Executive Summary The Federal Maritime Commission has issued a final rule clarifying that shippers and logistics providers have two distinct paths for disputing unfair carrier charges: the existing interim charge complaint procedure or the FMC’s traditional complaint processes (formal complaint before an Administrative Law Judge or small claims complaint). Effective September 1, 2026, the rule addresses confusion that the interim procedure was the only route available. Crucially, regardless of which path is chosen, the burden of proof falls on the carrier to establish the reasonableness of any demurrage or detention charges. This gives shippers and logistics providers significant leverage in challenging unfair fees—but the choice of procedure carries important trade-offs in terms of cost, timeline, and procedural requirements.

FMC Clarifies Charge Complaint Procedures: New Options for Disputing Carrier Fees

(FMC明确收费投诉程序：挑战承运人费用的新途径)

1 · The Legal Foundation: OSRA 2022 and the Charge Complaint Mechanism

What Is a Charge Complaint?

A “charge complaint” is a mechanism created by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA 2022) that allows any person to submit information to the FMC about charges assessed by a common carrier. The statute directs the FMC to “promptly investigate the charge” and, if necessary, order refunds and penalties for charges that do not comply with shipping regulations.

Charge complaints can address a broad range of noncompliant charges, but demurrage and detention fees are by far the most common subject. The mechanism covers shippers, consignees, truckers, and any third party invoiced by a common carrier.

The Key Statutory Advantage: Burden of Proof on the Carrier

Perhaps the most significant feature of the charge complaint mechanism is the reversal of the burden of proof. In traditional adjudicatory proceedings, the complainant typically bears the burden of establishing violations. But under OSRA 2022, when a charge complaint is filed, the respondent carrier bears the burden of establishing the reasonableness of any demurrage or detention charges.

This is a critical advantage for shippers: instead of having to prove that a charge was unfair, the carrier must prove that it was reasonable.

2 · The Two Paths: Interim Procedure vs. Traditional Complaint

The FMC’s September 1, 2026 final rule clarifies that charge complaints may be pursued through two distinct avenues.

Path 1: The Interim Charge Complaint Procedure

The interim procedure was first established by the FMC in December 2022 as it worked toward a permanent filing process. Under this process:

1. Filing: A person submits a charge complaint and supporting documentation to chargecomplaints@fmc.gov. There are no filing fees.

2. Investigation: FMC staff in the Office of Investigations promptly investigates the complaint. The FMC can help shippers include missing information.

3. BEIC Review: If the investigation supports a finding of violation, the Bureau of Enforcement, Investigations, and Compliance (BEIC) recommends that the FMC order the carrier to show cause why it should not refund or waive the fees.

4. Resolution: If the FMC orders a refund, it may also initiate a separate civil penalty proceeding against the carrier.

Key Advantages:

• No filing fees
• FMC staff can assist with incomplete submissions
• Informal process with lower barriers to entry

Key Trade-offs:

• Less formal procedural rights
• Relies on FMC investigation rather than adversarial process
• No opportunity for the complainant to testify or provide additional information in the show cause proceeding

Path 2: Traditional Complaint Process

The final rule clarifies that shippers may also pursue a charge complaint through the FMC’s traditional complaint processes—either a formal complaint before an Administrative Law Judge or a small claims complaint.

Under this path:

1. Filing: The complainant files a formal or small claims complaint with the FMC.

2. Filing Fees: Fees range from $176 to $387.

3. Adjudication: The Administrative Law Judge or Small Claims Officer treats the complaint as a charge complaint, including applying the burden of proof requirement that the carrier must establish the reasonableness of any demurrage or detention charges.

4. Resolution: The matter proceeds through formal adjudication.

Key Advantages:

• Full procedural rights in an adversarial proceeding
• Opportunity to present evidence and testimony
• Formal decision with precedential value

Key Trade-offs:

• Filing fees ($176–$387)
• More formal and potentially longer process
• Complainant must be prepared to litigate

One Critical Restriction: No Duplicate Claims

The FMC made clear that the two processes may not run simultaneously. A person who files a charge complaint under the interim procedure can still file a formal or small claims complaint—even if the initial investigation does not support a finding of a violation—but filers are prohibited from filing a duplicate claim that has been decided on the merits.

3 · What the Final Rule Clarifies

Addressing Confusion

The final rule was issued to bring awareness that the interim procedure is not the only route. The FMC acknowledged that some shippers were confused, believing the interim procedure was the “only route for bringing Charge Complaints”. The agency clarified: “That is not the case. The Commission’s Interim Procedure is merely one way for the Commission to meet its statutory obligation to ‘investigate’ Charge Complaints”.

What Constitutes a Charge Complaint

The rule clarifies that so long as the complaint concerns charges assessed by a carrier, alleges a specific violation, and includes the applicable bill of lading numbers and invoices, it will be treated as a charge complaint and resolved accordingly.

Application of the Burden of Proof

The rule confirms that regardless of which path is chosen, the requirement that the respondent carrier establish the reasonableness of any demurrage or detention charges applies.

Effective Date

The final rule took effect September 1, 2026.

4 · What This Means for Logistics Providers

New Leverage in Fee Disputes

For logistics providers that pay demurrage, detention, or other carrier fees on behalf of clients—or that are directly invoiced by carriers—the clarified procedures offer significant new leverage. The burden of proof on carriers means that logistics providers no longer need to prove a charge was unfair; they need only to file a complaint and force the carrier to justify its fees.

The Choice of Procedure Matters

Logistics providers should carefully consider which path to choose:

The 30-Day Window Still Applies

The FMC’s demurrage and detention billing rules require that parties billed with at least 30 calendar days to make fee mitigation, refund, or waiver requests. If a valid request is made within this timeframe, the billing party must attempt to resolve the issue within 30 calendar days. Logistics providers should be aware that the charge complaint process exists in addition to—not as a replacement for—the standard dispute window.

Documentation Is Critical

To file a charge complaint under either path, logistics providers must:

• Identify the carrier and the specific alleged violation
• Gather and submit supporting documentation (e.g., invoices, bill of lading numbers)
• Confirm that the disputed charges were incurred on or after the date OSRA 2022 was enacted

The Growing Trend: Complaints Have Risen Substantially

Charge complaint activity has grown substantially since the interim procedure’s December 2022 launch. FMC reporting from 2023 indicated that complaints to the Commission over shipping industry business practices had roughly tripled over the prior two years, with the agency having completed 43 investigations into charge-related claims and resolved 36 of them as of that point—alongside carriers voluntarily waiving or refunding several million dollars in disputed charges. More current, Commission-specific figures were not available at publication time; logistics providers should treat this as an established growth trend rather than a precise current count, and can confirm the latest statistics directly through FMC’s public meeting materials and enforcement reports.

5 · What Logistics Providers Must Do Now

1. Understand Your Rights

Every logistics provider that pays carrier fees—demurrage, detention, or other charges—should understand that the charge complaint mechanism exists and is available. The FMC’s September 1 rule clarifies that two paths are available, not just one.

2. Document Everything

To file an effective charge complaint, logistics providers must have:

• Carrier identification
• Invoices showing the disputed charges
• Bill of lading numbers
• Documentation of any prior dispute attempts
• A clear explanation of the alleged violation

3. Consider the Interim Procedure First

For most logistics providers, the interim procedure is the logical first step:

• No filing fees
• FMC staff can assist with incomplete submissions
• Lower barrier to entry
• If the investigation supports a violation, BEIC can recommend show cause proceedings

4. Preserve the Right to File a Traditional Complaint

Even if a logistics provider files under the interim procedure, it can still file a formal or small claims complaint later—even if the initial investigation does not support a finding of a violation. However, filers cannot pursue both paths simultaneously or file a duplicate claim that has already been decided.

5. Act Within the 30-Day Window

The FMC’s demurrage and detention billing rules provide a 30-day window to request mitigation, refund, or waiver. Logistics providers should use this window to dispute charges directly with the carrier first—and if that fails, consider filing a charge complaint.

6. Monitor FMC Developments

The FMC has indicated it intends to establish a permanent procedure for charge complaints. Logistics providers should monitor FMC announcements for future rulemaking that may further clarify or expand the charge complaint mechanism.

6 · Conclusion: A Powerful Tool for Disputing Unfair Carrier Fees

The FMC’s September 1, 2026 final rule clarifies that shippers and logistics providers have two distinct paths for disputing unfair carrier charges: the interim procedure and traditional complaint processes. The interim procedure offers a cost-free, informal avenue with FMC staff assistance, while traditional complaints provide full procedural rights in an adversarial setting.

Key Takeaways

The Bottom Line

For logistics providers that have struggled with unfair demurrage, detention, or other carrier fees, the FMC’s clarified charge complaint procedures offer a powerful new tool. The burden of proof on carriers—combined with the choice between a cost-free interim procedure and a formal adjudicative process—gives shippers and logistics providers genuine leverage in fee disputes.

The message is clear: if you believe a carrier has charged you unfairly, you now have clear, accessible options to fight back. The burden is on the carrier to prove its fees were reasonable—not on you to prove they weren’t.

This analysis reflects the FMC’s final rule on charge complaint procedures, effective September 1, 2026, published in the Federal Register (91 FR 56053, Doc. 2026-17876). The interim procedure filing address is chargecomplaints@fmc.gov. For the latest contact details and procedural guidance, readers should refer directly to the FMC’s official website. Organizations disputing carrier charges should consult with trade counsel and logistics professionals for guidance tailored to their specific circumstances.