<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Along with funding through 2029, the reauthorization codified new responsibilities for the agency under OSRA-22.</div>

Along with funding through 2029, the reauthorization codified new responsibilities for the agency under OSRA-22.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Congress has reauthorized the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) for another four years while adding new powers to the agency for monitoring shipping exchanges and non-US ocean carriers. The House of Representatives voted Monday to fund the FMC through 2029, with the agency’s annual budget set to rise from $49.2 million currently to $57 million over the next four years. Along with the funding, the reauthorization codified new responsibilities for the FMC under the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). The bill now goes to the Senate, but there is no timeline for when it will vote. Among the changes in the reauthorization is a broader definition of a “controlled carrier,” which is subject to more oversight by the FMC. Along with a foreign government having a direct stake or oversight, a controlled carrier can now also be one that is domiciled in a foreign country subject to monitoring by the Department of Commerce or the US Trade Representative. Also part of the FMC’s reauthorization is a requirement that the agency’s annual report to Congress include an “analysis of any trade imbalance” that is the result of ocean carrier business practices. The FMC will also be empowered to investigate complaints against shipping exchanges. In a statement about the agency’s reauthorization, Rep. John Garamendi, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, singled out the Shanghai Shipping Exchange for the FMC’s new purview. By 2027, the FMC will also have to set out rules for registering and regulating shipping exchanges in the US. The agency will also be given one year for proposed rulemaking on how to develop containerized freight indices for shippers. The agency will continue to receive outside help in monitoring the industry. Along with reauthorizing the National Shipper Advisory Committee, Congress also authorized the FMC to establish a port advisory committee and an ocean carrier advisory committee. “This legislation builds on my Ocean Shipping Reform Act to deliver critical investments through 2027, strengthen the Commission’s independence, and ensure US businesses will compete on a fair and level playing field,” Garamendi said in the statement. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> </div>

Congress has reauthorized the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) for another four years while adding new powers to the agency for monitoring shipping exchanges and non-US ocean carriers. The House of Representatives voted Monday to fund the FMC through 2029, with the agency’s annual budget set to rise from $49.2 million currently to $57 million over the next four years. Along with the funding, the reauthorization codified new responsibilities for the FMC under the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). The bill now goes to the Senate, but there is no timeline for when it will vote. Among the changes in the reauthorization is a broader definition of a “controlled carrier,” which is subject to more oversight by the FMC. Along with a foreign government having a direct stake or oversight, a controlled carrier can now also be one that is domiciled in a foreign country subject to monitoring by the Department of Commerce or the US Trade Representative. Also part of the FMC’s reauthorization is a requirement that the agency’s annual report to Congress include an “analysis of any trade imbalance” that is the result of ocean carrier business practices. The FMC will also be empowered to investigate complaints against shipping exchanges. In a statement about the agency’s reauthorization, Rep. John Garamendi, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, singled out the Shanghai Shipping Exchange for the FMC’s new purview. By 2027, the FMC will also have to set out rules for registering and regulating shipping exchanges in the US. The agency will also be given one year for proposed rulemaking on how to develop containerized freight indices for shippers. The agency will continue to receive outside help in monitoring the industry. Along with reauthorizing the National Shipper Advisory Committee, Congress also authorized the FMC to establish a port advisory committee and an ocean carrier advisory committee. “This legislation builds on my Ocean Shipping Reform Act to deliver critical investments through 2027, strengthen the Commission’s independence, and ensure US businesses will compete on a fair and level playing field,” Garamendi said in the statement. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com

Container lines

North American ports

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

House reauthorizes FMC and adds to its oversight powers

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The handling and transportation of space components is opening up new opportunities for project cargo forwarders. </div>

The handling and transportation of space components is opening up new opportunities for project cargo forwarders.

<div class="phx-topic">Project cargo and breakbulk shipping company/forwarder Compagnie Maritime Nantaise (MN) has drawn up plans for a newbuild vessel designed specifically to meet the needs of the burgeoning space logistics project cargo sector. Part of the Sogestran group, MN’s fleet includes the MN Toucan and MN Colibri, built in 1995 and 2000, respectively, and designed in cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA) Arianespace program, for which MN managed vessel operations over four decades. Those dedicated vessels for space-related cargoes have carried the Euclid telescope from Savona, Italy, to Port Canaveral; the largest European geostationary satellite from Fos in France to Kourou, French Guiana; and the James Webb telescope from Seal Beach, California to Kourou. “The MN Toucan and MN Colibri are older vessels but very well maintained,” Mathias Audrain, MN’s commercial and business development manager, told the Journal of Commerce. “However, 2026 will see a new vessel order which will meet full space industry requirements, to carry all kinds of launchers and satellites.” The vessel will be specifically designed for the space industry and could be joined by a second order in 2026. “We must have two vessels because delays are not permitted in this industry,” Audrain said, adding the first vessel could be ready in less than three years. Despite its promised sophistication, the ship will be restricted to a maximum length of 120 meters to access Kourou port in French Guiana and other small ports. “Access to Kourou is tricky, via a narrow river, so we are limited on length,” Audrain said. “The main characteristics will be close to our present vessels, which cross the Atlantic with a five-meter draft but then we are able to de-ballast when we arrive, reducing draft to three meters in order to reach the Kourou pier.” <h3>Dealing with bureaucracy </h3>Modules and components transported for space range from overweight, oversize rocket sections and launchers to tiny, fragile and temperature-sensitive items – and yet geopolitics and bureaucracy, rather than the cargo itself, are said to present some of the toughest and most complex headaches for logistics specialists. Craig Russell, project manager at freight forwarder Pinnacle International Freight in the UK, described handling and shipping as the “relatively easy part.” He said the main challenges are geopolitical. “How do you move technologically sensitive components that could be under export controls, or how do you support cross-border collaborations with customs?” he said. Britain’s exit from the European Union has added to the complexities for shipments between the UK and EU, and the trade and tariff disputes set off by the Trump administration have also had their impact, along with ever-changing sanctions regimes. Pinnacle has an office at Space Park Leicester, a UK hub for space research located within the East Midlands Freeport. Russell believes there are massive opportunities ahead for project cargo logistics as space operations continue to soar. Freeport status could open opportunities for manufacturing, consolidating and assembling satellites and other products for export, but only if managed correctly. “This is a case of the [UK] government going top level down, putting these freeports in but without the practical support of how applying and managing a customs bonded facility works,” Russell said. Conversely, the US used to be relatively easy to navigate for space logistics because many products were duty free and could move in and out freely. Now, duties, temporary import bonds and other procedures make the process more complicated. Plus, geopolitical factors mean that trade partners for products and services change frequently. “In short, it is the procedural and compliance side rather than the practical that is raising the challenges,” Russell said. Security is tight and confidentiality is essential in this sector – and there is no room for error, he added. “Transporting space components is complex and planning can start several months – even years – before just one transport,” Russell said. “Everything must go smoothly – it is not during the operation that you should discover any issues. It’s a case of check, check and triple check.” Contact Felicity Landon at <a href="mailto:felicity@felicitylandon.com">felicity@felicitylandon.com.</a></div>

Project cargo and breakbulk shipping company/forwarder Compagnie Maritime Nantaise (MN) has drawn up plans for a newbuild vessel designed specifically to meet the needs of the burgeoning space logistics project cargo sector. Part of the Sogestran group, MN’s fleet includes the MN Toucan and MN Colibri, built in 1995 and 2000, respectively, and designed in cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA) Arianespace program, for which MN managed vessel operations over four decades. Those dedicated vessels for space-related cargoes have carried the Euclid telescope from Savona, Italy, to Port Canaveral; the largest European geostationary satellite from Fos in France to Kourou, French Guiana; and the James Webb telescope from Seal Beach, California to Kourou. “The MN Toucan and MN Colibri are older vessels but very well maintained,” Mathias Audrain, MN’s commercial and business development manager, told the Journal of Commerce. “However, 2026 will see a new vessel order which will meet full space industry requirements, to carry all kinds of launchers and satellites.” The vessel will be specifically designed for the space industry and could be joined by a second order in 2026. “We must have two vessels because delays are not permitted in this industry,” Audrain said, adding the first vessel could be ready in less than three years. Despite its promised sophistication, the ship will be restricted to a maximum length of 120 meters to access Kourou port in French Guiana and other small ports. “Access to Kourou is tricky, via a narrow river, so we are limited on length,” Audrain said. “The main characteristics will be close to our present vessels, which cross the Atlantic with a five-meter draft but then we are able to de-ballast when we arrive, reducing draft to three meters in order to reach the Kourou pier.” Dealing with bureaucracy Modules and components transported for space range from overweight, oversize rocket sections and launchers to tiny, fragile and temperature-sensitive items – and yet geopolitics and bureaucracy, rather than the cargo itself, are said to present some of the toughest and most complex headaches for logistics specialists. Craig Russell, project manager at freight forwarder Pinnacle International Freight in the UK, described handling and shipping as the “relatively easy part.” He said the main challenges are geopolitical. “How do you move technologically sensitive components that could be under export controls, or how do you support cross-border collaborations with customs?” he said. Britain’s exit from the European Union has added to the complexities for shipments between the UK and EU, and the trade and tariff disputes set off by the Trump administration have also had their impact, along with ever-changing sanctions regimes. Pinnacle has an office at Space Park Leicester, a UK hub for space research located within the East Midlands Freeport. Russell believes there are massive opportunities ahead for project cargo logistics as space operations continue to soar. Freeport status could open opportunities for manufacturing, consolidating and assembling satellites and other products for export, but only if managed correctly. “This is a case of the [UK] government going top level down, putting these freeports in but without the practical support of how applying and managing a customs bonded facility works,” Russell said. Conversely, the US used to be relatively easy to navigate for space logistics because many products were duty free and could move in and out freely. Now, duties, temporary import bonds and other procedures make the process more complicated. Plus, geopolitical factors mean that trade partners for products and services change frequently. “In short, it is the procedural and compliance side rather than the practical that is raising the challenges,” Russell said. Security is tight and confidentiality is essential in this sector – and there is no room for error, he added. “Transporting space components is complex and planning can start several months – even years – before just one transport,” Russell said. “Everything must go smoothly – it is not during the operation that you should discover any issues. It’s a case of check, check and triple check.” Contact Felicity Landon at felicity@felicitylandon.com.

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Maritime

Space logistics newbuilding to service booming project cargo sector

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The vessels take the carrier’s total order book to 36 ships to be delivered between 2026 and 2030, increasing its owned fleet to 150 ships totaling 927,250 TEUs.</div>

The vessels take the carrier’s total order book to 36 ships to be delivered between 2026 and 2030, increasing its owned fleet to 150 ships totaling 927,250 TEUs.

<div class="phx-topic">Taiwan's Wan Hai Lines will bolster its owned vessel fleet after approving a deal Tuesday worth almost $500 million for six 6,000-TEU dual-fuel LNG-powered container ships. Wan Hai, ranked 11th in the world in terms of capacity by Alphaliner, said the ships will be built by China's CSSC Huangpu Wenchong Shipbuilding. The vessels are priced between $75.2 million and $82 million each, giving the deal a total value of $451.2 million to $492 million, the carrier said in a Taiwan stock exchange filing. The vessels take Wan Hai's total order book to 36 ships to be delivered between 2026 and 2030, increasing its owned fleet to 150 ships totaling 927,250 TEUs. Its order book includes 12 16,000-TEU ships that will be the largest in Wan Hai’s fleet when they are delivered in 2027 and 2028. Wan Hai gave no details of where the new 6,000-TEU ships will be deployed, although they could join the carrier’s existing 600-series vessels on services between Asia and the Indian sub-continent. The ships further reinforce liquefied natural gas (LNG) as the next generation fuel of choice for ocean carriers, with this latest contract taking the total capacity of LNG-powered vessels on order to almost 4.2 million TEUs. That is double the 2.1 million TEUs of methanol-fueled vessels on order, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="b5f12c4e-8754-4025-849c-a8b4e06ae6f9"></dynamic-object></div>The shipbuilding order is part of a move by Wan Hai to expand its service network. In the first of these, the carrier's directors approved a $96 million deal Tuesday with Yokohama-Kawasaki International Port to lease for 20 years the Honmoku-futo D-4 Container Terminal in Japan's second-largest container port. Wan Hai will take over the terminal when CMA CGM, the current operator, moves to Honmoku’s D5 terminal by October next year. The D4 facility, with a quay length of 1,312 feet and three ship-to-shore cranes, has an annual handling capacity of 550,000 TEUs and will augment Wan Hai’s Ohi-5 terminal in Tokyo. The carrier also said it will launch a second trans-Pacific service in conjunction with Ocean Network Express in April or May of next year. The Asia-Pacific 2 loop will be an express service linking North and East China and the US West Coast. The full rotation is Qingdao – Ningbo – Los Angeles – Oakland – Qingdao. The AP2 service “will offer customers with a more comprehensive coverage between Asia and the US West Coast, delivering faster and more reliable transportation solutions to meet customer requirements,” Wan Hai said. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com.</a></div>

Taiwan's Wan Hai Lines will bolster its owned vessel fleet after approving a deal Tuesday worth almost $500 million for six 6,000-TEU dual-fuel LNG-powered container ships. Wan Hai, ranked 11th in the world in terms of capacity by Alphaliner, said the ships will be built by China's CSSC Huangpu Wenchong Shipbuilding. The vessels are priced between $75.2 million and $82 million each, giving the deal a total value of $451.2 million to $492 million, the carrier said in a Taiwan stock exchange filing. The vessels take Wan Hai's total order book to 36 ships to be delivered between 2026 and 2030, increasing its owned fleet to 150 ships totaling 927,250 TEUs. Its order book includes 12 16,000-TEU ships that will be the largest in Wan Hai’s fleet when they are delivered in 2027 and 2028. Wan Hai gave no details of where the new 6,000-TEU ships will be deployed, although they could join the carrier’s existing 600-series vessels on services between Asia and the Indian sub-continent. The ships further reinforce liquefied natural gas (LNG) as the next generation fuel of choice for ocean carriers, with this latest contract taking the total capacity of LNG-powered vessels on order to almost 4.2 million TEUs. That is double the 2.1 million TEUs of methanol-fueled vessels on order, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. The shipbuilding order is part of a move by Wan Hai to expand its service network. In the first of these, the carrier's directors approved a $96 million deal Tuesday with Yokohama-Kawasaki International Port to lease for 20 years the Honmoku-futo D-4 Container Terminal in Japan's second-largest container port. Wan Hai will take over the terminal when CMA CGM, the current operator, moves to Honmoku’s D5 terminal by October next year. The D4 facility, with a quay length of 1,312 feet and three ship-to-shore cranes, has an annual handling capacity of 550,000 TEUs and will augment Wan Hai’s Ohi-5 terminal in Tokyo. The carrier also said it will launch a second trans-Pacific service in conjunction with Ocean Network Express in April or May of next year. The Asia-Pacific 2 loop will be an express service linking North and East China and the US West Coast. The full rotation is Qingdao – Ningbo – Los Angeles – Oakland – Qingdao. The AP2 service “will offer customers with a more comprehensive coverage between Asia and the US West Coast, delivering faster and more reliable transportation solutions to meet customer requirements,” Wan Hai said. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com.

Trans-Pacific

Container Shipping News

Wan Hai inks roughly $500 million deal for six LNG-powered ships

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Data from consultants Trade and Transport Group shows the impact of regulatory changes as  de minimis traffic fell significantly while regular air cargo increased.</div>

Data from consultants Trade and Transport Group shows the impact of regulatory changes as  de minimis traffic fell significantly while regular air cargo increased.

<div class="phx-topic">A fundamental shift in trans-Pacific air freight trade flows since the US eliminated the de minimis exemption for low-value goods in May is becoming clearer, with a decline in China-US traffic replaced by booming imports from Taiwan and Vietnam. Data from consultants Trade and Transport Group shows the impact of the regulatory changes as  de minimis traffic fell significantly while regular air cargo increased. “The decline in China to US traffic has been more than offset, particularly by air freight from Taiwan and Vietnam, and it is mainly linked to computers and parts, as well as industrial equipment,” Frederic Horst, managing director of Trade and Transport Group, told the Journal of Commerce. In the first nine months of the year, US imports of air cargo from China were down 10.1% year over year, Trade and Transport data shows. But imports from Northeast Asia as a whole rose 36.4%, while imports from Southeast Asian origins were up almost 50%.  A deeper dive into the data shows US air cargo imports from Taiwan from January through September jumped almost 91% year over year, imports from Vietnam rose almost 80% and imports from Thailand were up more than 40%. Computers and accessories, industrial equipment and parts; audio, video and optical components; and mobile phones comprised the bulk of the air freight shipments. The trend has also been picked up by Taiwan-based Dimerco Express Group, which has urged shippers to factor the supply chain changes into their 2026 shipment plans. “Following changes to US de minimis rules, some direct China-US e-commerce flows have decreased, but more cargo is now routed via alternative hubs and forward-stocking models, making trade lanes more diversified,” Catherine Chien, chairwoman of Dimerco Express Group, said in a market update.  “Demand for high-tech, AI-related and e-commerce shipments continues to drive growth in air freight from the Asia-Pacific region to North America and Europe,” Chien added. “Shippers that can flex between multiple lanes, multiple modes and multiple origin countries will be better positioned than those relying on a single country or mode.” <h3>US import data distorted by e-commerce </h3>The main driver of inbound air cargo from Asia to the US has been e-commerce, which over the past few years has created a growing gap in US air cargo data. But the removal in May of the de minimis exemption for low-value imports from China, followed by the removal of de minimis rules for all US trading partners in August, has led to a fundamental change in the mix of air cargo. “Regular air freight imports – i.e. consignments greater than $2,000 – are up 16.5% for the first nine months, while overall inbound air cargo traffic (to the US) is down 2.5%,” Horst said. Data from air cargo analyst Rotate shows freighter operators have shifted capacity in Asia to follow the moving export trend. Direct air freight capacity offered from Southeast Asia to North America from May 2 – when the de minimis tariff on China imports was eliminated – through November was up 89% at 102,700 tonnes.  <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="8d7ed0b1-01de-471d-b540-bed610465c9a"></dynamic-object></div>However, the analyst pointed out that much of Vietnam’s air freight trade is shipped indirectly through Asian hubs in mainland China, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan, so the actual volume from Southeast Asia to North America is higher. The Freightos Air Index shows China-US rates at a 2025 high exceeding $8/kg this week, higher than last year's $7.30/kg peak, according to a market update from Freightos Tuesday.  The International Air Transport Association (IATA) expects global air volume growth of 3.1% for 2025 and 2.6% for 2026 despite the impact of the US tariffs on volume flows. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A fundamental shift in trans-Pacific air freight trade flows since the US eliminated the de minimis exemption for low-value goods in May is becoming clearer, with a decline in China-US traffic replaced by booming imports from Taiwan and Vietnam.  Data from consultants Trade and Transport Group shows the impact of the regulatory changes as  de minimis traffic fell significantly while regular air cargo increased.  “The decline in China to US traffic has been more than offset, particularly by air freight from Taiwan and Vietnam, and it is mainly linked to computers and parts, as well as industrial equipment,” Frederic Horst, managing director of Trade and Transport Group, told the Journal of Commerce.  In the first nine months of the year, US imports of air cargo from China were down 10.1% year over year, Trade and Transport data shows. But imports from Northeast Asia as a whole rose 36.4%, while imports from Southeast Asian origins were up almost 50%.   A deeper dive into the data shows US air cargo imports from Taiwan from January through September jumped almost 91% year over year, imports from Vietnam rose almost 80% and imports from Thailand were up more than 40%. Computers and accessories, industrial equipment and parts; audio, video and optical components; and mobile phones comprised the bulk of the air freight shipments.  The trend has also been picked up by Taiwan-based Dimerco Express Group, which has urged shippers to factor the supply chain changes into their 2026 shipment plans.  “Following changes to US de minimis rules, some direct China-US e-commerce flows have decreased, but more cargo is now routed via alternative hubs and forward-stocking models, making trade lanes more diversified,” Catherine Chien, chairwoman of Dimerco Express Group, said in a market update.   “Demand for high-tech, AI-related and e-commerce shipments continues to drive growth in air freight from the Asia-Pacific region to North America and Europe,” Chien added. “Shippers that can flex between multiple lanes, multiple modes and multiple origin countries will be better positioned than those relying on a single country or mode.”  US import data distorted by e-commerce  The main driver of inbound air cargo from Asia to the US has been e-commerce, which over the past few years has created a growing gap in US air cargo data. But the removal in May of the de minimis exemption for low-value imports from China, followed by the removal of de minimis rules for all US trading partners in August, has led to a fundamental change in the mix of air cargo.  “Regular air freight imports – i.e. consignments greater than $2,000 – are up 16.5% for the first nine months, while overall inbound air cargo traffic (to the US) is down 2.5%,” Horst said.  Data from air cargo analyst Rotate shows freighter operators have shifted capacity in Asia to follow the moving export trend. Direct air freight capacity offered from Southeast Asia to North America from May 2 – when the de minimis tariff on China imports was eliminated – through November was up 89% at 102,700 tonnes.   However, the analyst pointed out that much of Vietnam’s air freight trade is shipped indirectly through Asian hubs in mainland China, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan, so the actual volume from Southeast Asia to North America is higher.  The Freightos Air Index shows China-US rates at a 2025 high exceeding $8/kg this week, higher than last year's $7.30/kg peak, according to a market update from Freightos Tuesday.   The International Air Transport Association (IATA) expects global air volume growth of 3.1% for 2025 and 2.6% for 2026 despite the impact of the US tariffs on volume flows.  Contact Greg Knowler at  greg.knowler@spglobal.com . 

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo

Rising US air freight imports from Taiwan, Vietnam offset drop in China trade 

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The US Department of Transportation estimates there are about 200,000 holders of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, most of whom would lose eligibility under a proposed rule that would bar certain immigrants from operating commercial vehicles.</div>

The US Department of Transportation estimates there are about 200,000 holders of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, most of whom would lose eligibility under a proposed rule that would bar certain immigrants from operating commercial vehicles.

<div class="phx-topic">The trucking industry differs on how much of any impact stricter federal rules on immigrants driving in the US will have, with one side arguing that a crackdown will move the needle on subdued pricing and the other warning that only a demand rebound will end the three-year freight slump. The US Department of Transportation (USDOT) estimates there are about 200,000 holders of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs), most of whom would lose eligibility under a proposed rule that would bar certain immigrants, including asylum seekers, from operating commercial vehicles. No one has confirmed the number in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA’s) emergency interim rule; states issue CDLs, not the federal government. “There is a lack of clarity on where the 200,000 figure comes from in the first place,” Jason Miller, professor of supply chain management for Michigan State University, told the Journal of Commerce. Under the DOT’s proposed rule, only drivers holding H-2A, H-2B or E-2 visas would be permitted to retain non-domiciled CDLs. But the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has placed the rule on hold indefinitely. Even so, some industry executives argue that enforcement activity — rather than the rule itself — could have a more immediate effect on trucking capacity. Thom Albrecht, chief revenue officer of insurer Reliance Partners, said he believes up to 15% of current US truckload capacity may be tied to illegitimate operations, including cargo theft and carriers operating outside of US rules and regulations. Albrecht emphasized that the figure is an estimate based on publicly available CDL data, not an exact count. “That doesn’t mean we have 15% excess capacity. I would suggest it’s probably 2% to 3%. It would not take a whole lot for the industry to start feeling better,” he said during a webinar last week hosted by Deutsche Bank. “There have been so many bad actors let into this industry over the last few years. That’s the single-biggest deterrent for this industry to get healthy.” Ryan Joyce, CEO of cargo security firm Genlogs, said his company found nearly 1,000 Mexican trucking companies that are legally allowed to cross the border with international freight, but also operating far beyond the permitted zone inside the US. Joyce said those carriers are engaging in cabotage — legally delivering an international load, then illegally hauling a domestic load between two US locations. “The top violator, for example, was observed hundreds of times operating as far north as Minnesota, Wisconsin, and New York,” Joyce said on the Deutsche Bank webinar. He also said the non-domiciled CDL problem is tied to cargo theft, with some unsafe carriers shutting down one day, paying cash to obtain a new motor carrier number, and then reopening the next day, often referred to as “chameleon carriers.” Albrecht and Joyce are among those who expect a swift market response as insurers and USDOT increase scrutiny of illegitimate operations. “I follow certain threads of truck drivers online, and there are discussions that a lot of these non-domiciled CDLs coming up for renewal won’t be renewed,” Albrecht said on the webinar. “A lot of them have said that post-Christmas, that’s it for them. That this is the last hurrah.” Others, however, argue that the non-domiciled CDL and cabotage crackdowns will not produce a sudden spike in trucking rates. <h3>Skepticism abounds </h3>In audits conducted of Minnesota and New York, most of the violations cited by USDOT involved otherwise properly issued non-domiciled CDLs in which the license expiration date extended beyond the driver’s employment authorization, rather than wholesale ineligibility. And even when drivers with a valid non-domiciled CDL fail an English-language proficiency exam, many continue operating once highway patrol leaves the scene. Police cannot immobilize the vehicle because it is the driver, not the truck, who is taken out of service. “The driver will just wait a little bit and once the officer leaves, he’ll just drive off as if nothing happened,” said Cliff Bates, former owner of Capital City Trucking, a trucking company that went out of business within the last two years. “Even when the driver is dropped off at the next exit, the minute the patrol leaves, he’s walking back down the highway to the truck again.” While Bates agrees that reckless driving by some non-domiciled CDL holders is a major problem, he questions how quickly the Trump administration can act. “I think they’re going to cut off the spigot for new CDLs, but I question the assumption that this administration will act swiftly with midterms coming in less than a year,” Bates told the Journal of Commerce. He said rapid enforcement could raise rates and, by extension, consumer prices. Still, broader macroeconomic factors may limit how much enforcement alone can shift the market. Slashing capacity does not address weak US manufacturing data that has softened truckload demand, according to Miller. He noted, for example, that single-family building permits have fallen 10% from last year, as of the last update before the US government shutdown, and that fracking activity isn’t going to rebound with crude oil at current prices. “There are also individuals out there with the requisite background who could re-enter the [trucking] industry rather quickly if conditions significantly improve from a pricing standpoint, which would blunt any loss of non-domiciled capacity,” Miller said. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

The trucking industry differs on how much of any impact stricter federal rules on immigrants driving in the US will have, with one side arguing that a crackdown will move the needle on subdued pricing and the other warning that only a demand rebound will end the three-year freight slump. The US Department of Transportation (USDOT) estimates there are about 200,000 holders of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs), most of whom would lose eligibility under a proposed rule that would bar certain immigrants, including asylum seekers, from operating commercial vehicles. No one has confirmed the number in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA’s) emergency interim rule; states issue CDLs, not the federal government. “There is a lack of clarity on where the 200,000 figure comes from in the first place,” Jason Miller, professor of supply chain management for Michigan State University, told the Journal of Commerce. Under the DOT’s proposed rule, only drivers holding H-2A, H-2B or E-2 visas would be permitted to retain non-domiciled CDLs. But the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has placed the rule on hold indefinitely. Even so, some industry executives argue that enforcement activity — rather than the rule itself — could have a more immediate effect on trucking capacity. Thom Albrecht, chief revenue officer of insurer Reliance Partners, said he believes up to 15% of current US truckload capacity may be tied to illegitimate operations, including cargo theft and carriers operating outside of US rules and regulations. Albrecht emphasized that the figure is an estimate based on publicly available CDL data, not an exact count. “That doesn’t mean we have 15% excess capacity. I would suggest it’s probably 2% to 3%. It would not take a whole lot for the industry to start feeling better,” he said during a webinar last week hosted by Deutsche Bank. “There have been so many bad actors let into this industry over the last few years. That’s the single-biggest deterrent for this industry to get healthy.” Ryan Joyce, CEO of cargo security firm Genlogs, said his company found nearly 1,000 Mexican trucking companies that are legally allowed to cross the border with international freight, but also operating far beyond the permitted zone inside the US. Joyce said those carriers are engaging in cabotage — legally delivering an international load, then illegally hauling a domestic load between two US locations. “The top violator, for example, was observed hundreds of times operating as far north as Minnesota, Wisconsin, and New York,” Joyce said on the Deutsche Bank webinar. He also said the non-domiciled CDL problem is tied to cargo theft, with some unsafe carriers shutting down one day, paying cash to obtain a new motor carrier number, and then reopening the next day, often referred to as “chameleon carriers.” Albrecht and Joyce are among those who expect a swift market response as insurers and USDOT increase scrutiny of illegitimate operations. “I follow certain threads of truck drivers online, and there are discussions that a lot of these non-domiciled CDLs coming up for renewal won’t be renewed,” Albrecht said on the webinar. “A lot of them have said that post-Christmas, that’s it for them. That this is the last hurrah.” Others, however, argue that the non-domiciled CDL and cabotage crackdowns will not produce a sudden spike in trucking rates. Skepticism abounds In audits conducted of Minnesota and New York, most of the violations cited by USDOT involved otherwise properly issued non-domiciled CDLs in which the license expiration date extended beyond the driver’s employment authorization, rather than wholesale ineligibility. And even when drivers with a valid non-domiciled CDL fail an English-language proficiency exam, many continue operating once highway patrol leaves the scene. Police cannot immobilize the vehicle because it is the driver, not the truck, who is taken out of service. “The driver will just wait a little bit and once the officer leaves, he’ll just drive off as if nothing happened,” said Cliff Bates, former owner of Capital City Trucking, a trucking company that went out of business within the last two years. “Even when the driver is dropped off at the next exit, the minute the patrol leaves, he’s walking back down the highway to the truck again.” While Bates agrees that reckless driving by some non-domiciled CDL holders is a major problem, he questions how quickly the Trump administration can act. “I think they’re going to cut off the spigot for new CDLs, but I question the assumption that this administration will act swiftly with midterms coming in less than a year,” Bates told the Journal of Commerce. He said rapid enforcement could raise rates and, by extension, consumer prices. Still, broader macroeconomic factors may limit how much enforcement alone can shift the market. Slashing capacity does not address weak US manufacturing data that has softened truckload demand, according to Miller. He noted, for example, that single-family building permits have fallen 10% from last year, as of the last update before the US government shutdown, and that fracking activity isn’t going to rebound with crude oil at current prices. “There are also individuals out there with the requisite background who could re-enter the [trucking] industry rather quickly if conditions significantly improve from a pricing standpoint, which would blunt any loss of non-domiciled capacity,” Miller said. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Trucking labor

Surface

Impact of non-domiciled CDL enforcement splits US trucking sector

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Although major US gateways have made some progress in promoting data sharing on vessel arrivals, port authorities say more systemic thinking must take place among carriers and their supply chain partners to avoid a repeat of the meltdown that occurred in 2021–22.</div>

Although major US gateways have made some progress in promoting data sharing on vessel arrivals, port authorities say more systemic thinking must take place among carriers and their supply chain partners to avoid a repeat of the meltdown that occurred in 2021–22.

<div class="phx-topic">US container ports are receiving better buy-in from their supply chain partners, including ocean carriers, in sharing shipment information in advance to avoid a repeat of the congestion issues experienced during the post-pandemic cargo tsunami of 2021–22. But greater cooperation will be needed to handle the next cargo surge when it happens, port officials say. Managers of the Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA), the Port of Long Beach, the South Carolina Ports Authority and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey told the Journal of Commerce Port Performance webcast last week their data-sharing efforts are still hung up on the question of what proprietary data is. “We’re getting better buy-in from the carriers, but the issue is every sector of the supply chain thinks its information is proprietary,” said Beth Rooney, port director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. “If we are going to provide efficiency, we must think more systemically and cohesively rather than just focusing on your aspect of the supply chain,” she added. In retrospect, the vessel backlogs, congested marine terminals, displaced chassis, rail car shortages and fill-to-capacity warehouses that ports faced in 2021–22 were due to a lack of communication among supply chain partners, said Joel Britt, vice president-terminal operations at the South Carolina Ports Authority. The answer is greater data sharing among the supply chain partners, he said. “We’re trying to help them to help themselves,” Britt said. <h3>Capacity utilization a key factor in port performance </h3>A key indicator of the congestion ports experienced in 2021–22 was that the major gateways were operating at 90% to 95% capacity utilization, each of the four panelists said. Rooney noted that the industry standard for fluidity is that ports experience congestion after they reach 85% because then they have no buffer to handle cargo surges. Today, the Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) of Seattle and Tacoma is operating at 55% to 60% utilization, Long Beach at 54%, Charleston at 50% and New York-New Jersey 65%, the port officials said. A key difference in today’s supply chain fluidity is that warehouses in those regions are moving each season’s merchandise smoothly through their facilities to make room for the subsequent seasonal shipments, the port managers said. In 2021–22, the warehouses were filled to capacity, which forced importers to store inbound containers where they didn’t belong, such as at rail facilities, in truckers’ yards and on marine terminals. “It takes a long time to claw out of that,” said Jeff Bellerud, chief operating officer of the NWSA. Over the past several years, Seattle-Tacoma has developed or is in the process of locating near-dock yards for temporary storage of containers until they are needed. A second berth was added to the T-5 container terminal, a densification project at the Husky Terminal is underway and the port authority is working with railroads to develop support infrastructure to assemble longer trains and enable quicker train arrivals and departures, Bellerud said. Charleston’s Wando Terminal densification project has doubled the annual capacity of the port’s largest container terminal to 2.4 million TEUs a year, Britt said. And the Hugh Leatherman Terminal expansion project will have three berths with an annual capacity of 2.4 million TEUs, while the port’s near-dock rail project will accommodate 1 million rail moves upon completion, Britt said. Although Long Beach is a landlord port, in some ways it is resembling an operating port, said Noel Hacegaba, chief operating officer at the port. Long Beach is not taking over the operations, but rather is encouraging and contributing to measures that will improve operational efficiency. The Pier S facility is contributing to port fluidity as a logistics center for temporary storage of containers. Long Beach is developing the Pier B on-dock rail support facility for building longer inland point intermodal (IPI) trains to the US interior, a project that will be introduced in phases through 2032, Hacegaba said. In New York-New Jersey, every terminal is densifying its operations to increase capacity because the port authority has no more waterfront property to build on, Rooney said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

US container ports are receiving better buy-in from their supply chain partners, including ocean carriers, in sharing shipment information in advance to avoid a repeat of the congestion issues experienced during the post-pandemic cargo tsunami of 2021–22. But greater cooperation will be needed to handle the next cargo surge when it happens, port officials say. Managers of the Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA), the Port of Long Beach, the South Carolina Ports Authority and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey told the Journal of Commerce Port Performance webcast last week their data-sharing efforts are still hung up on the question of what proprietary data is. “We’re getting better buy-in from the carriers, but the issue is every sector of the supply chain thinks its information is proprietary,” said Beth Rooney, port director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. “If we are going to provide efficiency, we must think more systemically and cohesively rather than just focusing on your aspect of the supply chain,” she added. In retrospect, the vessel backlogs, congested marine terminals, displaced chassis, rail car shortages and fill-to-capacity warehouses that ports faced in 2021–22 were due to a lack of communication among supply chain partners, said Joel Britt, vice president-terminal operations at the South Carolina Ports Authority. The answer is greater data sharing among the supply chain partners, he said. “We’re trying to help them to help themselves,” Britt said. Capacity utilization a key factor in port performance A key indicator of the congestion ports experienced in 2021–22 was that the major gateways were operating at 90% to 95% capacity utilization, each of the four panelists said. Rooney noted that the industry standard for fluidity is that ports experience congestion after they reach 85% because then they have no buffer to handle cargo surges. Today, the Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) of Seattle and Tacoma is operating at 55% to 60% utilization, Long Beach at 54%, Charleston at 50% and New York-New Jersey 65%, the port officials said. A key difference in today’s supply chain fluidity is that warehouses in those regions are moving each season’s merchandise smoothly through their facilities to make room for the subsequent seasonal shipments, the port managers said. In 2021–22, the warehouses were filled to capacity, which forced importers to store inbound containers where they didn’t belong, such as at rail facilities, in truckers’ yards and on marine terminals. “It takes a long time to claw out of that,” said Jeff Bellerud, chief operating officer of the NWSA. Over the past several years, Seattle-Tacoma has developed or is in the process of locating near-dock yards for temporary storage of containers until they are needed. A second berth was added to the T-5 container terminal, a densification project at the Husky Terminal is underway and the port authority is working with railroads to develop support infrastructure to assemble longer trains and enable quicker train arrivals and departures, Bellerud said. Charleston’s Wando Terminal densification project has doubled the annual capacity of the port’s largest container terminal to 2.4 million TEUs a year, Britt said. And the Hugh Leatherman Terminal expansion project will have three berths with an annual capacity of 2.4 million TEUs, while the port’s near-dock rail project will accommodate 1 million rail moves upon completion, Britt said. Although Long Beach is a landlord port, in some ways it is resembling an operating port, said Noel Hacegaba, chief operating officer at the port. Long Beach is not taking over the operations, but rather is encouraging and contributing to measures that will improve operational efficiency. The Pier S facility is contributing to port fluidity as a logistics center for temporary storage of containers. Long Beach is developing the Pier B on-dock rail support facility for building longer inland point intermodal (IPI) trains to the US interior, a project that will be introduced in phases through 2032, Hacegaba said. In New York-New Jersey, every terminal is densifying its operations to increase capacity because the port authority has no more waterfront property to build on, Rooney said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Port News

Marine terminals

More data sharing crucial to avoiding future port congestion: officials

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Department of Justice seems to be suggesting that if the Supreme Court pulls the plug on the IEEPA tariffs, it won’t stand in the way of refunds — at least not for parties who get themselves properly in front of the Court.</div>

The Department of Justice seems to be suggesting that if the Supreme Court pulls the plug on the IEEPA tariffs, it won’t stand in the way of refunds — at least not for parties who get themselves properly in front of the Court.

<div class="phx-topic">The US Department of Justice quietly dropped a filing in the Court of International Trade last week that, depending on your tolerance for customs law drama, is either deeply boring or absolutely fascinating. Buried in the filing was a declaration from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with some eye-opening numbers: as of Dec. 10, 2025, the U.S. government has collected roughly $129 billion in International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs. That money came from about 301,000 importers spread across approximately 34 million entries. If you’ve ever wondered how big this issue really is, that’s your answer. It’s not a rounding error. Against that backdrop, DOJ told the CIT something very specific—and very carefully worded. If the US Supreme Court ultimately rules that the IEEPA tariffs are unlawful, the Trump administration would not oppose the Court’s authority to order reliquidation of the plaintiffs’ entries. In plain English, DOJ is acknowledging that the CIT could order those entries to be unwound and the duties refunded through reliquidation. No foot-stomping. No jurisdictional theatrics. Just a quiet concession that the Court has the power to fix this. Put even more simply, DOJ is signaling that if SCOTUS pulls the plug on the IEEPA tariffs, it won’t stand in the way of refunds — at least not for parties who get themselves properly in front of the Court. This lines up neatly with what DOJ has already told the Supreme Court in the pending cases: If the challengers win, they’re entitled to their money back. The only real question has always been how that happens, not whether refunds are theoretically available. <h3>Don’t expect ‘nice, clean’ refund program </h3>And that’s where the subtext starts doing some heavy lifting. What DOJ is very much not saying is that the administration plans to roll out a nice, clean, importer-friendly administrative refund program. There’s no promise of automatic reliquidations, mass refunds or CBP proactively cutting checks. Instead, the filing implicitly points importers toward the Court. If you want your money back, you may need to go to the CIT and ask for an order directing reliquidation. DOJ is saying it won’t object to the Court’s authority to do that—not that it intends to do everyone any favors administratively. This fits squarely with the broader reality importers should be preparing for post-decision. Even if the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs, refunds are unlikely to be frictionless. Liquidated entries will still need to be protested to CBP. Unliquidated entries will need to be protected. Some companies may pursue litigation; others may try to navigate administrative channels. Many will end up doing both. The idea that $129 billion is just going to flow back to importers on autopilot is, at best, optimistic. The takeaway is straightforward, even if the process won’t be. The government is already laying the groundwork for a refund framework that runs through the courts, not around them. Importers who assume this will all sort itself out may find themselves watching the reliquidation train leave the station without them. The smart money is on preparation, strategy, and knowing exactly which procedural doors need to be opened — before the Supreme Court tells everyone it’s time to start knocking Contact Pete Mento at <a href="mailto:pete.mento@bakertilly.com">pete.mento@bakertilly.com.</a></div>

The US Department of Justice quietly dropped a filing in the Court of International Trade last week that, depending on your tolerance for customs law drama, is either deeply boring or absolutely fascinating. Buried in the filing was a declaration from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with some eye-opening numbers: as of Dec. 10, 2025, the U.S. government has collected roughly $129 billion in International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs. That money came from about 301,000 importers spread across approximately 34 million entries. If you’ve ever wondered how big this issue really is, that’s your answer. It’s not a rounding error. Against that backdrop, DOJ told the CIT something very specific—and very carefully worded. If the US Supreme Court ultimately rules that the IEEPA tariffs are unlawful, the Trump administration would not oppose the Court’s authority to order reliquidation of the plaintiffs’ entries. In plain English, DOJ is acknowledging that the CIT could order those entries to be unwound and the duties refunded through reliquidation. No foot-stomping. No jurisdictional theatrics. Just a quiet concession that the Court has the power to fix this. Put even more simply, DOJ is signaling that if SCOTUS pulls the plug on the IEEPA tariffs, it won’t stand in the way of refunds — at least not for parties who get themselves properly in front of the Court. This lines up neatly with what DOJ has already told the Supreme Court in the pending cases: If the challengers win, they’re entitled to their money back. The only real question has always been how that happens, not whether refunds are theoretically available. Don’t expect ‘nice, clean’ refund program And that’s where the subtext starts doing some heavy lifting. What DOJ is very much not saying is that the administration plans to roll out a nice, clean, importer-friendly administrative refund program. There’s no promise of automatic reliquidations, mass refunds or CBP proactively cutting checks. Instead, the filing implicitly points importers toward the Court. If you want your money back, you may need to go to the CIT and ask for an order directing reliquidation. DOJ is saying it won’t object to the Court’s authority to do that—not that it intends to do everyone any favors administratively. This fits squarely with the broader reality importers should be preparing for post-decision. Even if the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs, refunds are unlikely to be frictionless. Liquidated entries will still need to be protested to CBP. Unliquidated entries will need to be protected. Some companies may pursue litigation; others may try to navigate administrative channels. Many will end up doing both. The idea that $129 billion is just going to flow back to importers on autopilot is, at best, optimistic. The takeaway is straightforward, even if the process won’t be. The government is already laying the groundwork for a refund framework that runs through the courts, not around them. Importers who assume this will all sort itself out may find themselves watching the reliquidation train leave the station without them. The smart money is on preparation, strategy, and knowing exactly which procedural doors need to be opened — before the Supreme Court tells everyone it’s time to start knocking Contact Pete Mento at pete.mento@bakertilly.com.

US signaling importers will need to do ‘heavy lifting' to secure possible tariff refunds

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Until the whole container shipping industry improves its reliability, the scope for any form of premium/bonus for above-target performance is low, writes John McCauley. </div>

Until the whole container shipping industry improves its reliability, the scope for any form of premium/bonus for above-target performance is low, writes John McCauley.

<div class="phx-topic">We are a strange bunch, we logisticians. One of our self-designed millstones is our key definition of success, and it is always unattainable either at an individual or aggregate level. For container shipping, I refer to on-time arrival (OTA), although for other modes this is usually on-time delivery. We measure on-time arrival as a percentage, with the only feasible outcome to fail; the only question is by how much. Those odds aren’t acceptable outside of shipping. The analogy frequently used is patient operation success in a hospital. If a patient operation is successful 999 times out of 1,000, do we want to be the one that didn’t make it? But seriously, as pertains to container shipping, there are factors beyond the control of the carrier, including severe weather at ports and on the water and strikes and other labor disruptions. That means a 100% on-time arrival within 24 hours of schedule is unachievable on a volume and consistent basis. However, levels of 60% to 65% at the industry level, with no historical precedent for greater achievement nor likelihood of ever getting there, mean we are in a doom loop of trying, other than hoping, to make it better. This is despite <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/value-unlocked-by-gemini-will-clear-path-for-premium-charge-maersk-ceo-6111339">the admirable efforts of the Gemini Cooperation alliance</a> of Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd to achieve superior reliability. Which leads to my observations about the suggestions of a premium for higher reliability levels, and particularly that carriers would want to claw back some of the benefits of lower inventory costs for beneficial cargo owners (BCOs). <h3>A few obstacles </h3>Firstly, all BCOs will keep a mix of carriers (dual or multi-sourcing) for multiple reasons, including schedule, risk of losing space, price, etc., which means that while one carrier may achieve above-market reliability, their benefit to BCOs will be dragged down by the performance of their other choices in the industry. As an example, Carrier A achieves 90% reliability, Carrier B 60%. You have to program your planning systems for one, not multiple, delivery durations. Which do you choose? None are ideal, too long and you unnecessarily extend inventory carry, but if those same shipments arrive early, you need warehousing. Secondly, what about all the other problems caused by poor reliability? Stock-outs, air freight, extra staffing, warehousing and more. Focusing on inventory highlights a cash flow problem; many of the others are either opportunity costs (stock-outs, lost sales) or real costs (additional warehousing, staffing, sales contract non-compliance). I am not at all saying that container shipping is responsible for all of this, but it is an important contributor to the problem. Thirdly, any premium/bonus for above-target performance must surely have an offset for under-performance. And by this I don’t mean adjusted performance taking account of externalities. The non-performance must be explanation/excuse agnostic, meaning if the one-time arrival is not met, then this is a fail. In other modes of transport, this is the norm and why targets are never set at 100% even for best-in-class. Finally, I am all for improved reliability; most actors in container shipping share that view. How to get there is tricky and requires strategic intent. Many carriers will see it as unachievable and not worth the effort given the likelihood of high uncertainty of any reward other than some degree of customer stickiness. Until the whole industry improves its reliability, the scope for any form of premium/bonus for above-target performance is low. The only way I can see it working is to have a premium attached to index-linked contracts, and even then, that must be linked to performance against an agreed target level with penalties. Given the favorable buy-side economics in current contracting, this may be one for carriers to put on the backburner. John McCauley, formerly a vice president of transportation and logistics at Cargill, now consults for shippers. Contact him at <a href="mailto:john-mccauley1@outlook.com">john-mccauley1@outlook.com</a>. </div>

We are a strange bunch, we logisticians. One of our self-designed millstones is our key definition of success, and it is always unattainable either at an individual or aggregate level. For container shipping, I refer to on-time arrival (OTA), although for other modes this is usually on-time delivery. We measure on-time arrival as a percentage, with the only feasible outcome to fail; the only question is by how much. Those odds aren’t acceptable outside of shipping. The analogy frequently used is patient operation success in a hospital. If a patient operation is successful 999 times out of 1,000, do we want to be the one that didn’t make it? But seriously, as pertains to container shipping, there are factors beyond the control of the carrier, including severe weather at ports and on the water and strikes and other labor disruptions. That means a 100% on-time arrival within 24 hours of schedule is unachievable on a volume and consistent basis. However, levels of 60% to 65% at the industry level, with no historical precedent for greater achievement nor likelihood of ever getting there, mean we are in a doom loop of trying, other than hoping, to make it better. This is despite the admirable efforts of the Gemini Cooperation alliance of Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd to achieve superior reliability. Which leads to my observations about the suggestions of a premium for higher reliability levels, and particularly that carriers would want to claw back some of the benefits of lower inventory costs for beneficial cargo owners (BCOs). A few obstacles Firstly, all BCOs will keep a mix of carriers (dual or multi-sourcing) for multiple reasons, including schedule, risk of losing space, price, etc., which means that while one carrier may achieve above-market reliability, their benefit to BCOs will be dragged down by the performance of their other choices in the industry. As an example, Carrier A achieves 90% reliability, Carrier B 60%. You have to program your planning systems for one, not multiple, delivery durations. Which do you choose? None are ideal, too long and you unnecessarily extend inventory carry, but if those same shipments arrive early, you need warehousing. Secondly, what about all the other problems caused by poor reliability? Stock-outs, air freight, extra staffing, warehousing and more. Focusing on inventory highlights a cash flow problem; many of the others are either opportunity costs (stock-outs, lost sales) or real costs (additional warehousing, staffing, sales contract non-compliance). I am not at all saying that container shipping is responsible for all of this, but it is an important contributor to the problem. Thirdly, any premium/bonus for above-target performance must surely have an offset for under-performance. And by this I don’t mean adjusted performance taking account of externalities. The non-performance must be explanation/excuse agnostic, meaning if the one-time arrival is not met, then this is a fail. In other modes of transport, this is the norm and why targets are never set at 100% even for best-in-class. Finally, I am all for improved reliability; most actors in container shipping share that view. How to get there is tricky and requires strategic intent. Many carriers will see it as unachievable and not worth the effort given the likelihood of high uncertainty of any reward other than some degree of customer stickiness. Until the whole industry improves its reliability, the scope for any form of premium/bonus for above-target performance is low. The only way I can see it working is to have a premium attached to index-linked contracts, and even then, that must be linked to performance against an agreed target level with penalties. Given the favorable buy-side economics in current contracting, this may be one for carriers to put on the backburner. John McCauley, formerly a vice president of transportation and logistics at Cargill, now consults for shippers. Contact him at john-mccauley1@outlook.com .

Premium pricing linked to vessel schedule reliability faces rough waters

{name}: {valueY} 
 {M-o-M:} {change_last_month.formatNumber('#.#%')} 
 {Y-o-Y:} {change_last_year.formatNumber('#.#%')} 

Global container volumes (CTS)

CTS Global TEU volumes (Monthly) Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The ubiquity of WiseTech’s flagship platform in the forwarding market has placed a target on its back — one that grew larger with a significant change last week in how it prices its product.</div>

The ubiquity of WiseTech’s flagship platform in the forwarding market has placed a target on its back — one that grew larger with a significant change last week in how it prices its product.

<div class="phx-topic">The number of complaints from forwarders about <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/wisetech-pricing-change-tests-shippers-willingness-to-absorb-tech-costs-6127788">last week’s pricing model change</a> by software provider WiseTech Global is an indication that the company’s flagship product has reached a level of market penetration that many technology companies can only dream of. There’s a saying in technology circles that software companies want their products to be so successful that everyone grumbles about them. That scenario generally only occurs when a product is so ubiquitous that it’s hard to envision an industry using anything else. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6133280_0.1.jpg"></img></div>CargoWise occupies that place in the world of forwarding. Simply put, most forwarders of any size and scale are using CargoWise for something, whether it be back-office accounting, transportation management, trade compliance or some mix of all three. By some estimates, CargoWise has as much as a 70% share of the forwarding software market, dwarfing the market share that even the largest forwarder, DSV (a current CargoWise customer) has over the logistics industry. Which means that WiseTech Global, with a $16 billion market capitalization, has a more dominant position in its market than its largest customer — with a $60 billion market cap – has in its market. That explains, in part, why something as seemingly banal as a change in the way WiseTech prices its product has created such a furor. Over the past three decades, a small software provider to Australian forwarders has morphed into a global technology powerhouse, a brand everyone loves to hate, because so many people must use its products. WiseTech’s fortress is, in part, built around a string of acquisitions of country-specific customs software vendors it made over the past dozen years. Those acquisitions give WiseTech direct connections to customs authorities that its competitors mostly lack, allowing its customers to remain compliant in a range of export and import markets. The importance of this network of customs capabilities can’t be understated — without it, forwarders struggle to help their customers clear regulatory authorities in key markets. That, along with general ledger and accounting functions upon which many forwarders base their operations, creates a scenario that makes it difficult for forwarders to switch to other solutions. As one forwarder put it to the Journal of Commerce: “It would be like ripping out a person’s circulatory system while the person was still alive.” <h3>No meaningful competition </h3>There is more to WiseTech’s dominance than its own ascent. A number of forwarding software vendors have, over the years, had designs encroaching on WiseTech’s turf. The list is not long, but it includes more than a dozen names, from sizable incumbent rivals such as Descartes, Softlink and Magaya, to upstarts that emerged in the past decade, including GoFreight and NewAge, to even newer entrants such as FreightSuite and Clear.ai. In addition, there are a number of regional providers that tend to focus on forwarders in their geographic market, most notably Riege in Germany. All of those providers collectively have failed to alter WiseTech’s trajectory, even as concerns grew from customers over WiseTech’s annual price increases and its sluggishness in integrating the products from its acquisitions. A new dimension to those concerns arose <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/wisetech-makes-2-billion-gamble-on-overturning-complicated-software-history-6013221">this past May when WiseTech made its biggest ever acquisition</a>, a $2.1 billion deal for E2open, a logistics software vendor that catered primarily to shippers. That enabled WiseTech to offer products directly to the customers of its core CargoWise users. Coupled with the upheaval from the pricing change, and an expectation from most CargoWise customers that the new pricing model would raise technology costs above the normal annual price increases, fully leveraging E2open would seemingly force forwarders to reconsider their use of CargoWise, if that is truly an option. For many, it won’t be. And so, if the anger around the pricing change model eventually passes without a wholesale loss of its customer base, that will be a sign that WiseTech has indeed reached escape velocity, and that the forwarding world is more dependent on the software provider than it had believed. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

The number of complaints from forwarders about last week’s pricing model change by software provider WiseTech Global is an indication that the company’s flagship product has reached a level of market penetration that many technology companies can only dream of. There’s a saying in technology circles that software companies want their products to be so successful that everyone grumbles about them. That scenario generally only occurs when a product is so ubiquitous that it’s hard to envision an industry using anything else. CargoWise occupies that place in the world of forwarding. Simply put, most forwarders of any size and scale are using CargoWise for something, whether it be back-office accounting, transportation management, trade compliance or some mix of all three. By some estimates, CargoWise has as much as a 70% share of the forwarding software market, dwarfing the market share that even the largest forwarder, DSV (a current CargoWise customer) has over the logistics industry. Which means that WiseTech Global, with a $16 billion market capitalization, has a more dominant position in its market than its largest customer — with a $60 billion market cap – has in its market. That explains, in part, why something as seemingly banal as a change in the way WiseTech prices its product has created such a furor. Over the past three decades, a small software provider to Australian forwarders has morphed into a global technology powerhouse, a brand everyone loves to hate, because so many people must use its products. WiseTech’s fortress is, in part, built around a string of acquisitions of country-specific customs software vendors it made over the past dozen years. Those acquisitions give WiseTech direct connections to customs authorities that its competitors mostly lack, allowing its customers to remain compliant in a range of export and import markets. The importance of this network of customs capabilities can’t be understated — without it, forwarders struggle to help their customers clear regulatory authorities in key markets. That, along with general ledger and accounting functions upon which many forwarders base their operations, creates a scenario that makes it difficult for forwarders to switch to other solutions. As one forwarder put it to the Journal of Commerce: “It would be like ripping out a person’s circulatory system while the person was still alive.” No meaningful competition There is more to WiseTech’s dominance than its own ascent. A number of forwarding software vendors have, over the years, had designs encroaching on WiseTech’s turf. The list is not long, but it includes more than a dozen names, from sizable incumbent rivals such as Descartes, Softlink and Magaya, to upstarts that emerged in the past decade, including GoFreight and NewAge, to even newer entrants such as FreightSuite and Clear.ai. In addition, there are a number of regional providers that tend to focus on forwarders in their geographic market, most notably Riege in Germany. All of those providers collectively have failed to alter WiseTech’s trajectory, even as concerns grew from customers over WiseTech’s annual price increases and its sluggishness in integrating the products from its acquisitions. A new dimension to those concerns arose this past May when WiseTech made its biggest ever acquisition , a $2.1 billion deal for E2open, a logistics software vendor that catered primarily to shippers. That enabled WiseTech to offer products directly to the customers of its core CargoWise users. Coupled with the upheaval from the pricing change, and an expectation from most CargoWise customers that the new pricing model would raise technology costs above the normal annual price increases, fully leveraging E2open would seemingly force forwarders to reconsider their use of CargoWise, if that is truly an option. For many, it won’t be. And so, if the anger around the pricing change model eventually passes without a wholesale loss of its customer base, that will be a sign that WiseTech has indeed reached escape velocity, and that the forwarding world is more dependent on the software provider than it had believed. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Logistics Technology News

Forwarding

Supply chain

CargoWise’s pricing model change could mark final milestone in market ascent

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">New analysis shows a systematic displacement of tonnage from primary to secondary trade lanes has occurred over the past two years, while a shortage of capacity is looming over the smaller shipping segment. </div>

New analysis shows a systematic displacement of tonnage from primary to secondary trade lanes has occurred over the past two years, while a shortage of capacity is looming over the smaller shipping segment.

<div class="phx-topic">The massive injection of larger vessels into the Asia-Europe and Asia-Mediterranean trades over the past two years has pushed smaller vessels into the trans-Atlantic and Latin America corridors, spreading structural overcapacity to secondary lanes. However, despite more than 1.7 million TEUs of new tonnage set to be delivered in 2026, mostly in the 15,000-to-24,000-TEU range, there is a growing mismatch in terms of the size of ships needed, with vessels in the sub-5,000-TEU segment — the backbone of intra-regional and feeder networks — aging rapidly, according to new analysis. A systematic displacement of tonnage from primary to secondary trade lanes over the past two years was driven by extreme outward pressure from the Red Sea diversions, drought in the Panama Canal and the reshuffling of alliances in the first half of 2025, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. “To maintain weekly service frequency while navigating the longer sailing distances on Asia-Europe, carriers were forced to inject significant additional tonnage into Asia-North Europe,” Alan Murphy, CEO of Sea-Intelligence, wrote in this week’s Sunday Spotlight newsletter. The injection of so much capacity triggered a massive downstream effect. As carriers introduced new 24,000-TEU vessels into the extended North Europe services, the existing 14,000-to-20,000-TEU vessels were cascaded directly into the Asia-Mediterranean trade lane. In the trans-Pacific, the capacity management on the Asia-North America West and East coast trades through 2024 was operational in nature as carriers shuffled tonnage between the two trade lanes to mitigate Panama Canal draft restrictions, US port labor disruptions and the after-effects of the pandemic-induced volatility. The net effect was high movement of ships but not much change in capacity. In February of this year, the launch of new alliance structures — Gemini Cooperation, Premier Alliance and Mediterranean Shipping Co. as a standalone venture — provided the catalyst for a massive network shakeup, Sea-Intelligence noted. Carriers broke up established service loops and repositioned vessels globally to fit the new service networks. Volatile demand on Asia-North America West Coast saw a net reduction of 427,432 TEUs in the first half of 2025 as carriers blanked sailings to try to support rates, Murphy noted in the Sunday Spotlight. At the same time, the rapid growth on Asia-Mediterranean subsided, with Murphy surmising that after 18 months of absorbing cascaded tonnage from Asia-North Europe, the trade lane had likely reached a saturation point. In the first half of this year, the net capacity growth into Asia-Mediterranean decelerated by 79% compared with 2024. <h3>Steady operational state </h3>By the second half of 2025, the new alliance networks had reached a relatively steady operational state with the Mediterranean-North America East Coast trade lane emerging as a key cascading corridor, absorbing 127,686 TEUs in the second half, with most of that capacity from the Asia-Mediterranean trade, the Sunday Spotlight noted. A total of 14 vessels were shifted in the second half, 11 of those of 14,000 to 15,000 TEUs. Asia-East Coast South America (ECSA) was the next biggest net gainer in the second half, absorbing 112,998 TEUs. Most of that was from the two Asia-North America trade lanes that cascaded a combined 283,946 TEUs. A total of 32 vessels were shifted, with 72% of them in the 8,000- to 14,000-TEU segment. But Murphy noted that the nature of the growth in capacity was fundamentally different from the previous year, with 97% of the vessels entering the Asia-East Coast South America trade taking up permanent employment there and not being returned to their previous routes. “This meant that Asia-ECSA became a seemingly preferred destination for mid-size tonnage of 8,000-14,000 TEU vessels that had been cycled out of the main east-west trade lanes,” he said. As the dust settles from the alliance reshuffling of capacity, new analysis from consultancy MDS Transmodal notes that should carriers return to large-scale Red Sea transits, it will expose the imbalance that has built up in the global fleet over the past few years. “While much of the industry has focused on the temporary capacity absorption created by rerouting around Africa, the underlying fundamentals point to something far more persistent: a container fleet that is oversupplied at the top end but increasingly shrinking at the bottom,” Antonella Teodoro, senior consultant at MDS Transmodal, noted in her analysis titled The Post-Red Sea Fleet Paradox: Oversupply at the Top, Shortages at the Bottom. “As diversions unwind and new ships continue to arrive, the industry faces two very different capacity problems — one defined by excess, the other by scarcity,” Teodoro said. <h3>Small ships crucial to regional segment </h3>In 2025, the capacity ordered in the 10,000-to-20,000-TEU bracket was 1.6 million TEUs and the ships greater than 20,000 TEUs comprised 1.3 million TEUs. By contrast, in the less-than-5,000-TEU segment, the 2025 order book was at 442,182 TEUs, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Teodoro said the sub-5,000-TEU segment was crucial for the intra-regional and feeder networks, but more than 60% of the vessels were at least 25 years old or older, making them prime scrapping candidates. Yet the order book in these size categories was almost non-existent. “By 2030, the global fleet below 2,500 TEUs could contract by 40% to 80%, with the 500-to-999-TEU category almost disappearing entirely,” she said. “This matters because many port systems depend on these vessels in a way that cannot be substituted ... by larger tonnage, regardless of how cheap or abundant it becomes.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="5ea90874-1017-4ee9-a80c-de2dfc51d88b"></dynamic-object></div>Alphaliner shipping analyst Mael Pape-Léostic said there are 593 vessels in the sub-5,000-TEU bracket that are 25 years old or older out of 4,473 ships currently trading — 13% of the fleet. In the sub-2,500-TEU segment, 17% of the trading fleet is 25 years old or older. “After a first wave of orders mainly focusing on large ships, we saw carriers this year in particular ordering smaller units with a high interest for specific classes like Bangkokmax [1,700-1,900 TEUs] and Chittagongmax [2,800 TEUs],” Pape-Léostic told the Journal of Commerce. “The ships of smaller segments of the market are aging, but it seems that carriers and non-operating owners are now in the process of rejuvenating this fleet after having focused on mainliners,” he added. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The massive injection of larger vessels into the Asia-Europe and Asia-Mediterranean trades over the past two years has pushed smaller vessels into the trans-Atlantic and Latin America corridors, spreading structural overcapacity to secondary lanes. However, despite more than 1.7 million TEUs of new tonnage set to be delivered in 2026, mostly in the 15,000-to-24,000-TEU range, there is a growing mismatch in terms of the size of ships needed, with vessels in the sub-5,000-TEU segment — the backbone of intra-regional and feeder networks — aging rapidly, according to new analysis. A systematic displacement of tonnage from primary to secondary trade lanes over the past two years was driven by extreme outward pressure from the Red Sea diversions, drought in the Panama Canal and the reshuffling of alliances in the first half of 2025, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. “To maintain weekly service frequency while navigating the longer sailing distances on Asia-Europe, carriers were forced to inject significant additional tonnage into Asia-North Europe,” Alan Murphy, CEO of Sea-Intelligence, wrote in this week’s Sunday Spotlight newsletter. The injection of so much capacity triggered a massive downstream effect. As carriers introduced new 24,000-TEU vessels into the extended North Europe services, the existing 14,000-to-20,000-TEU vessels were cascaded directly into the Asia-Mediterranean trade lane. In the trans-Pacific, the capacity management on the Asia-North America West and East coast trades through 2024 was operational in nature as carriers shuffled tonnage between the two trade lanes to mitigate Panama Canal draft restrictions, US port labor disruptions and the after-effects of the pandemic-induced volatility. The net effect was high movement of ships but not much change in capacity. In February of this year, the launch of new alliance structures — Gemini Cooperation, Premier Alliance and Mediterranean Shipping Co. as a standalone venture — provided the catalyst for a massive network shakeup, Sea-Intelligence noted. Carriers broke up established service loops and repositioned vessels globally to fit the new service networks. Volatile demand on Asia-North America West Coast saw a net reduction of 427,432 TEUs in the first half of 2025 as carriers blanked sailings to try to support rates, Murphy noted in the Sunday Spotlight. At the same time, the rapid growth on Asia-Mediterranean subsided, with Murphy surmising that after 18 months of absorbing cascaded tonnage from Asia-North Europe, the trade lane had likely reached a saturation point. In the first half of this year, the net capacity growth into Asia-Mediterranean decelerated by 79% compared with 2024. Steady operational state By the second half of 2025, the new alliance networks had reached a relatively steady operational state with the Mediterranean-North America East Coast trade lane emerging as a key cascading corridor, absorbing 127,686 TEUs in the second half, with most of that capacity from the Asia-Mediterranean trade, the Sunday Spotlight noted. A total of 14 vessels were shifted in the second half, 11 of those of 14,000 to 15,000 TEUs. Asia-East Coast South America (ECSA) was the next biggest net gainer in the second half, absorbing 112,998 TEUs. Most of that was from the two Asia-North America trade lanes that cascaded a combined 283,946 TEUs. A total of 32 vessels were shifted, with 72% of them in the 8,000- to 14,000-TEU segment. But Murphy noted that the nature of the growth in capacity was fundamentally different from the previous year, with 97% of the vessels entering the Asia-East Coast South America trade taking up permanent employment there and not being returned to their previous routes. “This meant that Asia-ECSA became a seemingly preferred destination for mid-size tonnage of 8,000-14,000 TEU vessels that had been cycled out of the main east-west trade lanes,” he said. As the dust settles from the alliance reshuffling of capacity, new analysis from consultancy MDS Transmodal notes that should carriers return to large-scale Red Sea transits, it will expose the imbalance that has built up in the global fleet over the past few years. “While much of the industry has focused on the temporary capacity absorption created by rerouting around Africa, the underlying fundamentals point to something far more persistent: a container fleet that is oversupplied at the top end but increasingly shrinking at the bottom,” Antonella Teodoro, senior consultant at MDS Transmodal, noted in her analysis titled The Post-Red Sea Fleet Paradox: Oversupply at the Top, Shortages at the Bottom. “As diversions unwind and new ships continue to arrive, the industry faces two very different capacity problems — one defined by excess, the other by scarcity,” Teodoro said. Small ships crucial to regional segment In 2025, the capacity ordered in the 10,000-to-20,000-TEU bracket was 1.6 million TEUs and the ships greater than 20,000 TEUs comprised 1.3 million TEUs. By contrast, in the less-than-5,000-TEU segment, the 2025 order book was at 442,182 TEUs, according to Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Teodoro said the sub-5,000-TEU segment was crucial for the intra-regional and feeder networks, but more than 60% of the vessels were at least 25 years old or older, making them prime scrapping candidates. Yet the order book in these size categories was almost non-existent. “By 2030, the global fleet below 2,500 TEUs could contract by 40% to 80%, with the 500-to-999-TEU category almost disappearing entirely,” she said. “This matters because many port systems depend on these vessels in a way that cannot be substituted ... by larger tonnage, regardless of how cheap or abundant it becomes.” Alphaliner shipping analyst Mael Pape-Léostic said there are 593 vessels in the sub-5,000-TEU bracket that are 25 years old or older out of 4,473 ships currently trading — 13% of the fleet. In the sub-2,500-TEU segment, 17% of the trading fleet is 25 years old or older. “After a first wave of orders mainly focusing on large ships, we saw carriers this year in particular ordering smaller units with a high interest for specific classes like Bangkokmax [1,700-1,900 TEUs] and Chittagongmax [2,800 TEUs],” Pape-Léostic told the Journal of Commerce. “The ships of smaller segments of the market are aging, but it seems that carriers and non-operating owners are now in the process of rejuvenating this fleet after having focused on mainliners,” he added. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Trans-Atlantic

Asia-Europe

Cascading container tonnage spreads structural overcapacity to secondary lanes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The rise in bookings is driving an increase in the capacity offered by ocean carriers on Asia to North Europe and the Mediterranean that this week reached record levels on both trades. </div>

The rise in bookings is driving an increase in the capacity offered by ocean carriers on Asia to North Europe and the Mediterranean that this week reached record levels on both trades.

<div class="phx-topic">Robust demand in December is filling ships on the Asia to North Europe and Mediterranean container shipping trades, with the strong volume expected to continue through January as cargo owners lock in bookings ahead of February’s Lunar New Year. Data from container shipment tracker Vizion shows bookings for the three weeks ending Dec. 7 rose 10% compared with the prior three weeks, with 207,000 TEUs booked on Asia-Europe. Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said high demand in December has become a “new normal” on the westbound corridors. “In 2023 and 2024, and probably also 2025, December is the month of the year with the highest demand,” he said, adding that it was “real demand” with no sign of shippers frontloading orders. The rise in bookings is driving an increase in the capacity offered by ocean carriers on Asia to North Europe and the Mediterranean that this week reached record levels on both trades. Data from Xeneta shows carriers are deploying 1.12 million TEUs of capacity in December on Asia-North Europe while blanking 84,000 TEUs, down from 126,000 TEUs blanked in November. Planned capacity for the trade in January is at a record 1.17 million TEUs, while blanks announced so far are at 54,000 TEUs. Capacity deployed on Asia-Mediterranean in December is at 788,842 TEUs with 69,218 TEUs blanked, compared with November, when 713,489 TEUs were deployed and 98,296 TEUs blanked, Xeneta data shows. A record 849,371 TEUs are planned for January deployment, with blank sailings currently at 39,706 TEUs. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="f4ff8e0a-22c0-44e8-99ff-43c43501ec74"></dynamic-object></div>A spokesperson for Hapag-Lloyd said regular capacity deployed on the main trade lanes into Europe was increasing to meet the rising demand, while rates “are expected to peak in early January with a gradual slowdown towards February.” The rising volume through the fourth quarter is being accompanied by a steep increase in spot rates. Asia-North Europe rates reached $2,350 per FEU as of Dec. 9, up 80% since the beginning of October, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Asia-Mediterranean rates of $3,250/FEU this week are just over double where they were on Oct. 1. Jacob Moe, senior vice president of global FCL (full container load) at DHL Global Forwarding, said Asia-Europe demand leading into the Lunar New Year was “very strong” in December with a “strong booking intake” already being made for January. “We are for now not seeing extra loaders being put in but are watching the blank sailing program as this seems to be enough to manage the capacity from the carrier side,” Moe told the Journal of Commerce. <h3>Year of high demand growth </h3>Demand growth in Asia-Europe this year is up between 10% and 14%, depending on the market vertical, according to Michael Aldwell, executive vice president of sea logistics at Kuehne + Nagel. “We haven’t seen growth like that on the Far East westbound trade since before the global financial crisis,” Aldwell told the Journal of Commerce in a recent interview. Total Asian exports to North Europe and the Mediterranean of 21.95 million TEUs from January through October are up 8.6% year over year, with almost 2 million more boxes this year than last, according to Container Trades Statistics (CTS). <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="1757bc92-59e3-4e30-b987-63a9d840cd61"></dynamic-object></div>One explanation for the solid growth in European import volumes into December is that shippers are building inventory as a buffer to counter the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/stretched-logistics-capacity-in-europe-threatened-by-red-sea-return-6129492">disruption that is likely to occur should widespread Red Sea transits resume</a>, with the later-than-usual Lunar New Year that starts on Feb. 17 giving shippers more time to stock up. But Andy Gillespie, senior logistics advisor at supply chain managers WOWL, said shippers trying to plan orders three or four months out while factoring in a potential return to the Red Sea was virtually impossible. “[Reducing] inventories and replenishment planning with some orders suddenly transiting two weeks faster while others are taking the Cape of Good Hope routing is unplannable for those supply chain managers that are placing orders 90 to 120 days in advance of when they think they need the products at destination [distribution centers] or with customers,” he told the Journal of Commerce. Gillespie said logistics service providers will have to pick up the slack in Europe, adding that yards or warehouses with capacity at 80% or higher “will be slammed” as ships diverting around southern Africa and those transiting the Red Sea converge. “For shippers and the routing of cargo, we won’t know which services are going which way exactly or where the feeders will hook up on which service, so the logistics people will deal with the chaos,” he said. “In the end, though, back to Suez safely is a great thing.” Despite some carriers moving capacity through the Suez, there remains no clarity on when large-scale mainline Asia-Europe services will resume voyages through the critical waterway. Carriers are assessing the risk profile of returning to the Red Sea, which they say revolves around the safety of the crew, ship and cargo. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Robust demand in December is filling ships on the Asia to North Europe and Mediterranean container shipping trades, with the strong volume expected to continue through January as cargo owners lock in bookings ahead of February’s Lunar New Year. Data from container shipment tracker Vizion shows bookings for the three weeks ending Dec. 7 rose 10% compared with the prior three weeks, with 207,000 TEUs booked on Asia-Europe. Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said high demand in December has become a “new normal” on the westbound corridors. “In 2023 and 2024, and probably also 2025, December is the month of the year with the highest demand,” he said, adding that it was “real demand” with no sign of shippers frontloading orders. The rise in bookings is driving an increase in the capacity offered by ocean carriers on Asia to North Europe and the Mediterranean that this week reached record levels on both trades. Data from Xeneta shows carriers are deploying 1.12 million TEUs of capacity in December on Asia-North Europe while blanking 84,000 TEUs, down from 126,000 TEUs blanked in November. Planned capacity for the trade in January is at a record 1.17 million TEUs, while blanks announced so far are at 54,000 TEUs. Capacity deployed on Asia-Mediterranean in December is at 788,842 TEUs with 69,218 TEUs blanked, compared with November, when 713,489 TEUs were deployed and 98,296 TEUs blanked, Xeneta data shows. A record 849,371 TEUs are planned for January deployment, with blank sailings currently at 39,706 TEUs. A spokesperson for Hapag-Lloyd said regular capacity deployed on the main trade lanes into Europe was increasing to meet the rising demand, while rates “are expected to peak in early January with a gradual slowdown towards February.” The rising volume through the fourth quarter is being accompanied by a steep increase in spot rates. Asia-North Europe rates reached $2,350 per FEU as of Dec. 9, up 80% since the beginning of October, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Asia-Mediterranean rates of $3,250/FEU this week are just over double where they were on Oct. 1. Jacob Moe, senior vice president of global FCL (full container load) at DHL Global Forwarding, said Asia-Europe demand leading into the Lunar New Year was “very strong” in December with a “strong booking intake” already being made for January. “We are for now not seeing extra loaders being put in but are watching the blank sailing program as this seems to be enough to manage the capacity from the carrier side,” Moe told the Journal of Commerce. Year of high demand growth Demand growth in Asia-Europe this year is up between 10% and 14%, depending on the market vertical, according to Michael Aldwell, executive vice president of sea logistics at Kuehne + Nagel. “We haven’t seen growth like that on the Far East westbound trade since before the global financial crisis,” Aldwell told the Journal of Commerce in a recent interview. Total Asian exports to North Europe and the Mediterranean of 21.95 million TEUs from January through October are up 8.6% year over year, with almost 2 million more boxes this year than last, according to Container Trades Statistics (CTS). One explanation for the solid growth in European import volumes into December is that shippers are building inventory as a buffer to counter the disruption that is likely to occur should widespread Red Sea transits resume , with the later-than-usual Lunar New Year that starts on Feb. 17 giving shippers more time to stock up. But Andy Gillespie, senior logistics advisor at supply chain managers WOWL, said shippers trying to plan orders three or four months out while factoring in a potential return to the Red Sea was virtually impossible. “[Reducing] inventories and replenishment planning with some orders suddenly transiting two weeks faster while others are taking the Cape of Good Hope routing is unplannable for those supply chain managers that are placing orders 90 to 120 days in advance of when they think they need the products at destination [distribution centers] or with customers,” he told the Journal of Commerce. Gillespie said logistics service providers will have to pick up the slack in Europe, adding that yards or warehouses with capacity at 80% or higher “will be slammed” as ships diverting around southern Africa and those transiting the Red Sea converge. “For shippers and the routing of cargo, we won’t know which services are going which way exactly or where the feeders will hook up on which service, so the logistics people will deal with the chaos,” he said. “In the end, though, back to Suez safely is a great thing.” Despite some carriers moving capacity through the Suez, there remains no clarity on when large-scale mainline Asia-Europe services will resume voyages through the critical waterway. Carriers are assessing the risk profile of returning to the Red Sea, which they say revolves around the safety of the crew, ship and cargo. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Cargo bookings for Asia-Europe ocean trade rise sharply in December

Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code SSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SEASON"S SAVINGS

Use code SSW495 and upgrade to Gold for just $495! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SEASON'S SAVINGS

Subscribe today using code SSW30 at checkout and save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SSW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code SSW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) has long been the backbone of global commerce, quietly facilitating trillions in transactions. Yet, despite its critical role, traditional EDI has remained notoriously complex, labor-intensive, viewed as antique, and costly. Companies have historically grappled with cumbersome mapping processes, intricate partner-specific logic, and extended onboarding timelines. Now, as industries increasingly adopt agile digital frameworks, the limitations of conventional EDI solutions have become glaringly apparent. Enter Mosaic, an innovative solution unveiled by Orderful, which promises to radically streamline and modernize EDI integration through artificial intelligence. Orderful, already recognized for simplifying supply chain data exchanges, has now introduced Mosaic as the first AI-enriched EDI integration product that completely removes traditional mapping processes. At its core, Mosaic represents a fundamental shift from legacy EDI protocols, replacing archaic, code-heavy formats such as X12 and EDIFACT with modern, easy to use JSON inputs oriented around system-of-record concepts. This alone significantly lowers the barrier to integration, allowing teams accustomed to modern SaaS API development to seamlessly adopt EDI workflows. Mosaic's AI-powered engine ingests and interprets trading partner requirements as well as millions of actual transactions to build reliable, reuseable, self-healing integration which translating data into partner-specific formats without manual intervention. Such automated adaptability is unprecedented in the EDI landscape and promises a marked reduction in implementation timelines, from what once took months or even years, down to mere weeks. Erik Kiser, founder and CEO of Orderful, understands firsthand the pain points of traditional EDI. Having built integrations himself early in his career, Kiser founded Orderful specifically to address the persistent challenges that frustrate businesses across the supply chain. "Nobody has been more frustrated by EDI than I have," Kiser notes candidly. "Those experiences are precisely why Orderful and now Mosaic exist." Mosaic further distinguishes itself by embedding real-time validation and debugging, streamlining error resolution from lengthy processes into rapid, straightforward fixes. Developers, traditionally burdened by the complexities of partner-specific requirements and intricate coding standards, now gain an intuitive, self-service environment. This reduction in complexity not only accelerates implementation but also reduces operational overhead, offering critical advantages in today’s fast-paced business environment. Brian Roberts, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz and Orderful board member, underscores Mosaic's industry impact: "Mosaic has taken one of the most entrenched bottlenecks in enterprise technology, EDI mapping, and replaced it with an AI-native product that adapts automatically. It’s exactly the type of innovation the industry has been missing." While Mosaic initially supports the complete Order-to-Cash lifecycle, covering purchase orders, acknowledgments, shipping notices, and invoices, the platform is designed for continuous growth and expansion. Orderful sees Mosaic not merely as a product but as a foundational architecture poised to support a broader range of data flows and integrations, aligning perfectly with the scalable requirements of global businesses. “The underlying unified data model not only lets us act as the universal connector, but also enables us to build product once that applies to all partners. This includes EDI functionality like order splitting and consolidation, but also unlocks powerful analytics and insights for our customers to help them grow their business,” said Will Benish, principal product manager at Orderful. Security and reliability are integral to Mosaic’s infrastructure, evidenced by SOC 2 Type II compliance and OAuth 2.0 integration. Additionally, the platform guarantees robust performance, boasting sub-second transaction speeds and immediate access to an extensive network of over 10,000 trading partners. For businesses already utilizing Orderful, Mosaic offers a seamless upgrade pathway, allowing organizations to embrace the future of EDI without disrupting their current trading partner relationships. New clients will find Mosaic’s approach refreshingly modern, providing immediate gains in speed, ease of integration, and scalability. Mosaic represents more than just an incremental improvement; it's a visionary leap forward in how enterprises manage and leverage supply chain data. As businesses grapple with increasingly complex global supply networks, Orderful’s Mosaic emerges as a timely and essential tool, providing clarity, agility, and unprecedented simplicity. Mosaic elevates EDI, providing businesses with a streamlined and efficient pathway to rapidly integrate, adapt, and scale in today's dynamic market. “Mosaic wouldn’t have been possible to build even three years ago. The work our team has put in has been extraordinary, combining cutting edge AI techniques with our deep experience with EDI and our rich library of trading partner guidelines and requirements,” said Benish. To learn more about how Mosaic can transform your EDI capabilities and streamline your integration processes or request a demonstration at <a href="https://www.orderful.com/product/mosaic" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">www.orderful.com/product/mosaic</a>.

Orderful Corredted.png

From 1940s Roots to AI-Driven Future: Reinventing EDI for Today's Supply Chains

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

SEASON'S SAVINGS: Use code SSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SEASON'S SAVINGS: Subscribe today using code SSW30 at checkout and save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SEASON'S SAVINGS: Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code SSW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SEASON'S SAVINGS: Use code SSW495 and upgrade to Gold for just $495! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SEASON'S SAVINGS: Use code SSW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Israel-based carrier is urging shareholders to reelect its current slate of directors later this month after alternate nominees were put forth by dissident shareholders. </div>

The Israel-based carrier is urging shareholders to reelect its current slate of directors later this month after alternate nominees were put forth by dissident shareholders.

<div class="phx-topic">A group of shareholders has launched a proxy fight to get their candidates elected to the board of Zim Integrated Shipping Services after the ocean carrier rejected <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/zim-says-reviewing-buyout-offers-including-one-from-ceo-6123362">an initial buyout offer from its chief executive</a> as too low and continues to review other potential bids. The Israel-based ocean carrier said in a statement Tuesday that a proxy advisor recommended shareholders reelect eight current board members at the company’s Dec. 26 annual meeting. The advisor also recommended that Zim shareholders vote against a slate of three directors nominated by an investor group that “made no attempt to work constructively with the board nor provided any suggestions for improving the company’s business or any other insight into how to create long-term value for shareholders,” Zim said. The investor group — Mor Gemel &amp; Pension Ltd., Reading Capital Ltd., and Sparta 24 — said in a letter nominating its candidates that it holds 5% of the company’s stock, Zim said. The investor group did not release the required stock exchange disclosures or a public statement about its proxy fight. There was no contact information available for the investors. The investor group put up their nominees after a report that Zim Chief Executive Eli Glickman made a buyout offer that was less than the company’s cash balance, Zim said in its statement. While Zim evaluated Glickman’s proposal, it “unanimously determined that it materially undervalued the company,” the carrier said. “The rumor that the board was willing to accept such an undervalued bid was clearly false,” Zim said. The investor group wants the company to issue a special dividend, Zim said, which would undermine Zim’s “liquidity and create substantial risk to shareholder value given our charter-intensive model, which requires adequate cash to navigate industry cycles.” Zim’s board said that it’s continuing a review of strategic alternatives that could include a merger or other another transaction. As part of that review, Zim has set up a transaction committee and appointed two additional outside directors to review any offers. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A group of shareholders has launched a proxy fight to get their candidates elected to the board of Zim Integrated Shipping Services after the ocean carrier rejected an initial buyout offer from its chief executive as too low and continues to review other potential bids. The Israel-based ocean carrier said in a statement Tuesday that a proxy advisor recommended shareholders reelect eight current board members at the company’s Dec. 26 annual meeting. The advisor also recommended that Zim shareholders vote against a slate of three directors nominated by an investor group that “made no attempt to work constructively with the board nor provided any suggestions for improving the company’s business or any other insight into how to create long-term value for shareholders,” Zim said. The investor group — Mor Gemel & Pension Ltd., Reading Capital Ltd., and Sparta 24 — said in a letter nominating its candidates that it holds 5% of the company’s stock, Zim said. The investor group did not release the required stock exchange disclosures or a public statement about its proxy fight. There was no contact information available for the investors. The investor group put up their nominees after a report that Zim Chief Executive Eli Glickman made a buyout offer that was less than the company’s cash balance, Zim said in its statement. While Zim evaluated Glickman’s proposal, it “unanimously determined that it materially undervalued the company,” the carrier said. “The rumor that the board was willing to accept such an undervalued bid was clearly false,” Zim said. The investor group wants the company to issue a special dividend, Zim said, which would undermine Zim’s “liquidity and create substantial risk to shareholder value given our charter-intensive model, which requires adequate cash to navigate industry cycles.” Zim’s board said that it’s continuing a review of strategic alternatives that could include a merger or other another transaction. As part of that review, Zim has set up a transaction committee and appointed two additional outside directors to review any offers. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Zim faces proxy fight after rejecting CEO’s buyout bid

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">S&amp;P Global’s outlook for the transportation sector sees US ports facing a volume decline in 2026 with the potential for recovery in 2027. </div>

S&P Global’s outlook for the transportation sector sees US ports facing a volume decline in 2026 with the potential for recovery in 2027.

<div class="phx-topic">US ports face another down year for volumes in 2026 due to ongoing uncertainty over the direction of US trade and tariff policy, according to an S&amp;P Global credit outlook. The forecast drop in container volumes echoes similar outlooks from major US port operators whose fortunes are not expected to turn around until 2027. S&amp;P Global Ratings said Tuesday that while US economic output and employment are expected to remain stable through next year, ports face a down year as the Trump administration’s wide-ranging tariffs against most US trade partners likely make shippers cautious and continue to reshore production. Trade with China might stabilize in 2026 due to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trade-deal-could-boost-short-term-china-imports-but-uncertainty-lingers-6106809">the trade deal the US struck with China through next November</a>, S&amp;P Global Ratings said. But tariffs against China and other trading partners remain at record high levels, forcing shippers to be cautious. A US Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s tariffs could reignite cargo shipments, the outlook said. Nevertheless, S&amp;P Global said US port container volumes will decline 2% in 2026. The outlook calls for a rebound in volume of 6% in 2027 on the hopes of a more stable trade policy. The outlook did not include actual volume figures. “US ports face the greatest uncertainty due to the evolving tariff landscape in 2026,” S&amp;P Global Ratings said. “The recently negotiated truce in the US-China trade conflict provides a measure of certainty until that agreement expires. Our estimate of slightly lower container volumes in 2026 is followed by a solid recovery in 2027.” The outlook follows a similar forecast from the National Retail Federation (NRF), which said Monday <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/december-us-imports-on-track-to-be-lowest-since-june-23-retailers-6130632">first-quarter 2026 port volumes could see double-digit declines from the year earlier</a>. Overall, the NRF expects 2025 volumes to come in slightly below 2024. Credit ratings agency Moody’s on Nov. 18 warned that US import volumes in 2026 will be flat to down 2% from this year. Port operators, too, are budgeting for declines or only slow growth in 2026. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said in November it’s budgeting for total container volumes of 8.5 million TEUs in 2026, which would be just over a 2% decline from 2024. Since 2016, NY-NJ port container volumes have grown at an annual average of 4.2%. Port Houston Authority also said last month it’s budgeting for container volumes to reach 4.4 million TEUs in 2026, which would represent growth of 4.7%, below the port’s decade-long average volume growth of 7%. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

US ports face another down year for volumes in 2026 due to ongoing uncertainty over the direction of US trade and tariff policy, according to an S&P Global credit outlook. The forecast drop in container volumes echoes similar outlooks from major US port operators whose fortunes are not expected to turn around until 2027. S&P Global Ratings said Tuesday that while US economic output and employment are expected to remain stable through next year, ports face a down year as the Trump administration’s wide-ranging tariffs against most US trade partners likely make shippers cautious and continue to reshore production. Trade with China might stabilize in 2026 due to the trade deal the US struck with China through next November , S&P Global Ratings said. But tariffs against China and other trading partners remain at record high levels, forcing shippers to be cautious. A US Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s tariffs could reignite cargo shipments, the outlook said. Nevertheless, S&P Global said US port container volumes will decline 2% in 2026. The outlook calls for a rebound in volume of 6% in 2027 on the hopes of a more stable trade policy. The outlook did not include actual volume figures. “US ports face the greatest uncertainty due to the evolving tariff landscape in 2026,” S&P Global Ratings said. “The recently negotiated truce in the US-China trade conflict provides a measure of certainty until that agreement expires. Our estimate of slightly lower container volumes in 2026 is followed by a solid recovery in 2027.” The outlook follows a similar forecast from the National Retail Federation (NRF), which said Monday first-quarter 2026 port volumes could see double-digit declines from the year earlier . Overall, the NRF expects 2025 volumes to come in slightly below 2024. Credit ratings agency Moody’s on Nov. 18 warned that US import volumes in 2026 will be flat to down 2% from this year. Port operators, too, are budgeting for declines or only slow growth in 2026. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said in November it’s budgeting for total container volumes of 8.5 million TEUs in 2026, which would be just over a 2% decline from 2024. Since 2016, NY-NJ port container volumes have grown at an annual average of 4.2%. Port Houston Authority also said last month it’s budgeting for container volumes to reach 4.4 million TEUs in 2026, which would represent growth of 4.7%, below the port’s decade-long average volume growth of 7%. S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

US container volumes set for weak 2026 amid ongoing trade uncertainty

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">For the first time, US regulators can evaluate a rail merger not on assertions, but on what the data actually shows — and they can do it in hours, not months. </div>

For the first time, US regulators can evaluate a rail merger not on assertions, but on what the data actually shows — and they can do it in hours, not months.

<div class="phx-topic">The most important factor that will shape the Union Pacific (UP)-Norfolk Southern (NS) merger review isn’t network size, labor or the familiar debate over competition. It’s the arrival of artificial intelligence (AI) in a regulatory process that has never had this level of analytical horsepower. For the first time, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) can evaluate a rail merger not on assertions, but on what the data actually shows — and they can do it in hours, not months. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6131406_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Once UP and NS submit their formal application, the full filing becomes part of the public STB docket. With limited exceptions for sealed exhibits, every page will be posted online and fully downloadable. Anyone — regulators, competitors, ports, shippers, analysts — will have the same access at the same moment. I’ve already set up the prompts, tools, and workflows to download the filing the moment it posts, and will begin examining the sections that matter most, the way an operator would, not just an analyst. That accessibility alone changes the dynamic. In past mergers, volume itself was a defensive moat. This time, AI ensures everyone can analyze the document as quickly as the applicants who wrote it. Modern AI systems can ingest a 4,000-page filing in minutes and begin stress-testing it. Contradictions that once hid in appendices — mismatches between narrative claims and actual performance, optimistic cycle-time assumptions, recycled language posing as new analysis — surface immediately. A line-by-line integrity audit that previously required months now takes a few hours. That speed forces a different caliber of evidence. When UP and NS promise corridor-level velocity improvements, the STB will test those claims against historic dwell in the same terminals. When they assert minimal competitive harm, DOJ will compare their modeling with real origin/destination patterns, interchange frequencies, and lane elasticity. What once passed as “directionally accurate” will now be judged against observed performance. AI also exposes the control layers that traditionally operated in the shadows. In earlier writing, I described how TTX — the shared pool governing nearly every well car, autorack, and flatcar in North America — creates its own physics inside the network. Under conventional review, those mechanics were too complex and opaque to analyze meaningfully. With AI, they become visible. Regulators and stakeholders will be able to examine car-flow patterns, identify cycle-time asymmetries and determine whether the merged network benefits simply from having more gravitational pull inside a pooled system. Patterns that once felt anecdotal will become measurable. <h3>AI ‘does not bend to narrative’ </h3>Ports will feel this transparency immediately. Equipment velocity has always been a stronger determinant of port competitiveness than berth depth or crane count. AI will allow ports to model how the merger affects inland access — whether discretionary cargo tilts toward the merged network, whether high-capacity wells cycle more reliably in certain export corridors, and whether inland terminals feeding those ports become structurally advantaged. These are no longer theoretical concerns; they are quantifiable outcomes. Competitors will apply the same capabilities. Canadian National, BNSF, CSX and Canadian Pacific Kansas City will not submit abstract protests; they will submit counter-models. They will show where routing options shrink, where interchange loses practical meaning, and where inland terminals shift from shared gateways to effective chokepoints. AI turns what used to be rhetoric into structured evidence that regulators must consider. UP and NS will use AI as well — they would be negligent not to — but AI does not bend to narrative. It rewards consistency, exposes wishful thinking, and highlights unsupported assumptions. It cannot hide whether a merged network delivers sustained service improvement or simply consolidates power. It cannot disguise whether velocity gains are proven or aspirational. This is the real shift. AI forces a merit-based review in a way no previous merger has experienced. If UP-NS can demonstrate that a unified network produces faster turns, more reliable inland flows, stronger port connectivity, and broader access for shippers, AI will validate those claims. If the merger instead creates velocity asymmetry, reduces routing flexibility, or concentrates quiet control of pooled assets inside one dominant carrier, AI will reveal that as well. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO) and Patriot Rail. He is the founder of Integrated Multimodal Solutions LLC and author of the Substack newsletter Signals &amp; Switches. Contact him at  <a href="mailto:paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io">paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io</a>. </div>

The most important factor that will shape the Union Pacific (UP)-Norfolk Southern (NS) merger review isn’t network size, labor or the familiar debate over competition. It’s the arrival of artificial intelligence (AI) in a regulatory process that has never had this level of analytical horsepower. For the first time, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) can evaluate a rail merger not on assertions, but on what the data actually shows — and they can do it in hours, not months. Once UP and NS submit their formal application, the full filing becomes part of the public STB docket. With limited exceptions for sealed exhibits, every page will be posted online and fully downloadable. Anyone — regulators, competitors, ports, shippers, analysts — will have the same access at the same moment. I’ve already set up the prompts, tools, and workflows to download the filing the moment it posts, and will begin examining the sections that matter most, the way an operator would, not just an analyst. That accessibility alone changes the dynamic. In past mergers, volume itself was a defensive moat. This time, AI ensures everyone can analyze the document as quickly as the applicants who wrote it. Modern AI systems can ingest a 4,000-page filing in minutes and begin stress-testing it. Contradictions that once hid in appendices — mismatches between narrative claims and actual performance, optimistic cycle-time assumptions, recycled language posing as new analysis — surface immediately. A line-by-line integrity audit that previously required months now takes a few hours. That speed forces a different caliber of evidence. When UP and NS promise corridor-level velocity improvements, the STB will test those claims against historic dwell in the same terminals. When they assert minimal competitive harm, DOJ will compare their modeling with real origin/destination patterns, interchange frequencies, and lane elasticity. What once passed as “directionally accurate” will now be judged against observed performance. AI also exposes the control layers that traditionally operated in the shadows. In earlier writing, I described how TTX — the shared pool governing nearly every well car, autorack, and flatcar in North America — creates its own physics inside the network. Under conventional review, those mechanics were too complex and opaque to analyze meaningfully. With AI, they become visible. Regulators and stakeholders will be able to examine car-flow patterns, identify cycle-time asymmetries and determine whether the merged network benefits simply from having more gravitational pull inside a pooled system. Patterns that once felt anecdotal will become measurable. AI ‘does not bend to narrative’ Ports will feel this transparency immediately. Equipment velocity has always been a stronger determinant of port competitiveness than berth depth or crane count. AI will allow ports to model how the merger affects inland access — whether discretionary cargo tilts toward the merged network, whether high-capacity wells cycle more reliably in certain export corridors, and whether inland terminals feeding those ports become structurally advantaged. These are no longer theoretical concerns; they are quantifiable outcomes. Competitors will apply the same capabilities. Canadian National, BNSF, CSX and Canadian Pacific Kansas City will not submit abstract protests; they will submit counter-models. They will show where routing options shrink, where interchange loses practical meaning, and where inland terminals shift from shared gateways to effective chokepoints. AI turns what used to be rhetoric into structured evidence that regulators must consider. UP and NS will use AI as well — they would be negligent not to — but AI does not bend to narrative. It rewards consistency, exposes wishful thinking, and highlights unsupported assumptions. It cannot hide whether a merged network delivers sustained service improvement or simply consolidates power. It cannot disguise whether velocity gains are proven or aspirational. This is the real shift. AI forces a merit-based review in a way no previous merger has experienced. If UP-NS can demonstrate that a unified network produces faster turns, more reliable inland flows, stronger port connectivity, and broader access for shippers, AI will validate those claims. If the merger instead creates velocity asymmetry, reduces routing flexibility, or concentrates quiet control of pooled assets inside one dominant carrier, AI will reveal that as well. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO) and Patriot Rail. He is the founder of Integrated Multimodal Solutions LLC and author of the Substack newsletter Signals & Switches. Contact him at   paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io .

House reauthorizes FMC and adds to its oversight powers

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

CargoWise’s pricing model change could mark final milestone in market ascent

Cascading container tonnage spreads structural overcapacity to secondary lanes

Cargo bookings for Asia-Europe ocean trade rise sharply in December

Recent Commentary

US signaling importers will need to do ‘heavy lifting' to secure possible tariff refunds

Premium pricing linked to vessel schedule reliability faces rough waters

Top 5 Most Read Stories