California Port Taxes

[mcrcruiser]

We are seeing over $600 for port taxes for the Calif ports . We once use to di these cruises  but now stay away   because of the high   port taxes  .Both Mexico & Hawaii port Taxes are much lower . 

Besides being California does any one know why these port taxes  have gone up so much .They are even competing with Alaska & The Panama Canal for the highest  tax rates 

[chengkp75]

Shore power.

[Ipeeinthepools]

18 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Shore power.

That’s interesting.  So is it a net gain for the cruise line in ports with shore power with the passengers paying more?   I’m assuming that the cruise line is saving money by not burning fuel in port.

[d9704011]

16 minutes ago, Ipeeinthepools said:

That’s interesting.  So is it a net gain for the cruise line in ports with shore power with the passengers paying more?   I’m assuming that the cruise line is saving money by not burning fuel in port.

I doubt there is a 1:1 relationship between the port taxes and fees compared to the potential fuel savings in the 'shore power' ports.  Maybe the cruise line has passed along the reduced fuel costs by cutting everybody's fare by $2.

[CruiserBruce]

Seriously comparing US port taxes to Mexico? There isn't any obvious economic reason for higher taxes in the US? And Hawaii has 2 tender only ports...

 

Hopefully the board member with the great explanation of how port taxes are calculated will come along and explain them again.

[mcrcruiser]

2 hours ago, CruiserBruce said:

Seriously comparing US port taxes to Mexico? There isn't any obvious economic reason for higher taxes in the US? And Hawaii has 2 tender only ports...

 

Hopefully the board member with the great explanation of how port taxes are calculated will come along and explain them again.

Santa Barbara & Monterey are both tender ports . SF & LA are deep sea ports  & Ensenada Mexico is also a deep sea port 

[mcrcruiser]

12 minutes ago, mcrcruiser said:

Santa Barbara & Monterey are both tender ports . SF & LA are deep sea ports  & Ensenada Mexico is also a deep sea port 

Instead of the high port taxes  HAL should rebate the unused fuel savings  to off set those high port taxes in SF ,SD ,LA & Ensenada

[CruiserBruce]

1 hour ago, mcrcruiser said:

Santa Barbara & Monterey are both tender ports . SF & LA are deep sea ports  & Ensenada Mexico is also a deep sea port 

Gee...didn't know that. Only lived here 66 years and sailed out of all of those ports.

 

The ships are paying for the power, so nothing really to rebate.

 

The point of my post is EVERYTING is more expensive in the US as opposed to Mexico, or any of the Caribbean ports. So this really isn't a fair comparison. 

[mcrcruiser]

19 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

Gee...didn't know that. Only lived here 66 years and sailed out of all of those ports.

 

The ships are paying for the power, so nothing really to rebate.

 

The point of my post is EVERYTING is more expensive in the US as opposed to Mexico, or any of the Caribbean ports. So this really isn't a fair comparison. 

  Mexico is warmer  than the coast & we are able  to swim in  Mexican waters from Cabo San Lucas south   but not in the cold waters  off the coast of Calif .Same for Hawaiian waters  being nice & warm 

 Many people buy perscription drugs  in Mexico because of the high cost here in the states;wgich  is a shame .  We love the in port shopping in Mazatlan  where we can get a  Mexican beer for $3 vs the high cruise price  . We also buy  many things while in port with additional saving   . Where can you negotiate prices  not in the US but  at these Mexican ports .Lots of Fun 😁 

[mcrcruiser]

The Caribbean ports yes are very similar to Mexico  in buying any thing vs US prices 

[Sir PMP]

Hal should avoid these ports in the future.

[chengkp75]

The port fee I mentioned for shore power is the "hook up" fee, and the "delivery" fee to pay for the infrastructure that was built to provide shore power.  Those are flat rates, and can be passed on as "port taxes and fees". 

 

As for fuel savings, the cruise line pays for the shore power by the mega-watt-hour, just like your meter at home (though that's in kilowatt-hours), and there have been studies that show it is more expensive for the ships to use shore power than to run their own diesels.  The amount charged for the amount of power used, is an "operational" cost, and therefore is not allowed to be included in the "port taxes and fees".

[Ipeeinthepools]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The port fee I mentioned for shore power is the "hook up" fee, and the "delivery" fee to pay for the infrastructure that was built to provide shore power.  Those are flat rates, and can be passed on as "port taxes and fees". 

 

As for fuel savings, the cruise line pays for the shore power by the mega-watt-hour, just like your meter at home (though that's in kilowatt-hours), and there have been studies that show it is more expensive for the ships to use shore power than to run their own diesels.  The amount charged for the amount of power used, is an "operational" cost, and therefore is not allowed to be included in the "port taxes and fees".

Thank you 

[mcrcruiser]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The port fee I mentioned for shore power is the "hook up" fee, and the "delivery" fee to pay for the infrastructure that was built to provide shore power.  Those are flat rates, and can be passed on as "port taxes and fees". 

 

As for fuel savings, the cruise line pays for the shore power by the mega-watt-hour, just like your meter at home (though that's in kilowatt-hours), and there have been studies that show it is more expensive for the ships to use shore power than to run their own diesels.  The amount charged for the amount of power used, is an "operational" cost, and therefore is not allowed to be included in the "port taxes and fees".

The point   here is the high port taxes we pay not the cruise line for in port services which includes electric power to the  ships  . When does these high port fees end or do they ever end . There can become a time when they price themselves out of the market .  There is only so much consumers will absorb . Even Alaska is going wild with taxes as has the Panama Canal . 

 

 It seems to me that  these jurisdictions  can charge at will . If enough people don't accept it then things will have to change but  will they is the question  or continue  to pay high fees or even higher fees . Taxes never have gone down 

 

[Guest ldtr]

Santa Barbara charges a tax of $10 per passenger

 

Some of the LA port charges

 

Effective September 20, 2016, bundled Passenger fees are inclusive of (subject to Note 1 and Note 2): (1) Passenger fees (2) Dockage for the first twenty-four hours only (3) Wharfage for vessel stores and supplies (4) Lay Day Fee for the first twenty-four hours only

 

Effective Date Per Passenger Fee 9/20/2016 $13.50 9/1/2017 $13.91 9/1/2018 $14.32 9/1/2019 $14.75 9/1/2020 $15.19 9/1/2021 $15.65 9/1/2022 $16.12 9/1/2023 $16.60

 

(b) Pilotage charges will be assessed per gross registered ton in addition to a charge assessed on the overall length of the vessel per movement type (see Item 300) according to the following tables: Gross Registered Ton (GRT) Rate Schedule Effective Date 4/1/2021 1/1/2022 1/1/2023 1/1/2024 1/1/2025 $0.00665 $0.00703 $0.00742 $0.00783 $0.00827

 

Overall Length of Vessel in Meters (See Item 320)

 

Figure another $4000 or more every time the ship enters or leaves the harbor based upon ship length in addition to the gross weight fee

 

There are a number of categories that LA port charges for.  For those interested in the details here are the various categories

 

https://www.portoflosangeles.org/business/tariff

 

It all adds up rather quickly.

 

 

 

[USN59-79]

What @ldtr just posted certainly doesn't add up to $600. per passenger; not even close.

Ray

[Colorado Klutch]

Likely port fees in California are high for the reasons everything else in California is high; big demand. California is by the far the most populous state. It is easy for Californians to drive or fly to a California cruise port.  

California ports offer very popular itineraries. People from outside of California also have a reason to embark from a California port to go to Mexico, Hawaii and the South Pacific. 

 

That's a lot of demand. This allows the state to charge a lot of money so they do.
 

[Guest ldtr]

6 minutes ago, mcrcruiser said:

The point   here is the high port taxes we pay not the cruise line for in port services which includes electric power to the  ships  . When does these high port fees end or do they ever end . There can become a time when they price themselves out of the market .  There is only so much consumers will absorb . Even Alaska is going wild with taxes as has the Panama Canal . 

 

 It seems to me that  these jurisdictions  can charge at will . If enough people don't accept it then things will have to change but  will they is the question  or continue  to pay high fees or even higher fees . Taxes never have gone down 

 

Actually in LA and San Francisco they do pay for electricity as part of port services, at least according to the LA port fee list.  Keep in mind that California has passed laws concerning cruise ships and air pollution that pretty much requires shore based power where possible.

 

Electric current supplied by the Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles is subject to changes in rates without notification from the Harbor Department. When furnished to vessels at wharves and for services supplied in connection therewith through facilities of the Harbor Department, a service charge of fifteen percent (15%) of the cost of such electric current will be added for the use of such facilities.

 

They will continue to go up each year, just as the LA port tariffs show annual increases on all fees.  They will also continue to increase as cities and states change laws and raise taxes on cruise ships and their passengers.

 

Not much doubt that the fees will increase just as other costs increase.  In additions you have locals in many of these communities lobbying their local government for increased fees or even more restrictions limiting cruise ships. 

[Guest ldtr]

2 minutes ago, USN59-79 said:

What @ldtr just posted certainly doesn't add up to $600. per passenger; not even close.

Ray

That is just a small portion of the fees.  I just posted some as examples to show the annual rate increases.  No way for example to post the power charges in LA since we do not know the consumption, but if you click on the link you will see the section on power.  

 

 

[chengkp75]

10 minutes ago, mcrcruiser said:

 It seems to me that  these jurisdictions  can charge at will . If enough people don't accept it then things will have to change but  will they is the question  or continue  to pay high fees or even higher fees . Taxes never have gone down 

What you don't understand is that the taxes and fees paid by the cruise lines are a very small percentage of the total taxes and fees collected by the ports.  Cargo ships pay the same dockage fees, pilot and tug fees, etc, and also pay a tax on each container landed or loaded, just like the per passenger tax.  This affects nearly every price in your daily lives, as over 80% of world commerce travels by sea.  The cruise ship taxes and fees don't go to just maintain the cruise terminal, it all goes into the port authority kitty for upkeep of the entire port.  And, as you say, things cost more in the US than it does in Mexico or the Caribbean, so the cost to maintain the ports will be higher.

[Guest ldtr]

Just a little more information on the increase in port fees

 

The rule requires that every vessel coming into a regulated California port either use shore power (e.g., plug in to the local electrical grid) or a CARB-approved control technology to reduce harmful emissions. These include diesel particulate matter, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) oxides of nitrogen (NOx, a precursor to smog), reactive organic gases (ROG, another precursor to smog), greenhouse gases, and oxides of sulfur (SOx). One example of an alternative to shore power is what is known as capture-and-control technology that employs a “bonnet” to cover a ship’s exhaust stacks, both containing and treating harmful emissions.

 

The existing regulation stays in force through 2022; the updated regulation starts in 2023 when container, reefer and cruise vessels – already included under the existing rule - will transition to the new regulation. Auto carriers will need to comply starting in 2025. Tankers docking at the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach must also comply starting in 2025, while tankers in Northern California have until 2027. 

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, ldtr said:

Actually in LA and San Francisco they do pay for electricity as part of port services, at least according to the LA port fee list.

There are a lot of things on the "port fee list" that cannot be listed as "port fees and taxes" by the cruise lines.  Things that are required to be paid, simply because the ship is in port (like the hook up fee, and delivery fee for shore power) is required for any ship that enters the port.  The actual usage of electricity, while paid to the port authority, is an "operational" cost, just like potable water, or wharfage and stevedoring for the provisions and stores that are loaded, and these costs are not "required" but are optional charges that the ship decides it needs.  These cannot be included in "port taxes and fees" according to a class action suit against the cruise lines a couple of decades ago.

[FlaMariner]

13 minutes ago, Colorado Klutch said:

Likely port fees in California are high for the reasons everything else in California is high; big demand. California is by the far the most populous state. It is easy for Californians to drive or fly to a California cruise port.  

 

Not sure about this......This is dated (2016/17) but as far as passenger counts, California is way on down the list for cruise ship passenger count. 

 

Florida looks like the volume winner and I have not heard of sky high port taxes/fees there. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_cruise_ports_by_passengers

[Colorado Klutch]

3 minutes ago, FlaMariner said:

 

Not sure about this......This is dated (2016/17) but as far as passenger counts, California is way on down the list for cruise ship passenger count. 

 

Florida looks like the volume winner and I have not heard of sky high port taxes/fees there. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_cruise_ports_by_passengers

 

Fair points, but California doesn't have the massive cruise port infrastructure present in Florida. And California doesn't have the room to build such cruise ports. So maybe there is more demand for less dock space?

[mcrcruiser]

Ir could easily reach  the point where the port taxes for the 3  deep sea ports pushes business away from  the  California   ports   including cargo ships who may be apt to unload in Mexico   or  Oregon  . There are always ends to both good & bad things