Congress quietly opens protected shipping market to foreign competitors
H.R. 667 — Noncontiguous Shipping Relief Act of 2024 · Filed by Ed Case (D-HI) · 2 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 23, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill creates a new exemption to the Jones Act (a 1920 law requiring ships in U.S. coastal trade to be U.S.-built and U.S.-owned) by allowing foreign-flagged vessels with foreign crews to carry cargo between U.S. noncontiguous territories (Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.) if they employ some U.S. citizens and obtain a Department of Transportation certificate. The bill also modifies labor liability rules and environmental standards for these foreign vessels operating in U.S. waters.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core function is to carve out a major exception to the Jones Act, a foundational U.S. maritime protectionist law. Despite the title's neutral framing ('Relief'), the mechanism directly undermines domestic maritime labor and shipbuilding by permitting foreign competition in a historically protected market.
What the text implies
- Foreign shipping companies gain access to a previously closed market (noncontiguous U.S. trade) without building U.S. vessels or employing U.S. crews at prevailing wage rates, potentially lowering shipping costs for consumers in Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories but at the expense of domestic maritime jobs.
- The bill's labor provisions (Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act participation) are optional for foreign employers, creating a two-tier liability system where foreign operators can choose lighter regulatory burdens than U.S. operators face.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
foreign shipping companies; foreign vessel owners; international freight operators