HOCC denies any plan to impose transit fees, confirms that its Safe Transit Service remains free, and warns shipping companies against fraudulent payment demands

The Humanitarian Operations Coordination Center, or HOCC, has formally denied reports that Yemen’s Houthi authorities are preparing to charge commercial vessels for transiting the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

In a press release issued on 1 August 2026 from Sana’a, HOCC said it had become aware of reports circulating across news websites and maritime media platforms alleging that Yemen intended to introduce tolls for ships passing through the strategic waterway.

HOCC categorically rejected those claims.

It said that it had neither taken nor considered any decision to impose fees for transiting Bab el-Mandeb and stressed that passage through the strait remained free of charge.

The organisation also confirmed that its Safe Transit Service for vessels was entirely free.

The statement marked the first direct and formal response from HOCC following a Reuters report on 29 July that cited regional sources as saying the Houthis were studying a fee mechanism for commercial shipping in the southern Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb.

Based on the latest official statement, the publicly confirmed Houthi-linked position as of 1 August is clear: no transit fee has been imposed, no fee mechanism has been formally adopted, and HOCC says it has not considered establishing one.

A direct denial of the reported toll plan

Reuters had previously reported, citing several regional sources familiar with the discussions, that the Houthis were considering charging most commercial ships transiting the southern Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb.

The same sources reportedly said that a dedicated body could be created to handle vessel approvals, waterway management and fee collection.

They also suggested that Iranian advisers might be involved in shaping the mechanism and that the model could resemble arrangements linked to compulsory insurance, security services and navigation management in the Strait of Hormuz.

Earlier reports from Lloyd’s List had also cited maritime-security sources as saying that senior Houthi figures had discussed the possibility of creating a Red Sea toll system.

Taken together, those reports had raised concern that Houthi influence over regional shipping could evolve from missile attacks, drone operations and maritime blockades into a more institutionalised structure involving vessel registration, political screening, differentiated access and possible charges.

HOCC’s latest statement directly disputes that interpretation.

Its wording was unusually explicit. The organisation said it had “neither taken nor considered” any decision to impose fees for Bab el-Mandeb transit.

That denies not only the existence of an operational fee system, but also the assertion that such a policy was under formal consideration.

The earlier reports therefore remain based largely on anonymous regional and maritime-security sources. No official policy document, tariff schedule, implementation date, payment channel or verified payment record has been published.

HOCC’s public denial significantly weakens the case for treating a Houthi transit-fee mechanism as an established or imminent policy.

It does not prove that no individual within the Houthi movement has ever discussed such an idea. However, in the absence of further evidence, the shipping industry should not treat the reported toll plan as confirmed.

Safe Transit Service remains free

HOCC used the statement to clarify how its Safe Transit Service operates.

According to the organisation, the service is voluntary and free of charge. It is available to vessels and companies that fall outside the scope of what HOCC described as the “declared ban”.

Such vessels may submit a request seeking additional confirmation regarding safe passage through the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea.

HOCC said responses would normally be provided within a few hours.

Shipping companies seeking such confirmation may send a Safe Transit Request to:

clearances@hocc.gov.ye

The statement reiterates HOCC’s previously stated position that vessel-identification, transit-information and safe-passage services are provided without charge.

However, the phrase “free transit” should not be interpreted as meaning that all vessels may pass without conditions.

HOCC explicitly limited its assurance to ships falling outside the scope of the declared ban.

That means existing Houthi restrictions involving certain states, ports, owners, commercial links or vessel-trading histories remain relevant.

The statement rejects the idea of paid passage, but it does not abolish the Houthi system of vessel screening, restriction lists and differentiated treatment.

For shipowners and managers, the key questions therefore remain whether a vessel is regarded as being linked to Israel, the United States, the United Kingdom or another targeted party; whether it has called at restricted ports; and whether its owner, manager, charterer or cargo interests could trigger Houthi criteria.

HOCC warns against fraudulent fee demands

One of the most important elements of the statement was HOCC’s warning that third parties may attempt to collect money by falsely claiming to represent the organisation or Yemen.

HOCC said that any individual or entity requesting payment in exchange for transit through Bab el-Mandeb did not represent either HOCC or the Republic of Yemen.

It urged shipping companies not to make payments or disclose vessel, cargo or voyage information to unauthorised parties.

The organisation also warned against the unauthorised use of its name or logo and against false claims of representation made for the purpose of collecting transit-related fees or other payments.

Any company or vessel receiving such a demand was advised not to pay.

Where safe and practicable, the recipient should preserve emails, account details, payment instructions and communication records and report the incident to:

compliance@hocc.gov.ye

This part of the statement suggests that the recent publicity surrounding alleged Bab el-Mandeb tolls may have created an opportunity for fraudulent intermediaries, fake clearance providers or other unauthorised actors.

The shipping market is particularly vulnerable to such schemes.

In the current Red Sea security environment, shipowners often operate with incomplete information regarding vessel targeting, safe-passage arrangements and identity checks.

An unauthorised intermediary could exploit those concerns by claiming to obtain a Houthi security guarantee and demanding a “transit fee”, “insurance charge”, “security-service payment” or “coordination fee”.

HOCC’s position is now explicit: its official Safe Transit Service is free, and any party demanding money while claiming to act on its behalf should be treated with extreme caution.

The “dual chokepoint toll” scenario must be reassessed

HOCC’s statement also changes the way the shipping market should assess the previously discussed prospect of political charges at both the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb.

The US Treasury has accused certain Iran-linked entities of supporting a Hormuz payment structure involving compulsory insurance, security services and navigation management. Related entities have been sanctioned by Washington.

Following the Reuters report on possible Houthi charges, the market began to consider whether the Iranian model could be replicated at the southern entrance to the Red Sea.

That raised the possibility that global energy and trade flows could face politically conditioned payment systems at two of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints.

HOCC has now expressly denied such a plan.

As of 1 August, there is no evidence that HOCC or the Houthis have formally introduced a standard Bab el-Mandeb transit fee. There is also no verified evidence that shipping companies have paid such charges under an official system.

The “dual chokepoint toll” scenario should therefore no longer be presented as a confirmed emerging trend.

A more accurate assessment is that Iran-related arrangements in Hormuz have been the subject of US allegations and sanctions, while HOCC has formally denied any intention to establish a similar mechanism in Bab el-Mandeb.

The two situations should not currently be treated as equivalent.

No fee does not mean no risk

The HOCC statement clarifies the fee issue, but it does not materially change the wider security environment in the southern Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb.

Missile attacks, drones, uncrewed surface vessels, misidentification and temporary restrictions remain credible risks.

Houthi authorities continue to classify vessels according to ownership, commercial links, port-call history and cargo destination.

Even where a ship receives a Safe Transit response from HOCC, the owner and master must still conduct an independent assessment of military activity, war-risk insurance conditions, flag-state and coastal-state warnings, naval advisories and the company’s own sanctions and compliance obligations.

A Safe Transit response from HOCC should not be interpreted as a legally enforceable safety guarantee.

Shipping structures are often complex. Registered ownership, beneficial ownership, technical management, commercial operation, chartering and cargo interests may involve different companies in several jurisdictions.

A vessel that appears unrelated to a restricted party may still be reclassified because of historical port calls, chartering arrangements or wider group affiliations.

The immediate practical conclusion for shipping companies is therefore limited but important.

There is no official HOCC transit fee to include in voyage costs or payment planning. Any request for money made in HOCC’s name should be treated as suspicious and independently verified.

However, the security, insurance, sanctions and vessel-identity risks associated with Red Sea transit remain in place.

From a reported toll plan to a formal free-transit statement

The information surrounding Bab el-Mandeb charges changed materially between the Reuters report of 29 July and the formal HOCC statement of 1 August.

The reported fee mechanism has not been confirmed by HOCC.

Instead, the organisation has publicly stated that it has neither imposed nor considered imposing such charges.

HOCC has also reiterated that transit through Bab el-Mandeb and its Safe Transit Service are free of charge.

It further warned that anyone requesting payment in exchange for passage does not represent HOCC and advised shipping companies to report such demands.

Based on the evidence currently available, the latest conclusion is therefore straightforward:

The Houthi-linked HOCC has formally denied plans to charge ships for transiting Bab el-Mandeb. Earlier reports of a possible fee mechanism remain unsupported by official documentation or verified payment cases and have now been expressly disputed by the organisation concerned.

Shipping companies should not pay any purported Bab el-Mandeb transit fee or provide sensitive vessel information to unauthorised parties.

At the same time, free passage should not be confused with unrestricted or risk-free navigation.

The fee question has been clarified. The wider security and compliance challenges of Red Sea transit have not.