Trump’s Maritime Action Plan Opens New Waters for Domestic Shipbuilding Industry

A recently announced Trump Administration plan for the U.S. maritime industry is likely to open new opportunities for companies, investors, training businesses, and even real-estate developers interested in reigniting the domestic shipbuilding industry and its related value chain – while presenting commensurate challenges in invigorating an industry that has been forsaken in favor of foreign competitors for decades.

Entitled “America’s Maritime Action Plan”, the proposal released last month responds to a long-held but still shocking fact: that despite boasting the world’s largest economy, a long history of engineering and technological innovation at sea, and over 95,000 miles (150,000 kilometers) of shoreline, less than 1% of the world’s ships are built in the U.S.

It was not always so. The domestic U.S. shipbuilding industry was key to providing the seafaring vessels that helped with both world wars. And the U.S. was the world’s largest shipbuilder as late as 1975, according to a report published last year by the U.S. Trade Representative’s office. The decline of the domestic shipbuilding industry echoes that of many American manufacturing sectors in the post-World War II era. Foreign countries using cost advantages in labor and materials to siphon away an industry once dominated by American companies. Today, 74% of the world’s commercial ships, 80% of ship-to-shore cranes and 96% of shipping containers are built in China, according to the White House. U.S. reliance on foreign shipping presents a national-security risk cited by both Republican and Democrat-led Administrations in recent years as the rivalry between China and the U.S. has intensified.

The Maritime Action Plan was set in motion by an executive order signed by President Trump in April 2025. It focuses on four areas to attempt to rebuild domestic shipbuilding and maritime supply chains: Rebuild domestic shipbuilding capacity; reform maritime workforce education and training; protect the maritime industrial base; and national security, industrial security, and industrial resilience.

The action plan also recommends establishing Maritime Prosperity Zones (MPZs) that would be modeled on the Opportunity Zones (OpZones) included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the tax bill passed by Trump Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress in 2017. OpZones were made permanent and the tax incentives expanded in the OBBB passed in July 2025. OpZones are census tracts designated as economically distressed where investors can receive tax benefits for long-term investments.

the action plan recommends that the Secretary of Commerce designate 100 MPZs, ensuring that these areas are geographically diverse and include regions outside traditional coast shipbuilding and repair centers. The plan suggests uses for the MPZs could include maritime manufacturing centers and workforce development institutions.

Implications for Companies and Investors

Like many federal government white papers, The Maritime Action Plan is loaded with recommendations and big ideas, many of which are unlikely to become reality. It also acknowledges that a number of its initiatives would require Congressional legislation (see below), many with funding required – not an easy task given partisan rancor and high budget deficits. Nonetheless, the plan touches a nerve as both U.S. political parties have grown more concerned in recent years about over-reliance on China in a number of industries, from pharmaceuticals to rare earths.

America's Maritime Action Plan: Recommended Legislative Actions

• Enforce payment of fees at U.S. borders and prevent circumvention by importing goods through land borders as opposed to maritime ports.

• Create Maritime Security Trust Fund to fund U.S. maritime investment.

• Provide for creation and improvement of programs to incentivize private investment in domestic shipbuilding, shipyards and repair facilities.

• Organize Maritime Prosperity Zones to incentivize domestic and allied investment in U.S. maritime industries and waterfront communities.

• Establish national maritime scholarships and other opportunties to facilitate training of students in maritime fields.

• Ensure adequate tonnage of U.S.-flagged commercial vessels to be called on in times of crisis through incentives to expand the fleet of U.S.-built, crewed and flagged vessels participating in international trade.

Source: America's Maritime Action Plan, February 2026 (whitehouse.gov)

We do see the Administration continuing its focus on domestic shipbuilding for the remainder of Trump’s current term (the plan says further details will be provided in the President’s F27 budget proposal, which is expected to be released in April) given its focus on reshoring American manufacturing activity and reducing dependence on foreign partners for critical infrastructure. We believe Congress would be inclined to support an expanded maritime strategy with funding and emphasis. A Democratic President would likely continue with many of the work streams outlined in the action plan, especially as the investments outlined would help both red and blue states (Democrats will also like the fact that many U.S. shipyards are heavily staffed by union workers). A contact of ours who attended a recent annual shipbuilding conference reported that attendance was double or more the year before, with discussions at the event dominated by ways the private sector can support the Administration’s maritime strategy.

Some Democrats view OpZones as a tax-reduction vehicle for institutions and wealthy individuals that has not in fact spurred much additional investment in economically stressed regions. Yet we think the MPZ concept, couched as a way to spur U.S. shipbuilding and the domestic supply chain, and geographically diversified to target both blue and red geographies, could gain bipartisan support in Congress down the road.

Revitalizing the domestic shipbuilding industry and its related labor and supply chains will take years. But in the interim, other shorter-term opportunities may well present themselves to maritime operators and their owners: domestically made and operated software to track ships, the aforementioned Maritime Prosperity Zones, a revitalized Merchant Marine Academy and other education and training programs to name a few. In a fractious Washington – one in which control of the seas have come rapidly to the fore again through the recently initiated conflict in the Gulf – the U.S. domestic maritime industry may well set sail.