The Port of Rotterdam Authority finances investments in port infrastructure itself, whereas the governments in Flanders and Germany contribute or make up the difference if their port managers make a loss. That leads to a distortion of the market, so that the terminals in Rotterdam lose cargo to their rivals in Hamburg and Antwerp in particular,” says Allard Castelein, Chief Executive of the Port of Rotterdam Authority.

In the study that was carried out by RHV-Erasmus University and Ecorys, by order of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, it was calculated that Rotterdam would handle around 7% more containers if neighbouring countries did not subsidise their ports. If the costs of keeping the Elbe, the Scheldt and the Maas dredged were counted too, that would be as high as 10%. According to the researchers, the impact on other types of goods is much smaller or even non-existent, because this cargo is, for example, more associated with processing in the port itself.

The 7% or 10% for containers is surprisingly high, considering the fact that port charges in Europe (pilots, linesmen, tug services, terminal costs, port tariffs) only constitute 4% of the costs associated with transporting a container from Asia to a destination in Europe. The impact is so great because of the fierce competition in the container market. A couple of euro per container can make a difference. If the dredging work on the Elbe, Maas and Scheldt are left out of the picture, the Flemish ports receive €0.54 per tonne per annum from the government, the German ports €0.81 and the Dutch ports nothing.

No subsidy

The Port of Rotterdam Authority expects no financial support from the Dutch government such as that received by the ports in neighbouring countries. On the one hand, it is not realistic to ask for this because the government does not have the money for it. The Port Authority already pays towards public infrastructure on a regular basis. On the other hand, it is not desirable in a Europe without borders for governments to all subsidise their own ports. The free movement of goods and services on a level playing field is the cornerstone of a strong European economy. The Port Authority will approach the European Commission and Euro MPs about achieving that equal playing field and is urging the government to do the same thing via its own channels.

No corporation tax

At the same time, this study indicates that it would be extremely unwise to ask the Dutch ports unilaterally to pay corporation tax too. This could increase the Port of Rotterdam Authority’s tax burden by an extra €50 million or thereabouts per annum. The government has been ordered by the European Commission to introduce corporation tax for the Dutch port authorities as of 1 January 2016. Other countries have managed to handle this in such a way that, in practice, port authorities pay no or very little corporation tax.

The Port Authority also expects the government to take heed of the negative effect that the strict application of European rules has on the port’s competitive position. For instance, the Netherlands makes it obligatory to hold a permit for the deposition of, among other things, nitrogen oxides in Natura2000 areas from 1 mol per hectare, whilst this only applies in Germany from 7 mol per hectare. The report also provides examples of the less stringent inspection of cargo in surrounding countries. Customs in Le Havre, for example, has stopped using a container scan. Subsidies make rail transport in the German ports more attractive. In Flanders, only a proportion of the inspection costs are passed on to the sector; in the Netherlands the inspection charges are self-financing.

According to the World Economic Forum, port infrastructure in the Netherlands is the best in the world. Thanks to the heavy investments made in the area by the Port Authority and the business community and the favourable geographic location at the mouth of the Rhine, the quality of the port of Rotterdam is excellent. Vessel traffic services, terminals and nautical services are superb. A structural, sizable subsidy for less well-positioned ports leads to sub-optimisation (which is ultimately bad for businesses and consumers), hampers European economic growth and undermines European integration.  

The latest statistics from the Port Hedland Port Authority (PHPA) show a 39% increase in throughput for the month of February, compared to the previous year. The PHPA recorded a total throughput of 28.4 million tonnes (Mt) for February 2014, compared to 20.4 Mt in February 2013. The PHPA’s Utah Point Multi-User Bulk Export facility recorded a total monthly throughput of 1.3 Mt, a 69% increase from the previous year. Financial year-to-date figures show total throughput at 230.7 Mt, a 29% increase on the previous year.

The support from President Obama and Vice President Biden – along with members of Congress, the South Carolina delegation, South Carolina Legislature, Gov. Haley and Mayor Riley – cannot be overstated in its impact on the SCPA’s future competitiveness and our role in the region and nation’s prosperity.”

The Administration allocated the requested $695,000 to continue the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers feasibility study of the Charleston Harbor deepening. The project’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement is scheduled to be released later this year and the Chief’s Report in September of 2015, which will recommend to Congress a depth to dredge the harbor. President Barack Obama’s allocations ensure that all aspects of the project remain on time and within budget.

Charleston Harbor is designated to receive $1.57 million in construction funding and $13.15 million in operations and maintenance funding.

“Being included in the executive budget again this year is incredibly important for our project,” said SCPA President and CEO Jim Newsome. “Our team is on track to ensure Charleston remains the most capable harbor in the Southeast, and we are grateful for the productive relationship we have with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.”

All levels of government have supported deepening Charleston Harbor. Vice President Joe Biden visited the Port of Charleston last year and emphasized the importance of deepening to 50 feet to accommodate post-Panamax ships that will access the East Coast after the Panama Canal expansion. The Administration has named the Charleston Harbor Post-45 Project in its “We Can’t Wait” initiative, which seeks to expedite the most critical infrastructure projects in the country.

Congress has demonstrated support for SC Ports initiatives with authorization and appropriations efforts through the Water Resources and Reform Development Act (WRRDA) and passage of the Omnibus bill. And in 2012, the South Carolina General Assembly set aside $300 million to cover the full estimated cost of construction for 50-foot or deeper harbor, ensuring that funding issues would not create delays in the project’s progress.

Harbor funding recommendations will now be considered by the full Congress.

With 45 feet of depth at mean low water, Charleston currently has the deepest harbor in the region and can handle ships drafting up to 48 feet on high tide. Deepening Charleston Harbor to 50 feet or more will open the port to larger post-Panamax container ships 24 hours a day. Currently, Charleston receives seven post-Panamax ship calls weekly. 

The facility which now has capacity for 140,000 tonnes of animal feed, will serve livestock industry in the Port of Liverpool’s hinterland of the Midlands, Wales and the North of the UK. The port has invested in six new JCB wheel loaders for the animal feed facility and has upgraded its automated grain facility control system, which will drive efficiencies in the discharge and transit of material from ship to warehouse. A major upgrade to the terminal management operating system by port technology specialist DBIS will include the automatic accrual of storage and handling charges, vessel discharge optimisation and the ability to provide real-time key performance indicator reports on both operational and customer service.

David Huck, Port Director at Peel Ports Liverpool, added: “This investment is just one in a series of significant customer investments we are making across our port group. As a service industry business, we are constantly assessing our offering to make sure our customers benefit from a best-in-class process handling and a consistent quality of delivery.”