U.S. non-party status to UNCLOS is far more a financial liability than its accession would be

Every financial concern raised against UNCLOS has been expressly rebuked by US industry; in fact, nearly every major US business possessing maritime interests has publicly and unequivocally supported US accession to the Convention.¹⁰¹ For example, the American Petroleum Institute (API) has repeatedly asserted that its members will not risk investing the billions of dollars required to drill in the US ECS without the legal certainty UNCLOS offers.¹⁰² Consequently, as long as the US remains outside the UNCLOS framework, it cannot receive any of the royalties it would otherwise be entitled to from the petroleum industry were ECS drilling to commence. As one UNCLOS proponent expressed, “it’s better to have 93% of something, than 100% of nothing.”¹⁰³ Therefore, as it stands today, it would be more accurate to characterize UNCLOS, as it relates to the costs to comply, as a squandered source of revenue, as opposed to a financial liability.