Demurrage and Detention Fees: What to Do When Port Delays Aren’t Your Fault

If you work in international trade long enough, whether as an importer, customs broker, freight forwarder, or ocean carrier, you will eventually receive a demurrage or detention invoice that makes you pause and think: We didn’t cause this delay. Why are we paying for it?

Across U.S. ports, demurrage and detention fees have become a recurring and costly problem. Containers sit idle due to congestion, labor shortages, equipment unavailability, inspections, or enforcement actions, while charges continue to accrue day after day. What were once intended as modest incentives to keep cargo moving have, in many cases, turned into significant financial penalties imposed regardless of fault or control. What many trade professionals do not realize is that these fees are not automatically lawful, and there are circumstances where they can and should be challenged.

Demurrage and Detention: the Reality of Port Delays

Demurrage generally applies when a container remains at a marine terminal beyond the allowed free time, while detention applies when a container is picked up but not returned to the carrier within the required timeframe. On paper, both charges are meant to promote efficiency by encouraging prompt pickup and return of equipment. In practice, however, today’s port environment often makes compliance impossible. Congestion at major gateways, appointment shortages, chassis unavailability, system outages, and labor disruptions routinely prevent cargo from moving. On top of these operational challenges, government actions, such as Customs and Border Protection exams, FDA holds, agriculture inspections, or law-enforcement seizures, can place containers entirely outside the control of importers, brokers, or consignees.

When a party cannot physically access or return a container, the incentive purpose behind demurrage and detention breaks down. At that point, continued billing raises legal and regulatory questions rather than simply operational ones.

Federal Oversight, Reasonableness, and the Incentive Principle

In the United States, demurrage and detention practices are regulated by the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). The FMC has made clear that these fees must be tied to a legitimate incentive to move cargo. When movement is not possible, charging fees may be considered unreasonable.

This framework places real obligations on ocean carriers and marine terminal operators. In disputes, they may be required to show that free time was reasonable, that notice was properly provided, and that the billed party had a fair and realistic opportunity to act. Automated billing, inflexible refusal to extend free time, or charging fees during periods of documented port inaccessibility can expose carriers and terminals to regulatory scrutiny and formal FMC complaints.

For brokers and multinational importers, understanding this regulatory backdrop is critical. Demurrage and detention disputes are no longer just commercial disagreements; they increasingly involve compliance, enforcement, and federal oversight.

Customs Holds, Inspections, and Seizures: Who Pays When You Can’t Move the Container

Demurrage and detention disputes frequently intersect with regulatory compliance and enforcement actions. When cargo is detained or seized by a federal agency, containers may remain at port, or under government control, for extended periods. Despite this, carriers or terminals may continue to issue invoices to private parties who lack any authority to move the goods.

This overlap becomes particularly significant in civil forfeiture and enforcement matters. Charging ongoing demurrage or detention while cargo is held as part of an investigation raises serious legal and equitable concerns. Addressing these situations often requires a coordinated approach that accounts for both the regulatory action and the accumulating port fees.

Depending on the circumstances, affected parties may have options to dispute charges directly, pursue relief through FMC procedures, or address fee exposure as part of broader enforcement or litigation strategy. Just as important, proactive contract review and documentation of access issues can significantly reduce exposure before disputes escalate.

Demurrage Isn’t Always Just “Part of the Cost of Doing Business”

Demurrage and detention fees are not an unavoidable cost of doing business, and they are not beyond challenge. When port delays stem from congestion, operational failures, regulatory holds, or enforcement activity, businesses may have strong legal grounds to push back.

For importers, customs brokers, carriers, and multinational companies operating across U.S. ports, understanding when these fees cross the line from incentive to penalty is now essential. Acting early, documenting delays, and understanding the regulatory framework can protect cash flow, reduce risk, and prevent unnecessary losses in an already complex trade environment.