News / Forwarders warn war-risk surcharges could set dangerous precedent

© Muhammad Wasil

Unregulated carrier surcharging practices prompted by the US/Israel war against Iran could have precedent-setting effects, prompting forwarders to question the validity of any contractual agreements they hold.

Over the past week, The Loadstar has documented increasing forwarder anger toward “war-risk” surcharges issued by carriers, with calls for an international body to step in and regulate the practice after realisation that the levies afford no additional protection.

Speaking as a collective, multiple forwarders told The Loadstar: “The concern is not only the current level of charges, but the precedent it sets. Once normalised, these pricing mechanisms risk becoming embedded beyond the period of actual disruption.”

Describing the slew of “war-risk” surcharges introduced by carriers, including CMA CGM, Maersk, and ONE, as beyond disproportionate, the forwarders said the carriers were simply capitalising on their strength in moments of chaos.

Seeking regulatory intervention, the forwarders noted that, contractually, there remained a “stark” imbalance between carriers and their customers, with the former retaining “broad exemptions” for force majeure events.

“Simultaneously, they have the ability to impose surcharges linked to those same risks,” the forwarders pointed out, but while carrier surcharging is nothing new, it seems that the “disconnect” between their cost to carriers and the surcharges has spooked forwarders.

Unlike fuel surcharges, which have a reference framework, the war-risk surcharges are without rhyme or reason, leading the forwarding community to fear that carriers may simply be testing the water to see what they can get away with.

Should it go unchecked, forwarders The Loadstar spoke with expressed concern that at any opportunity to claim market instability, carriers would hit customers with some sort of pricing incident that further undermined the reliability of global supply chains.

They added: “In disrupted markets with constrained capacity, pricing behaviour tends to reflect market power rather than underlying cost movements. The current surcharge environment is consistent with that pattern.

“The recurrence of such surcharges across successive disruptions suggests a structurally fragile system – one where shocks are rapidly monetised rather than collectively managed.”