported

Source Landscape

This story draws on neutral-leaning sources from Russia, Qatar and 1 more

Russia

Qatar

Latvia

Primary parallel:

Egypt's nationalisation of the Suez Canal in 1956 under Nasser: a domestic legal act that codified sovereign control over an international waterway, triggering the Suez Crisis. The international Community spent two years finding a legal framework that acknowledged Egyptian sovereignty while protecting transit rights. The Hormuz bill follows the same template.

Counter-parallel:

Libya's claim to the Gulf of Sidra in 1973: Gaddafi declared the gulf Libyan territorial waters through domestic legislation, but the US contested it militarily in 1981 and 1986 without legal consequence. Domestic legislation alone does not create internationally recognised sovereign rights.

If enacted, the toll applies to non-US and non-Israeli shipping transiting Hormuz. At $2 million per vessel ; the current IRGC informal rate ; the Iranian state could generate billions annually from a waterway it does not own under international law.

The requirement to pay in Iranian rial creates a structural demand for Iran's sanctioned currency, partially offsetting the impact of dollar-based financial sanctions.

Consensus view: Maritime law scholars at the International Maritime Organisation view the toll as incompatible with UNCLOS Article 38, which guarantees transit passage through international straits.

Counter-view: Iranian legal scholars argue Article 111 permits sovereign enforcement measures during armed conflict, citing historical Ottoman Bosphorus tolls as precedent.

Key tension: Whether the toll survives the war depends on codification into domestic law, not on international legal arguments either side can win.

Sources:Interfax Ukraine·Interfax Ukraine·US Department of the Treasury

Mentions:Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) →Strait of Hormuz Toll System →Majlis →

First Reported In

Update #54 · Trump declares victory and withdrawal

Interfax Ukraine· 1 Apr 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

Caused by

Majlis codifies Hormuz toll in law

Majlis committee approval advances the toll legislation that began as draft law on 27 March (ID:1751).

Occurred 31 Mar 2026

Read story →

This Event

Majlis approves Hormuz toll bill

The Hormuz toll, if enacted into law, transforms a military tactic into a sovereign legal right. No ceasefire agreement can override domestic Iranian law without Iran's consent, converting the strait's status into a permanent diplomatic problem.

Led to

Philippines Cuts Bilateral Hormuz Deal, Bypassing US Posture

Iran's Hormuz toll legislation created the economic pressure that prompted Manila to negotiate a bilateral exemption, the first crack in the collective allied posture.

Occurred 2 Apr 2026

Read story →

Omani Vessels Bypass IRGC Corridor, Disable Trackers

IRGC toll codification prompted Omani vessels to seek the traditional international channel, suggesting an undisclosed bilateral arrangement similar to the Philippines deal.

Occurred 2 Apr 2026

Read story →

Different Perspectives

China

Beijing has not publicly commented on the dual Oreshnik launch. China's declared position of urging restraint and dialogue sits awkwardly alongside its continued economic ties with Russia; the weapons escalation tests whether Beijing's neutrality framing can survive a European IRBM normalisation event.

IAEA

Director General Grossi condemned the ZNPP reactor-6 turbine building strike and stated "there should be no attack of any kind from or against the plant." The agency confirmed normal radiation levels but has not resolved attribution; Rosatom CEO Likachev warned the region is "one step closer to an incident."

Turkey

Ankara hosted Istanbul Round 2 at Ciragan Palace on 2 June and secured a 1,200-for-1,200 prisoner exchange, consolidating Turkey as the war's sole diplomatic venue after Rubio confirmed US mediation has ended. Erdogan's leverage over both parties grows with each round.

European Union

EU Ambassador Mathernova answered Lavrov's evacuation demand with "We stay in Kyiv. We stay with Ukraine." The Verkhovna Rada approved the EUR 90bn EU loan on 28 May; the EUR 9.1bn first tranche, the EU's first explicit defence-procurement financing, arrives mid-June.

United States

Rubio declared US mediation stagnated on 22 May and confirmed no talks were occurring, then received Lavrov's evacuation demand three days later without ordering embassy drawdown. Washington's leverage now runs through the GL 134C sanctions cliff on 17 June rather than any active diplomatic channel.

Ukraine

Zelenskyy called Russia's 2-3 day ceasefire counter-offer at Istanbul Round 2 "shortsighted" and submitted a full peace memorandum covering EU membership, international guarantees, phased sanctions relief and frozen-asset reparations. Kyiv's position is that a partial ceasefire freeze aids Russian reconstitution; only an all-domain 30-day pause is acceptable.