Trump Floats 'Hormuz Venture' with Iran — Joint Toll Collection on the Table

In a statement that would have been inconceivable four weeks ago — when Trump was threatening to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities — the President said on April 10 that he is reviewing a joint "Hormuz venture" with Iran. A structure in which the United States and Iran jointly collect fees from Hormuz transit would transform the relationship from adversarial to collaborative, and would give Iran a revenue stream tied directly to keeping the strait open rather than using it as a threat.

The "joint venture" framing is structurally unusual for a US-Iran context. A joint commercial arrangement implies mutual legitimacy — both parties are recognized as co-operators in a commercial enterprise. That is a significant political concession to Iran, which has spent decades asserting its right to operate as a normal sovereign state rather than a sanctioned pariah.

How a Hormuz Venture Would Work

The mechanics of a joint toll collection arrangement would require resolving several complex questions. Who sets the fees? How is revenue divided? What happens when one party believes the other is not fulfilling its obligations? What dispute resolution mechanism exists?

The most likely structure, if this moves forward, would be a multilateral arrangement rather than a pure US-Iran bilateral — the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Oman all have legitimate interests in Hormuz transit arrangements, and their participation would provide political cover for both the US and Iran. The US and Iran would be the two largest players in such an arrangement, but embedding it in a multilateral framework reduces the political exposure of both governments domestically.

Why Iran Would Accept This

Iran's interest in any Hormuz arrangement is straightforward: it wants to be treated as a legitimate player in regional security rather than a country whose capabilities are simply tolerated. A joint venture structure, in which Iran explicitly participates in managing Hormuz, provides exactly that recognition.

The economic incentive is also real. Hormuz handles approximately $1 trillion in goods annually. A modest transit fee applied to commercial shipping — even something as small as $0.05 per barrel on oil transit — would generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year for participating parties. For an Iran under sanctions with a compressed oil revenue base, that is meaningful income from a legitimate source.

The Geopolitical Implications

If a joint Hormuz venture between the US and Iran were to materialize, it would represent the most significant normalization of the US-Iran relationship since 1979. It does not resolve the nuclear question — that remains a separate track — but it creates a shared economic interest that gives both governments an ongoing reason to avoid conflict.

That is probably the best practical outcome available from the current confrontation: not a comprehensive nuclear deal, but a commercial arrangement that changes the incentive structure for both sides in the direction of stability.