Initially, Iran would send ships, including oil tankers, through the waterway to ensure it is free of mines before the strait opens to other shipping, FT reports citing sources

• Ships would not be charged fees during the temporary arrangement, the people added.
• If a deal holds and the strait reopens, the US would lift its naval blockade on Iranian ports and reinstate a waiver to allow Iran to sell oil and petroleum-related products, one of the people said.

Strait reopenings of this kind have historically been staged affairs, with the flag state sweeping its own waters before commercial traffic resumes, a sequence that echoes past episodes where mine clearance lagged the political deal by weeks and kept freight, insurance and war-risk premia elevated well after headlines declared the waterway open. The sequencing detail matters more than the headline: Iranian vessels transiting first without fees is a confidence-building measure, not a resumption of normal flow, and tanker operators and their underwriters have tended to wait for proof of safe passage before committing hulls. The reported quid pro quo, lifting the naval blockade and reinstating sanctions waivers for Iranian crude and products, is the standard shape of de-escalation in this theatre and, if it holds, would add Iranian barrels back into an Atlantic basin balance that has been pricing their absence. The relevant tells are whether the arrangement is formalised in writing, how quickly third-party shipping actually returns versus the clearing convoys, and whether any waiver covers petroleum-related products as well as crude, since the product channel has at times been the binding constraint. Past episodes of strait de-escalation have unwound risk premia in crude, the dollar's haven bid and gold in that rough order, but reversals on any breach have been equally fast.