The absence of any official U.S. legislative proposal, executive order, or diplomatic initiative to rename the Strait of Hormuz underpins traders' strong consensus against the outcome by December 31. Geographic features of this scale fall under international maritime conventions and require coordination among multiple nations, including those bordering the critical energy chokepoint, rather than unilateral U.S. action. Historical patterns show presidents rarely pursue symbolic renamings of shared international waterways without broad congressional and allied support. Realistic scenarios that could still alter the trajectory include a surprise executive memorandum or congressional rider introduced in the final months, though such steps would face significant procedural, legal, and diplomatic hurdles before any formal change.