Three Words Ports Should Know—Inside the New Maritime Action Plan!

On April 9, 2025, the White House issued Executive Order 14269, directing the development of a Maritime Action Plan (MAP) to strengthen U.S. maritime capacity. The finalized MAP outlines a coordinated federal strategy, working across agencies and in partnership with industry, state and local governments, and allied nations, to rebuild the nation's Maritime Industrial Base (MIB). The MAP is organized around four pillars intended to accelerate U.S. shipbuilding and strengthen the supporting maritime industries.

This BAPerspective highlights the MAP elements most relevant to ports, the major open questions, and actions port leaders can consider as implementation takes shape.

Pillar I: Rebuild U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity & Capabilities

Pillar I focuses on rebuilding U.S. shipbuilding capacity, but its scope extends beyond shipyards. Ports are positioned as enabling infrastructure for a stronger maritime industrial base emphasizing coordinated investment across shipyards, ports, terminals, and connecting infrastructure. Key initiatives for ports include:

• Modernized port infrastructure. Upgrades to drydocks, heavy-lift equipment, pier utilities (shore power, high-capacity electrical distribution, water/wastewater, and communications), terminals, and rail connections support ship construction and repair.
• Expanded access to funding and resilience investment. Port projects such as terminal upgrades, last-mile rail, utilities, and resilience/enabling infrastructure align with expanded Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP) support. The MAP also calls for coordination to assess shipping channel depths nationwide to improve access and broaden the number of operational ports.
• Maritime Prosperity Zones (MPZs). The MAP proposes up to 100 MPZs, modeled after Opportunity Zones, to attract private investment into maritime industries and waterfront communities. Eligible activities may include shipbuilding, maritime supply-chain businesses, workforce and training institutions, and advanced manufacturing. MPZs would extend beyond traditional coastal hubs to include river ports, the Great Lakes, and U.S. territories—positioning port-adjacent areas for tax-advantaged investment and redevelopment.
• Increased cargo tied to shipbuilding supply chains. Expanded domestic shipbuilding could generate new cargo flows—steel, components, equipment, and specialized materials—supporting industrial, breakbulk, and project cargo activity at ports.
• Funding tied to port calls. The MAP proposes a fee concept tied to foreign-built vessels calling U.S. ports, potentially creating a direct link between port activity and maritime reinvestment.
• Ports as eligible beneficiaries. Financing tools traditionally focused on vessels or shipyards may expand to include marine terminal operators.
• Growing demand for maritime industrial space. Increased shipbuilding and repair activity could drive demand for port-adjacent industrial land—including opportunities to expand or attract ship repair capabilities and, in select cases, develop new shipyard capacity—as well as multi-use maritime facilities and service hubs.

Pillar II: Reform Workforce Education & Training

Pillar II focuses on expanding and modernizing the U.S. maritime workforce, particularly credentialed mariners and shipyard labor. This pillar is important to enabling fleet growth, but for most ports its effects will be incremental. Key implications for ports include:

• Workforce availability as a limiting factor. Growth in shipbuilding and the U.S.-flag fleet depends on trained labor, which can influence the pace of maritime expansion.
• Selective opportunities to support workforce programs. Some ports—especially those connected to ship repair, training vessels, or waterfront facilities—may support workforce partnerships with academies, training providers, or employers.

Pillar III: Protect the Maritime Industrial Base

Pillar III uses trade policy and federal procurement to support U.S.-built and U.S.-flag vessels and to create more consistent demand for U.S. maritime services. For most ports, impacts will depend on implementation, but ports handling government cargo or competing with land-border routes may see more noticeable effects. Key implications for ports include:

• Cargo rules that could shift where some cargo moves. Expanded cargo preference and related policies could shift certain government-impelled cargo to U.S.-flag vessels, affecting vessel calls and cargo distribution—most relevant for ports handling government cargo.
• Potential rebalancing between seaports and land ports. The proposed Land Port Maintenance Tax is intended to address cargo diversion by applying a fee at land ports similar to the Harbor Maintenance Tax at seaports—potentially influencing routing decisions where cargo can move by land border or through a seaport.
• Gradual changes in cargo mix. Trade enforcement actions and allied coordination could shift sourcing and manufacturing patterns over time.

Pillar IV: National Security, Economic Security, & Industrial Resilience

Pillar IV frames the maritime industry as a strategic national asset—critical to sustaining military logistics, securing trade routes, and maintaining the flow of goods during both normal operations and times of conflict. It explains why ports are increasingly viewed as essential infrastructure within national security and economic resilience planning. While near-term impacts for most ports are limited, this pillar provides the context for sustained federal attention to maritime and port capabilities. Key implications for ports include:

• Ports as part of national resilience planning. Ports are reinforced as essential infrastructure for trade continuity and emergency logistics during disruptions or conflicts.
• A dedicated funding source for maritime investment. The proposed Maritime Security Trust Fund, potentially supported by a fee on foreign-built vessels calling U.S. ports, is intended to provide consistent long-term funding for the U.S. maritime system.
• Support for fleet growth and enabling infrastructure. Over time, this approach could help expand the U.S.-flag fleet while supporting shipbuilding and port infrastructure needed to sustain maritime operations.
• Automation, innovation, and infrastructure readiness. The MAP encourages increased use of autonomous technologies; ports may need to prepare for automation-ready infrastructure, including digital systems, automated mooring, enhanced connectivity, and stronger cyber and resilience standards.
• Targeted impacts at strategic and government-supporting ports. Ports supporting shipyards, sealift operations, reserve fleets, or specialized government activity may see more direct effects from readiness and fleet recapitalization initiatives.

Conclusion: What This Means—and What to Watch Next

The MAP signals a renewed federal focus on rebuilding U.S. maritime capacity and elevating ports as strategic infrastructure. At the same time, the MAP is best viewed as policy direction, not yet a fully enacted regime—many components will depend on funding decisions, rulemaking, and (in several cases) Congressional action.

As with many federal initiatives, the MAP's ultimate impact will depend on how programs are implemented, how agencies coordinate, and how carriers and shippers respond to potential new costs and market shifts. Timelines and incentives will evolve, and not every element of the plan will affect every port equally.

Looking ahead, the MAP reinforces a broader trend: ports are increasingly viewed not only as gateways for cargo and passengers, but as strategic assets within national supply chains and industrial policy. For port authorities, terminal operators, and maritime stakeholders, this highlights the importance of long-range planning, flexible infrastructure, and readiness to align with shifting federal priorities.

Ports that proactively align capital planning, land use strategies, partnerships, and policy engagement with these emerging directions may be best positioned to capture future opportunities as the U.S. maritime sector enters a new phase of reinvestment and transformation.