Pressure Mounts to Let Jones Act Waiver Expire

Recognizing that extraordinary circumstances may occasionally require temporary relief, 46 U.S.C. § 501 authorizes waivers of Jones Act requirements when necessary in the “interest of national defense.” Such waivers have historically been rare and narrowly tailored to address emergencies such as natural disasters, military operations and acute energy supply disruptions.

The Conflict in Iran and the Jones Act Waiver
On March 17, 2026, the Trump administration exercised its emergency waiver authority under the Jones Act in response to the conflict in Iran and the resulting threats to commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global petroleum shipments. As disruptions to international energy supply chains limited the availability of imported crude oil and refined petroleum products, there was an increased need for domestic shipments to meet demand but an insufficient number of Jones Act-qualified vessels. By temporarily allowing qualifying foreign-flag vessels to participate in coastwise movements, the waiver expanded available tanker capacity, reduced transportation bottlenecks and allowed for domestic shipments using foreign flag vessels to U.S. locations without sufficient refining capacity to serve local markets.

Among the jurisdictions most affected by the Jones Act waiver were Hawaii and Alaska, both of which rely heavily on marine transportation to meet their energy needs. Unlike the contiguous United States, these states have limited practical alternatives for transporting large volumes of crude oil and refined petroleum products and have historically relied significantly on imported petroleum products transported aboard foreign-flag vessels. When disruptions to commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz constrained those international supply chains, suppliers increasingly sought to replace imported fuel with shipments from U.S. refineries. Because those domestic coastwise movements are subject to the Jones Act, the limited availability of qualified U.S.-flag tankers created a significant transportation bottleneck. The waiver temporarily expanded the pool of vessels available to move petroleum products between U.S. ports, helping maintain fuel supplies.

The current Jones Act waiver is unusual both in its breadth and its duration. Historically, Jones Act waivers have been narrowly tailored to specific emergencies, regions or commodities. However, the current waiver applies nationwide, has been extended substantially longer than typical, and covers not only a wide range of energy commodities, such as crude oil, refined petroleum products and natural gas, but also chemical products, fertilizers, fertilizer inputs and other industrial materials.

Extension of the Waiver
The waiver was initially intended to expire on May 17, 2026. However, as the conflict and its effects on international markets and supply chains persisted, the Administration concluded that the conditions supporting the waiver had not sufficiently abated. On April 24, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security approved a 90-day extension, effective May 18, 2026, extending the waiver for goods loaded by end of day (Eastern time) August 16, 2026. In announcing the extension, the Administration cited the continued need to mitigate disruptions to energy markets, improve the movement of critical commodities between U.S. ports and provide stability to supply chains during an ongoing period of geopolitical uncertainty.

Growing Opposition to Further Extensions
As the expiration date approaches, opposition to continued Jones Act waiver relief is increasing. Supporters of the Jones Act have begun highlighting concerns that an additional waiver extension will only serve to undermine domestic maritime policy objectives and discourage investment in U.S.-flag and U.S.-built vessel capacity. These groups argue that any emergency conditions justifying the original waiver have substantially diminished and that further relief is inconsistent with the Jones Act’s policy of preserving a robust domestic maritime industry.

Furthermore, the geopolitical landscape has evolved since the waiver was first issued. Although the situation in Iran remains volatile, recent diplomatic efforts aimed at de-escalation and reducing regional tensions may lead some policymakers to conclude that the emergency conditions that justified a Jones Act waiver no longer exist. Recently, Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and 51 other House Republicans (including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise) sent a letter to President Trump calling for the President not to extend the waiver and instead allow it to expire.

On the other hand, companies that rely on the waiver may contend that the underlying logistical constraints have not been fully resolved. They argue that, while international supply chains have stabilized, the availability of Jones Act-qualified tanker capacity remains limited in certain markets, particularly where domestic shipments are needed to supplement or replace imported petroleum products. Supporters of the waiver can also point to ongoing “tit-for-tat” military actions by the United States and Iran, including actions related to the Strait of Hormuz, to contend that supply chains can still be easily compromised.

With the current waiver scheduled to expire, companies that rely on the waiver may wish to consider engaging with the Trump administration well in advance of any decision regarding a further extension. Engagement by affected companies provides stakeholders with the opportunity to educate decision makers regarding the continuing operational need for the waiver and the practical consequences of allowing it to lapse.

Stakeholders that believe maintaining the waiver remains necessary must be prepared to demonstrate that the waiver remains in the interest of national defense. In particular, companies may wish to provide information regarding the continued availability of Jones Act-qualified tanker capacity, the challenges of supplying non-contiguous U.S. jurisdictions, the importance of maintaining fuel supply resilience, and the potential impacts on energy costs and supply chains if the waiver expires.

Engagement may occur on an individual company basis or through industry associations, coalitions or other coordinated stakeholder efforts. However, a coordinated approach may be particularly effective in demonstrating to policymakers the breadth of industries and communities that could be affected by the waiver’s expiration.