The Maritime Action Plan Explained: What’s Right and What’s Missing

The Trump Administration has released its Maritime Action Plan, an ambitious roadmap aimed at revitalizing America’s maritime industrial base; but, does it go far enough to restore global competitiveness and market share?

BACKGROUND

Less than one percent of new commercial ships are built in the United States. Domestic shipbuilding capacity has eroded over decades, leaving the U.S. unable to scale production at the pace required for national security or economic resilience. Meanwhile, strategic competitors build ships at dramatically lower cost and at industrial scale.

The Maritime Action Plan seeks to reverse this trajectory by rebuilding the U.S. maritime industrial base, expanding the U.S.-flag fleet, and restoring shipbuilding as a strategic national capability. (Source: Maritime Action Plan, February 2026)

WHAT’s RIGHT

Key themes of the broad reaching Maritime Action Plan include:

Rebuilding U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity

• Incentivizing investment in shipyards

• Establishing Maritime Prosperity Zones

• Expanding domestic production capability

• Leveraging international partnerships

Workforce Development

• Expanding mariner education and training

• Modernizing maritime academies

• Increasing funding and training infrastructure

Protecting the Maritime Industrial Base

• Expanding cargo requirements for qualifying U.S. vessels

• Improving Government procurement efficiency

• Establishing new funding mechanisms such as a Maritime Security Trust Fund

Strengthening National & Economic Security

• Growing the U.S.-flag international trading fleet

• Investing in advanced manufacturing and autonomy

• Supporting Arctic strategy and reserve fleet recapitalization

Regulatory Reform

• Streamlining outdated regulations that slow construction and increase cost.

WHAT’S MISSING

The plan lays a foundation, but several financial and structural levers critical to competitiveness remain unaddressed.

1) Export Credit Financing for Newbuilds

U.S. shipbuilding cannot scale solely on domestic demand. Export capability is essential. Competing yards benefit from aggressive export credit support; U.S. yards will struggle globally without similar tools.

2) Bonus Depreciation for Shipyard Capital Equipment

Modern yards require automation, robotics, and precision manufacturing. Bonus depreciation would materially improve investment economics and shorten payback periods.

3) Incentivized Leasing via Title XI

Leasing lowers capital barriers for owners and accelerates fleet renewal. Government-backed financing through the Maritime Administration Title XI program already supports ship financing, but its structure could better accommodate lessors and private capital participation.

Lessors are typically private equity backed, thus requiring higher returns because of risk. Government guarantees reduce risk, which lowers required return thresholds and expands access to capital.

4) Locality Pay for Shipyard Workers

Shipyards in high cost-of-living regions cannot compete with lower-cost Gulf Coast markets without wage flexibility. If they cannot compete domestically, they will not scale internationally.

5) Front-End Funding for Capital Investment

Many grant programs reimburse post-spending. This forces shipyards to use balance sheets, bridge financing, or credit lines before receiving support — an unnecessary barrier to growth.

6) Reward Specialization

Efficiency in shipbuilding comes from repetition. Policies should encourage yards to specialize by vessel type or construction method rather than broad generalization.

7) Promote Industry Consolidation

The U.S. industrial base remains highly fragmented. While consolidation reduces domestic competition, scale matters internationally. Buying power, shared resources, and sophisticated safety management systems are all necessary to meet the demand of discerning international clientele.

8) Tariff Relief for OEM Components

Much commercial shipboard equipment remains imported. A phased tariff strategy would reduce near-term build costs while domestic supply chains mature.

9) Payroll Protection for Skilled Workers

Shipyards rely heavily on contract labor because revenue flows are volatile. This creates workforce churn, drives up training costs, and causes long-term skill loss. Payroll stabilization tools would improve retention and learning curves.

10) Higher-Leverage Title XI Loans

Although Title XI financing offers favorable interest rates, leverage levels have historically been limited. Higher allowable leverage would reduce weighted average cost of capital and make projects more financeable at scale.

CONCLUSION

The U.S. Maritime Industrial Base has atrophied over the course of decades. The Maritime Action Plan is an important first step and a clear acknowledgment that maritime capability is national priority. In order to be successful, the road to revival and will require consistent policy spanning several political administrations.

If you have questions about the Maritime Action Plan, shipbuilding strategy, or maritime industrial policy, feel free to get in touch.