Iran may charge transit fees on the Strait, and in effect tax global shipping—an unrealistic idea; and if deterrence breaks down, it would be catastrophic...

Regarding the content of Trump's ten-point proposal that he calls “feasible” for Iran, the situation remains murky. But one point is very clear: Iran will tax cargo oil tankers passing through the Strait. According to the British Financial Times, the specific details (for example, Bitcoin equivalent to $1 per barrel) will be finalized before negotiations in Islamabad begin on April 10. In reality, this Hormuz Strait rent replaces Iran’s previously unrealistic demand for US war reparations, thereby narrowing the gap between the US and Iran’s negotiating positions.
Iran wants to institutionalize this “toll station” system in formal peace terms, which may also be unrealistic. But it’s not hard to imagine that by “packaging” the fees, many countries (especially GCC member states) can be brought to overcome their principled objections.
For example, although the 1936 Montreux Convention on the Turkish Straits guarantees “full freedom of navigation,” Turkey will still charge safety service fees to ships passing through the straits. Likewise, Denmark also provides pilotage services in the Danish Straits. A reasonable agreement premise is: the fee level would be set between Suez Canal transit tolls (Iran’s target) and the service fees of Denmark or Turkey, while Iran may retain discretion to offer discounts to friendly countries (especially China).
Another area that could potentially be reached as a compromise is, according to reports, that Iran is willing to split the related fees with Oman. Oman has previously reaffirmed its commitment not to charge transit fees, but Oman can passively accept part of the fees collected by Iran and use them for reconstruction in the GCC region.
Accepting any such compromise would be painful—viewed only as “choosing the lesser of two evils.” This is precisely where deterrence comes into play. Because if negotiations fail, the cost will be Iran re-blocking the strait’s choke points. At the same time, Iran will also be deterred and will not dare to take an excessively hardline negotiating stance—for example, Iran would have to face the prospect of the US or Israel resuming strikes (including decapitation-style attacks).
This successful scenario matches our expectations for the most likely outcomes of war and the timing of key milestones. Whether or not the scenario ultimately proves correct, it provides a benchmark for assessing the direction of risk over the next two weeks. Meanwhile, beyond oil and natural gas, disruptions in the physical supply of several key bulk commodities have been long-lasting, and the market’s reaction remains crucial for evaluating the economic, asset price, and policy impacts.
(The above content comes from TS Lombard’s viewpoint on April 8, for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice)#美伊停火协议谈判再生变故 #Gate广场四月发帖挑战