<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The uptick in rates comes despite a 9% surge in deployed capacity on regional services since February, according to figures from British transport consultant MDS Transmodal. </div>

The uptick in rates comes despite a 9% surge in deployed capacity on regional services since February, according to figures from British transport consultant MDS Transmodal.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Strong cargo demand from China to Southeast Asia and longer-haul intra-Asia markets propelled intra-Asia freight rates higher in June despite a surge of new shipping capacity entering the market, logistics and shipping executives say, with some expecting the buoyant conditions to continue in the second half of the year. “Depending on the carrier, rates are around $650 to $700 per TEU from Shanghai to Ho Chi Minh City and $800 to $900 per TEU from Shanghai to Bangkok,” a senior executive at a Hong Kong-based forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The rates for China to Southeast Asia are generally the highest since Christmas and the pre-Lunar New Year period when they were $1,000 to $1,100 per TEU to Bangkok, according to the source. “They’ve been trending higher since the end of May/early June on increased demand possibly due to the US tariff [pause] window or higher regional growth,” the executive said. “We don’t really see any slowdown in demand.” Cliff Xu, Greater China CEO for Rhenus Air &amp; Ocean, said there is a “strong market” for China cargo outbound to Southeast Asia. “This could partially be due to stable growth in the Southeast Asian economies especially with Chinese companies’ growing investment or business expansion in the region,” he said. “Orders received from businesses within the intra-Southeast Asia market are also showing very positive growth.” Xu said the strong cargo demand seen in the first half would continue for the rest of the year. <h3>Boost in deployed capacity </h3>Peter Sand, chief analyst at online benchmarking platform Xeneta, said cargo demand in the intra-Asia region grew 6.6% in the first four months of this year. Exports from China to other Far East countries climbed 15% year over year between January and April, he added, quoting the latest Chinese government figures available. FIBS Logistics was more cautious, indicating China’s long Oct. 1 National Day holidays, which start at the end of September, could impact the trade environment. “The market development/picture for this year’s Chinese National Holiday is unclear,” a FIBS spokesperson said. “We might need to review the outlook again at the end of August, although the impact of the peak season on the intra-Asia trade is later than for long-haul because intra-Asia transit times are relatively short.” Rates on longer-haul intra-Asia routes to India have also climbed to their highest level in about six months, with rates from China to Nhava Sheva near $2,600/FEU, the highest since mid-January, according to Xeneta data. Rates from China to Dubai are up 35% since January to $3,000/FEU, although Sand attributed the increase to the military conflict in the Middle East, where operational costs, including higher fuel prices and security measures, have risen on concerns of increased risks to shipping. The uptick in rates comes despite a 9% surge in deployed capacity on regional services since February, according to figures specially prepared for the Journal of Commerce by British transport consultant MDS Transmodal. Data shows capacity increased from almost 4.3 million TEUs per month in February to nearly 4.7 million TEUs in June. The figures are likely higher because they don’t include capacity increases on mainline services to Europe or the Mediterranean, which include calls at ports in Asia. Carriers that saw the biggest increase in capacity deployment include Mediterranean Shipping Co., which deployed an extra 10% of capacity, or nearly 52,000 TEUs, to the intra-Asia trade between the first and second quarters. CMA CGM, Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines and South Korea’s Sinokor Merchant Marine also boosted capacity, according to MDS figures. <h3>Equipment challenges in key ports </h3>That comes as shippers are facing equipment challenges in key export ports. FIBS Logistics said Monday all mainline carriers including Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen Marine, CMA CGM and Cosco Shipping Lines are facing tight supply or shortages of equipment in Ho Chi Minh City and Haiphong, while CMA CGM is facing a tight supply of containers at Shanghai, Ningbo and Shenzhen and Taiwanese ports including Kaohsiung. Other carriers such as Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen and HMM are experiencing equipment issues at other ports including Shanghai and Ningbo, according to FIBS. “Overall, space for intra-Asia remains tight and overbooked,” the FIBS Logistics spokesperson told the Journal of Commerce. Rhenus’ Xu said although the availability of equipment has generally improved year over year as carriers took delivery of new boxes, “ships exiting China may face tight supply of equipment in the short term before the long holidays in September.” Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Strong cargo demand from China to Southeast Asia and longer-haul intra-Asia markets propelled intra-Asia freight rates higher in June despite a surge of new shipping capacity entering the market, logistics and shipping executives say, with some expecting the buoyant conditions to continue in the second half of the year. “Depending on the carrier, rates are around $650 to $700 per TEU from Shanghai to Ho Chi Minh City and $800 to $900 per TEU from Shanghai to Bangkok,” a senior executive at a Hong Kong-based forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The rates for China to Southeast Asia are generally the highest since Christmas and the pre-Lunar New Year period when they were $1,000 to $1,100 per TEU to Bangkok, according to the source. “They’ve been trending higher since the end of May/early June on increased demand possibly due to the US tariff [pause] window or higher regional growth,” the executive said. “We don’t really see any slowdown in demand.” Cliff Xu, Greater China CEO for Rhenus Air & Ocean, said there is a “strong market” for China cargo outbound to Southeast Asia. “This could partially be due to stable growth in the Southeast Asian economies especially with Chinese companies’ growing investment or business expansion in the region,” he said. “Orders received from businesses within the intra-Southeast Asia market are also showing very positive growth.” Xu said the strong cargo demand seen in the first half would continue for the rest of the year. Boost in deployed capacity Peter Sand, chief analyst at online benchmarking platform Xeneta, said cargo demand in the intra-Asia region grew 6.6% in the first four months of this year. Exports from China to other Far East countries climbed 15% year over year between January and April, he added, quoting the latest Chinese government figures available. FIBS Logistics was more cautious, indicating China’s long Oct. 1 National Day holidays, which start at the end of September, could impact the trade environment. “The market development/picture for this year’s Chinese National Holiday is unclear,” a FIBS spokesperson said. “We might need to review the outlook again at the end of August, although the impact of the peak season on the intra-Asia trade is later than for long-haul because intra-Asia transit times are relatively short.” Rates on longer-haul intra-Asia routes to India have also climbed to their highest level in about six months, with rates from China to Nhava Sheva near $2,600/FEU, the highest since mid-January, according to Xeneta data. Rates from China to Dubai are up 35% since January to $3,000/FEU, although Sand attributed the increase to the military conflict in the Middle East, where operational costs, including higher fuel prices and security measures, have risen on concerns of increased risks to shipping. The uptick in rates comes despite a 9% surge in deployed capacity on regional services since February, according to figures specially prepared for the Journal of Commerce by British transport consultant MDS Transmodal. Data shows capacity increased from almost 4.3 million TEUs per month in February to nearly 4.7 million TEUs in June. The figures are likely higher because they don’t include capacity increases on mainline services to Europe or the Mediterranean, which include calls at ports in Asia. Carriers that saw the biggest increase in capacity deployment include Mediterranean Shipping Co., which deployed an extra 10% of capacity, or nearly 52,000 TEUs, to the intra-Asia trade between the first and second quarters. CMA CGM, Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines and South Korea’s Sinokor Merchant Marine also boosted capacity, according to MDS figures. Equipment challenges in key ports That comes as shippers are facing equipment challenges in key export ports. FIBS Logistics said Monday all mainline carriers including Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen Marine, CMA CGM and Cosco Shipping Lines are facing tight supply or shortages of equipment in Ho Chi Minh City and Haiphong, while CMA CGM is facing a tight supply of containers at Shanghai, Ningbo and Shenzhen and Taiwanese ports including Kaohsiung. Other carriers such as Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen and HMM are experiencing equipment issues at other ports including Shanghai and Ningbo, according to FIBS. “Overall, space for intra-Asia remains tight and overbooked,” the FIBS Logistics spokesperson told the Journal of Commerce. Rhenus’ Xu said although the availability of equipment has generally improved year over year as carriers took delivery of new boxes, “ships exiting China may face tight supply of equipment in the short term before the long holidays in September.” Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Maritime

Container Shipping News

Container lines

Strong China demand buoys intra-Asia rates despite capacity surge

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Loup Logistics provides direct access to nearly 80,000 rail-owned containers across North America, significantly expanding UP’s transloading options.</div>

Loup Logistics provides direct access to nearly 80,000 rail-owned containers across North America, significantly expanding UP’s transloading options.

<div class="phx-topic">A subsidiary of Union Pacific Railroad has launched a new transloading service that will transfer imports into rail-owned 53-foot containers for inland hauls, presenting new competition to rival BNSF Railway. Loup Logistics said Tuesday the “port-to-door” service will be available at any US port. Union Pacific currently relies on partners such as Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics, among others, for transloaded freight. But Loup provides direct access to nearly 80,000 rail-owned containers across North America, significantly expanding UP’s transloading options. Formed in 2017, Loup works with non-asset intermodal marketing companies (IMCs) to provide a door-to-door domestic intermodal product. Loup’s service removes the burden of securing drayage and chassis, making it an appealing option for IMCs seeking turnkey solutions for their shippers. It remains unclear whether Loup will market the new transloading service directly to importers or continue partnering with IMCs to expand relationships with their customers. Logistics powerhouse J.B. Hunt Transport Services, a partner of BNSF, has aggressively expanded its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/tpm23-intermodal-providers-banking-on-transloading-surge-5217461">transloading operations</a> in Los Angeles and the Seattle-Tacoma area in recent years. J.B. Hunt will also be a key partner in transloading through <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/tpm25-bnsf-believes-barstow-hub-can-improve-service-to-smaller-markets-5955620">BNSF’s Barstow International Gateway</a>, which is due to open in 2027. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A subsidiary of Union Pacific Railroad has launched a new transloading service that will transfer imports into rail-owned 53-foot containers for inland hauls, presenting new competition to rival BNSF Railway. Loup Logistics said Tuesday the “port-to-door” service will be available at any US port. Union Pacific currently relies on partners such as Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics, among others, for transloaded freight. But Loup provides direct access to nearly 80,000 rail-owned containers across North America, significantly expanding UP’s transloading options. Formed in 2017, Loup works with non-asset intermodal marketing companies (IMCs) to provide a door-to-door domestic intermodal product. Loup’s service removes the burden of securing drayage and chassis, making it an appealing option for IMCs seeking turnkey solutions for their shippers. It remains unclear whether Loup will market the new transloading service directly to importers or continue partnering with IMCs to expand relationships with their customers. Logistics powerhouse J.B. Hunt Transport Services, a partner of BNSF, has aggressively expanded its transloading operations in Los Angeles and the Seattle-Tacoma area in recent years. J.B. Hunt will also be a key partner in transloading through BNSF’s Barstow International Gateway , which is due to open in 2027. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Surface

Rail News

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

Union Pacific subsidiary jumps into transloading with ‘port-to-door' service

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Easing freight rates and demand suggest a “wait-and-see” approach by US importers as the July 9 end of the temporary reprieve on so-called “reciprocal” tariffs nears.</div>

Easing freight rates and demand suggest a “wait-and-see” approach by US importers as the July 9 end of the temporary reprieve on so-called “reciprocal” tariffs nears.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean carriers are keeping trans-Atlantic capacity at high levels ahead of next week’s expiration of President Donald Trump’s 90-day pause on so-called “reciprocal” tariffs. Easing freight rates and demand, meanwhile, suggest a “wait-and-see” approach by US importers. The pause ends on July 9 as trade negotiations continue between the US and the European Union. Market expectations are for the 10% across-the-board tariffs on all US trading partners to be applied to the EU and be accompanied by some level of tariffs on automobiles, steel and aluminum. Trump has also suggested he could extend the pause on reciprocal tariffs while talks continue. With no certainty over the outcome of the trade talks, carriers are keeping capacity available to handle any increase in shipments once there is greater clarity around tariff levels. Data from ocean visibility provider eeSea shows that carriers will deploy 344,811 TEUs of capacity in July on the westbound trans-Atlantic, the highest in the past 12 months, then easing slightly to 327,226 TEUs in August. Just 24,840 TEUs will be blanked in July, while no blank sailings have yet been announced for August. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="739d3923-220d-4e28-bddd-a3113b21dddf"></dynamic-object></div>Meanwhile, Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said the decline in short-term rates slowed in May and June after they fell 21.6% in the first quarter. The North Europe-North America rate is now down 37% compared with the beginning of the year, at $1,206 per FEU, according to Xeneta. “It comes on the back of falling demand in January to April, down from last year by 0.5%, with deployed capacity on this trade growing from 75,000 TEUs per week in mid-February to 89,000 TEUs per week now,” Sand told the Journal of Commerce. “Looking into the early days of July, we anticipate a slide in rates to the extent of $40 to $50 per FEU,” he added. “At the same time, carriers have announced that capacity could increase to as much as 95,000 to 97,000 TEUs/week in July and August.” The spot market assessed by Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, show that rates from North Europe to the East Coast of North America have remained at $1,700 per FEU since May 16. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="588a0a38-fc1c-473a-a9b5-5d71ec3b54dc"></dynamic-object></div>Casper Ellerbaek, global head of ocean freight at DHL Global Forwarding, said “some degree” of frontloading could be seen on westbound trans-Atlantic routes in some sectors, but noted that with the uncertainty surrounding the trade lane, it was hardly conclusive. “This does not warrant drawing any conclusions or making assessments about the general development of demand,” Ellerbaek told the Journal of Commerce. Imports from North Europe to the US came in at 196,580 TEUs in May, down from the peak so far this year of 212,730 TEUs in March, according to PIERS, also part of S&amp;P Global. US imports from the Mediterranean hit a 2025 high in April of 170,360 TEUs, but PIERS data for May shows a 19% drop in volume to 137,710 TEUs. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Ocean carriers are keeping trans-Atlantic capacity at high levels ahead of next week’s expiration of President Donald Trump’s 90-day pause on so-called “reciprocal” tariffs. Easing freight rates and demand, meanwhile, suggest a “wait-and-see” approach by US importers. The pause ends on July 9 as trade negotiations continue between the US and the European Union. Market expectations are for the 10% across-the-board tariffs on all US trading partners to be applied to the EU and be accompanied by some level of tariffs on automobiles, steel and aluminum. Trump has also suggested he could extend the pause on reciprocal tariffs while talks continue. With no certainty over the outcome of the trade talks, carriers are keeping capacity available to handle any increase in shipments once there is greater clarity around tariff levels. Data from ocean visibility provider eeSea shows that carriers will deploy 344,811 TEUs of capacity in July on the westbound trans-Atlantic, the highest in the past 12 months, then easing slightly to 327,226 TEUs in August. Just 24,840 TEUs will be blanked in July, while no blank sailings have yet been announced for August. Meanwhile, Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said the decline in short-term rates slowed in May and June after they fell 21.6% in the first quarter. The North Europe-North America rate is now down 37% compared with the beginning of the year, at $1,206 per FEU, according to Xeneta. “It comes on the back of falling demand in January to April, down from last year by 0.5%, with deployed capacity on this trade growing from 75,000 TEUs per week in mid-February to 89,000 TEUs per week now,” Sand told the Journal of Commerce. “Looking into the early days of July, we anticipate a slide in rates to the extent of $40 to $50 per FEU,” he added. “At the same time, carriers have announced that capacity could increase to as much as 95,000 to 97,000 TEUs/week in July and August.” The spot market assessed by Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, show that rates from North Europe to the East Coast of North America have remained at $1,700 per FEU since May 16. Casper Ellerbaek, global head of ocean freight at DHL Global Forwarding, said “some degree” of frontloading could be seen on westbound trans-Atlantic routes in some sectors, but noted that with the uncertainty surrounding the trade lane, it was hardly conclusive. “This does not warrant drawing any conclusions or making assessments about the general development of demand,” Ellerbaek told the Journal of Commerce. Imports from North Europe to the US came in at 196,580 TEUs in May, down from the peak so far this year of 212,730 TEUs in March, according to PIERS, also part of S&P Global. US imports from the Mediterranean hit a 2025 high in April of 170,360 TEUs, but PIERS data for May shows a 19% drop in volume to 137,710 TEUs. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Trans-Atlantic

Trans-Atlantic ocean trade readies for end to 90-day pause on US tariffs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The procedural reauthorization bill would provide funding for the agency for the next three fiscal years and add more outside expertise on ports and ocean carriers.</div>

The procedural reauthorization bill would provide funding for the agency for the next three fiscal years and add more outside expertise on ports and ocean carriers.

<div class="phx-topic">A bill reauthorizing the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) for another three years has been introduced in the House of Representatives, with the proposed legislation also adding more outside expertise to the agency for help on ocean carriers and ports and allowing for a complaint process covering freight indices. Representatives John Garamendi (D-Calif.), along with Dusty Johnson (R-SD), Mike Ezell (R-Miss.) and Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), introduced the bill last week to reauthorize the FMC through 2029, Garamendi’s office said in a statement Monday. The bill, which includes funding for the agency, aims to build on Garamendi and Johnson’s work on the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22), the statement said. “Ocean shipping is a critical aspect of America’s national, food and economic security,” Johnson said in the statement. That’s why our Federal Maritime Commission must be equipped with the proper tools to keep the industry operating above bar.” The reauthorization bill, which is a standard procedure for many federal agencies, outlines funding for the FMC through the next three fiscal years. The FMC’s budget will increase from $49.2 million in 2026 to $57 million in 2029, representing an average 5% annual increase over that time. Along with the funding, the bill includes <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-house-bills-keep-shipping-reform-effort-alive-even-after-freight-rate-plunge-5241752">tweaks to OSRA-22 that Garamendi and Johnson had been pushing for</a>. The reauthorization bill proposes the creation of a 13-member national port advisory committee. The committee would be comprised of five members from marine terminal operators, five from port authorities and three members of the longshore workforce. It also includes a new ocean carrier advisory committee with six members from ocean carriers and three from ocean forwarders or non-vessel-operating common carriers (NVOs). The bill also includes new regulations for freight index providers such as the Shanghai Shipping Exchange. OSRA-22 required that within three years of its passage, shipping exchanges be registered with the FMC and that their underlying rules and regulations for any service contracts using their indices be published. The new bill would also allow the FMC to investigate any complaints about “alleged incidents of market manipulation or other anticompetitive practices” by shipping exchanges. The legislation also extends the deadline for shipping exchanges to register with the FMC until two years after the reauthorization’s passage. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A bill reauthorizing the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) for another three years has been introduced in the House of Representatives, with the proposed legislation also adding more outside expertise to the agency for help on ocean carriers and ports and allowing for a complaint process covering freight indices. Representatives John Garamendi (D-Calif.), along with Dusty Johnson (R-SD), Mike Ezell (R-Miss.) and Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), introduced the bill last week to reauthorize the FMC through 2029, Garamendi’s office said in a statement Monday. The bill, which includes funding for the agency, aims to build on Garamendi and Johnson’s work on the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22), the statement said. “Ocean shipping is a critical aspect of America’s national, food and economic security,” Johnson said in the statement. That’s why our Federal Maritime Commission must be equipped with the proper tools to keep the industry operating above bar.” The reauthorization bill, which is a standard procedure for many federal agencies, outlines funding for the FMC through the next three fiscal years. The FMC’s budget will increase from $49.2 million in 2026 to $57 million in 2029, representing an average 5% annual increase over that time. Along with the funding, the bill includes tweaks to OSRA-22 that Garamendi and Johnson had been pushing for . The reauthorization bill proposes the creation of a 13-member national port advisory committee. The committee would be comprised of five members from marine terminal operators, five from port authorities and three members of the longshore workforce. It also includes a new ocean carrier advisory committee with six members from ocean carriers and three from ocean forwarders or non-vessel-operating common carriers (NVOs). The bill also includes new regulations for freight index providers such as the Shanghai Shipping Exchange. OSRA-22 required that within three years of its passage, shipping exchanges be registered with the FMC and that their underlying rules and regulations for any service contracts using their indices be published. The new bill would also allow the FMC to investigate any complaints about “alleged incidents of market manipulation or other anticompetitive practices” by shipping exchanges. The legislation also extends the deadline for shipping exchanges to register with the FMC until two years after the reauthorization’s passage. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Supply chain

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Congress seeks reauthorization of FMC through 2029

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Although spot rates from Asia to the US are dropping due to waning demand and overcapacity, the carrier is zeroing in on the e-commerce sector with its expedited transit times and the quick delivery of containers upon discharge from vessels. </div>

Although spot rates from Asia to the US are dropping due to waning demand and overcapacity, the carrier is zeroing in on the e-commerce sector with its expedited transit times and the quick delivery of containers upon discharge from vessels.

<div class="phx-topic">Hede Shipping in mid-July will launch its third expedited service from China to Los Angeles as the niche carrier seeks to expand its share of the trans-Pacific e-commerce market. Although spot rates from Asia to the US <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trans-pacific-sailing-into-slowdown-asia-europe-outlook-brightens-analysts-6031694">continue to drop due to waning demand and overcapacity in the overall market</a>, China-based Hede is zeroing in on the e-commerce sector with its expedited transit times and the quick delivery of containers upon discharge from vessels. “The e-commerce market is already there. It’s here to stay,” Roger Zhang, COO of Duke Shipping, the exclusive agent for Hede’s trans-Pacific services, told the Journal of Commerce Monday. Still, the new service that launches July 16 comes as e-commerce volumes, more typically the domain of the air cargo market, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/signs-of-air-cargo-recovery-on-the-trans-pacific-as-freighter-aircraft-return-6019701">are under pressure in the trans-Pacific</a>. The US on May 2 eliminated the duty-free exemption for low-value shipments from China valued at under $800. Less than two weeks later, the US reduced the so-called de minimis tariff on low-value imports from 120% to 54%. Items sent via post from China to the US will be charged a flat fee of $100, regardless of value. In 2024, e-commerce shipments accounted for about 50% of China-to-US air freight volume, according to rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. Since the duty-free status of low-value Chinese imports was revoked in May, the volume has declined. Hede’s new service initially will be biweekly, with a 14-day transit time from Nansha in South China to Los Angeles. Last year, Hede phased in two weekly services from Shanghai to Los Angeles covering northern and eastern China, Zhang said. The average transit time from China to Southern California for nonexpedited services ranges from 15 to 18 days. Average transit times from Shanghai to Los Angeles in May were 18 days, according to the latest data available from InforNexus. Hede’s new Nansha service will begin with three container ships ranging in size from 3,000 to 4,000 TEUs. Vessels operated by the alliance carriers are generally 10,000-TEU capacity or higher. At present, securing additional vessels is difficult, Zhang said. “The charter market is so hot,” he said. Hede competes in the expedited service space with Zim Integrated Shipping Services and CMA CGM. UWL offers an expedited service from Southeast Asia to Seattle. <h3>Expedited container handling landside in Los Angeles </h3>As with its first two trans-Pacific services, vessels will call at the West Basin Container Terminal (WBCT) in Los Angeles. Hede offers a wheeled operation at WBCT and a dedicated chassis pool. “Expedited containers are ready for pickup within 24 hours after discharge, offering a fast logistics solution for time-sensitive cargo,” Zhang said. The spot rate from Shanghai to Los Angeles as of last Thursday was $3,741 per FEU, down 27% week over week and 36% from June 5, according to Drewry. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Hede Shipping in mid-July will launch its third expedited service from China to Los Angeles as the niche carrier seeks to expand its share of the trans-Pacific e-commerce market. Although spot rates from Asia to the US continue to drop due to waning demand and overcapacity in the overall market , China-based Hede is zeroing in on the e-commerce sector with its expedited transit times and the quick delivery of containers upon discharge from vessels. “The e-commerce market is already there. It’s here to stay,” Roger Zhang, COO of Duke Shipping, the exclusive agent for Hede’s trans-Pacific services, told the Journal of Commerce Monday. Still, the new service that launches July 16 comes as e-commerce volumes, more typically the domain of the air cargo market, are under pressure in the trans-Pacific . The US on May 2 eliminated the duty-free exemption for low-value shipments from China valued at under $800. Less than two weeks later, the US reduced the so-called de minimis tariff on low-value imports from 120% to 54%. Items sent via post from China to the US will be charged a flat fee of $100, regardless of value. In 2024, e-commerce shipments accounted for about 50% of China-to-US air freight volume, according to rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. Since the duty-free status of low-value Chinese imports was revoked in May, the volume has declined. Hede’s new service initially will be biweekly, with a 14-day transit time from Nansha in South China to Los Angeles. Last year, Hede phased in two weekly services from Shanghai to Los Angeles covering northern and eastern China, Zhang said. The average transit time from China to Southern California for nonexpedited services ranges from 15 to 18 days. Average transit times from Shanghai to Los Angeles in May were 18 days, according to the latest data available from InforNexus. Hede’s new Nansha service will begin with three container ships ranging in size from 3,000 to 4,000 TEUs. Vessels operated by the alliance carriers are generally 10,000-TEU capacity or higher. At present, securing additional vessels is difficult, Zhang said. “The charter market is so hot,” he said. Hede competes in the expedited service space with Zim Integrated Shipping Services and CMA CGM. UWL offers an expedited service from Southeast Asia to Seattle. Expedited container handling landside in Los Angeles As with its first two trans-Pacific services, vessels will call at the West Basin Container Terminal (WBCT) in Los Angeles. Hede offers a wheeled operation at WBCT and a dedicated chassis pool. “Expedited containers are ready for pickup within 24 hours after discharge, offering a fast logistics solution for time-sensitive cargo,” Zhang said. The spot rate from Shanghai to Los Angeles as of last Thursday was $3,741 per FEU, down 27% week over week and 36% from June 5, according to Drewry. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Trans-Pacific

Hede Shipping to launch third expedited service from China to Los Angeles

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The groups want the US customs agency to rule that tariffs should be assessed according to a good’s origin port, not a secondary port through which it might have been transshipped. </div>

The groups want the US customs agency to rule that tariffs should be assessed according to a good’s origin port, not a secondary port through which it might have been transshipped.

<div class="phx-topic">A wide-ranging coalition of shipper and logistics service provider groups is urging US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to clarify whether goods transshipped before the Trump administration imposed tariffs on most nations on April 5 will be subject to those additional costs. At issue is whether goods that departed from their origin ports prior to the April 5 deadline, but were then transshipped at another port en route to their US destination ports, are subject to the tariffs, issued under the president’s authority through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In a letter dated June 27, 94 shipper, customs broker and forwarder organizations, including the National Retail Federation, Retail Industry Leaders Association, National Industrial Transportation League and National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, said communication between CBP and the trade community has offered “differing and sometimes contradictory responses.” The groups assert that previous CBP rulings dictate that relay legs or diversions of cargo shouldn’t impact the duty levels of goods, citing, in particular, the “sale for exportation standard” that underpins transactions between buyers and sellers of goods. “Numerous CBP rulings clarify that CBP relies on documentary evidence, such as invoices, purchase orders and/or bills of lading, when confirming that the ultimate destination for goods always was the United States and there was never a contingency of diversion,” the letter said. “The sale for exportation standard is consistent with and supports the finding that relay vessels originating in the initial country of export should meet the in-transit exception and eligibility should be based on the initial country of loading and export.” The transshipment issue has been a thorn in the side of importers trying to navigate the IEEPA tariffs, as CBP’s original guidance on April 4 wasn’t clear, according to a range of trade compliance experts. Subsequent guidance issued by CBP on May 15, which included a set of frequently asked questions, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scheduling-linked-to-10-tariffs-causing-confusion-angst-for-us-importers-6009281">included details on how transshipment would impact tariff exemptions</a>. <h3>Seeking better communication </h3>Import groups argue that transshipment is often out of the hands of the cargo owners responsible for paying tariffs. In the letter, the groups asked for guidance around the IEEPA tariffs to be conveyed via a consistent channel to avoid confusion among the trade community. “With the proliferation of communication channels, it is vital for the trade community to have one consistent and reliable repository of information regarding updates and changes to trade practices, policies and procedures,” the letter said. The groups also asked CBP and DHS to avoid cutting agency resources to execute and enforce changing tariffs. The IEEPA tariffs are currently caught up in a legal dispute, with the US Court of International Trade (CIT) <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/federal-court-ruling-blocking-tariffs-resets-shipping-outlook-6013402">ruling in late May</a> that President Donald Trump had overstepped his authority in using the act to justify his tariffs. But a US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily stayed the CIT’s order, preserving the tariffs until a hearing on the case is held. The US Supreme Court on June 20 declined to fast track a case brought by two toy importers challenging the tariffs. Trade attorneys speaking at the American Association of Exporters and Importers in Washington, DC, on Friday said they expect the dual challenges to IEEPA tariffs — the CIT challenge and the toy importers’ case — to take a minimum of six months to be resolved, and likely longer. The Trump administration, meanwhile, said last week it will likely extend the reprieve on the reciprocal tariffs that are due to expire July 9 on all countries except China, Mexico and Canada. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A wide-ranging coalition of shipper and logistics service provider groups is urging US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to clarify whether goods transshipped before the Trump administration imposed tariffs on most nations on April 5 will be subject to those additional costs. At issue is whether goods that departed from their origin ports prior to the April 5 deadline, but were then transshipped at another port en route to their US destination ports, are subject to the tariffs, issued under the president’s authority through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In a letter dated June 27, 94 shipper, customs broker and forwarder organizations, including the National Retail Federation, Retail Industry Leaders Association, National Industrial Transportation League and National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, said communication between CBP and the trade community has offered “differing and sometimes contradictory responses.” The groups assert that previous CBP rulings dictate that relay legs or diversions of cargo shouldn’t impact the duty levels of goods, citing, in particular, the “sale for exportation standard” that underpins transactions between buyers and sellers of goods. “Numerous CBP rulings clarify that CBP relies on documentary evidence, such as invoices, purchase orders and/or bills of lading, when confirming that the ultimate destination for goods always was the United States and there was never a contingency of diversion,” the letter said. “The sale for exportation standard is consistent with and supports the finding that relay vessels originating in the initial country of export should meet the in-transit exception and eligibility should be based on the initial country of loading and export.” The transshipment issue has been a thorn in the side of importers trying to navigate the IEEPA tariffs, as CBP’s original guidance on April 4 wasn’t clear, according to a range of trade compliance experts. Subsequent guidance issued by CBP on May 15, which included a set of frequently asked questions, included details on how transshipment would impact tariff exemptions . Seeking better communication Import groups argue that transshipment is often out of the hands of the cargo owners responsible for paying tariffs. In the letter, the groups asked for guidance around the IEEPA tariffs to be conveyed via a consistent channel to avoid confusion among the trade community. “With the proliferation of communication channels, it is vital for the trade community to have one consistent and reliable repository of information regarding updates and changes to trade practices, policies and procedures,” the letter said. The groups also asked CBP and DHS to avoid cutting agency resources to execute and enforce changing tariffs. The IEEPA tariffs are currently caught up in a legal dispute, with the US Court of International Trade (CIT) ruling in late May that President Donald Trump had overstepped his authority in using the act to justify his tariffs. But a US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily stayed the CIT’s order, preserving the tariffs until a hearing on the case is held. The US Supreme Court on June 20 declined to fast track a case brought by two toy importers challenging the tariffs. Trade attorneys speaking at the American Association of Exporters and Importers in Washington, DC, on Friday said they expect the dual challenges to IEEPA tariffs — the CIT challenge and the toy importers’ case — to take a minimum of six months to be resolved, and likely longer. The Trump administration, meanwhile, said last week it will likely extend the reprieve on the reciprocal tariffs that are due to expire July 9 on all countries except China, Mexico and Canada. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Shipper groups urge CBP to clarify tariff transshipment confusion

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Container market participants should be open to a better way to support their overall risk management, particularly with the amount of new tonnage scheduled to hit the market in the near future.</div>

Container market participants should be open to a better way to support their overall risk management, particularly with the amount of new tonnage scheduled to hit the market in the near future.

<div class="phx-topic">This piece follows <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/near-constant-disruption-giving-new-momentum-to-freight-futures-5979859">Peter Tirschwell’s update</a> on the freight forward agreement (FFA) market. While I agree with many points raised and was personally involved in many of the 2011 discussions, there is a wider point that needs to be raised and deepened. Let’s start with a basic premise of risk management: If you own an asset, you have a long position for that asset. In the case of container shipping, assuming the carrier is also the vessel owner (directly or disponent), then that asset is the long position (or more precisely, the vessel’s nominal TEU capacity is the long position, as TEUs are the primary revenue-earning unit). Let’s also assume a vessel’s capacity is 20,000 TEUs and it does five round trips per annum on an Asia-Europe service that requires 10 vessels. The combined asset or long position is 1 million TEUs per annum. The enduring question is how to earn revenue to at least cover the 1 million TEUs at margin cost and normal profit (or at higher revenue but lower volume). On the supply side, you could sell slots to others, preferably on a used/unused basis either as a slot charter or as part of a vessel-sharing agreement/alliance. The downside of the latter is clearly the requirement to purchase reciprocal slots. Let’s assume you sell off 20,000 slots per annum to a small competitor. You have covered 2% and only have 980,000 TEUs to cover! On the demand side, you have many contracts, with the promise, estimate or best effort of the counterparty to honor the volumes in the agreed time windows. But let’s say you have 50% contract coverage (we’ll include your 2% of slot sales). You will have contracted at above-normal profit, giving you a further 15% cover for your 1 million slots. However, we’ll subtract 5% for BCO/NVO underperformance with no fault on either party. You are back to 60% coverage and still require cover for the remaining 40%. Your standard assumption would be to look at historical indicators such as GDP (which may or may not correlate to actual trade and TEUs), purchasing managers’ indices and (hopefully) talk to key customers, and look at other inputs the clever economists will consider. These will be plugged in to spit out a number with an upside and downside tolerance that will show a correlation between all these indicators and likely volume trends. But what about trade wars, Houthi militants, COVID-19 and any other number of white or black swan events? Any of these can affect demand in the short to long term and defy standard assumptions. So in reality, your 40% capacity long position has just one strategy: optimism. <h3>Be risk ‘aware’ </h3>I would advise taking a few preliminary steps. The first is to benchmark the container FFA market with other futures markets. Start with the Baltic for dry and wet bulk. While helpful, there are many dissimilarities in the physical market versus container to make this only of passing interest. Try more of the commodities such as metals, but in any case, understand more deeply what is in play, what risks you carry and how to manage them. Also, look in-house with your treasury teams to more deeply understand your foreign exchange trading and fuel hedging. The good news is you have at least some good risk management practices, knowledge and controls in place. Second, get to know how the exchanges function. There have been concerns raised about counterparty risk. The exchanges/indexes of choice are ICE/NYSHEX and Baltic/Freightos, which will obviate this concern. The exchanges will manage liquidity on margin calls and overall exposure. The days of relying solely on less-credible indices are long gone, and players like Xeneta and others are well established and reliable. Finally, ensure your organization is well prepared. The benefit of the existing indices is they fall relatively easily into existing carrier trade profit and loss (PnL). This makes it easy for visibility and transparency for PnL owners and allows for direct allocation of the costs to manage and the eventual revenue streams. Be very clear about the amount of FFA exposure you want in total and by quarter and at what PnL level. Be sure to implement strict controls at the PnL level to avoid creating undue risk at the overall level. If it were my money, I’d keep an enterprise level of 5% of my overall TEU capacity as a maximum. I realize some or all of this may fall on deaf ears for those who are naturally cautious and/or risk averse. My suggestion is to be “risk aware” and be open to a better way to support your overall risk management, particularly with the amount of new tonnage scheduled to hit the market in the near future. 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>

This piece follows Peter Tirschwell’s update on the freight forward agreement (FFA) market. While I agree with many points raised and was personally involved in many of the 2011 discussions, there is a wider point that needs to be raised and deepened. Let’s start with a basic premise of risk management: If you own an asset, you have a long position for that asset. In the case of container shipping, assuming the carrier is also the vessel owner (directly or disponent), then that asset is the long position (or more precisely, the vessel’s nominal TEU capacity is the long position, as TEUs are the primary revenue-earning unit). Let’s also assume a vessel’s capacity is 20,000 TEUs and it does five round trips per annum on an Asia-Europe service that requires 10 vessels. The combined asset or long position is 1 million TEUs per annum. The enduring question is how to earn revenue to at least cover the 1 million TEUs at margin cost and normal profit (or at higher revenue but lower volume). On the supply side, you could sell slots to others, preferably on a used/unused basis either as a slot charter or as part of a vessel-sharing agreement/alliance. The downside of the latter is clearly the requirement to purchase reciprocal slots. Let’s assume you sell off 20,000 slots per annum to a small competitor. You have covered 2% and only have 980,000 TEUs to cover! On the demand side, you have many contracts, with the promise, estimate or best effort of the counterparty to honor the volumes in the agreed time windows. But let’s say you have 50% contract coverage (we’ll include your 2% of slot sales). You will have contracted at above-normal profit, giving you a further 15% cover for your 1 million slots. However, we’ll subtract 5% for BCO/NVO underperformance with no fault on either party. You are back to 60% coverage and still require cover for the remaining 40%. Your standard assumption would be to look at historical indicators such as GDP (which may or may not correlate to actual trade and TEUs), purchasing managers’ indices and (hopefully) talk to key customers, and look at other inputs the clever economists will consider. These will be plugged in to spit out a number with an upside and downside tolerance that will show a correlation between all these indicators and likely volume trends. But what about trade wars, Houthi militants, COVID-19 and any other number of white or black swan events? Any of these can affect demand in the short to long term and defy standard assumptions. So in reality, your 40% capacity long position has just one strategy: optimism. Be risk ‘aware’ I would advise taking a few preliminary steps. The first is to benchmark the container FFA market with other futures markets. Start with the Baltic for dry and wet bulk. While helpful, there are many dissimilarities in the physical market versus container to make this only of passing interest. Try more of the commodities such as metals, but in any case, understand more deeply what is in play, what risks you carry and how to manage them. Also, look in-house with your treasury teams to more deeply understand your foreign exchange trading and fuel hedging. The good news is you have at least some good risk management practices, knowledge and controls in place. Second, get to know how the exchanges function. There have been concerns raised about counterparty risk. The exchanges/indexes of choice are ICE/NYSHEX and Baltic/Freightos, which will obviate this concern. The exchanges will manage liquidity on margin calls and overall exposure. The days of relying solely on less-credible indices are long gone, and players like Xeneta and others are well established and reliable. Finally, ensure your organization is well prepared. The benefit of the existing indices is they fall relatively easily into existing carrier trade profit and loss (PnL). This makes it easy for visibility and transparency for PnL owners and allows for direct allocation of the costs to manage and the eventual revenue streams. Be very clear about the amount of FFA exposure you want in total and by quarter and at what PnL level. Be sure to implement strict controls at the PnL level to avoid creating undue risk at the overall level. If it were my money, I’d keep an enterprise level of 5% of my overall TEU capacity as a maximum. I realize some or all of this may fall on deaf ears for those who are naturally cautious and/or risk averse. My suggestion is to be “risk aware” and be open to a better way to support your overall risk management, particularly with the amount of new tonnage scheduled to hit the market in the near future. John McCauley, formerly a vice president of transportation and logistics at Cargill, now consults for shippers. Contact him at john-mccauley1@outlook.com .

Be open to new ways to support your risk management strategy

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">As agricultural exports enter their traditional peak season, it is prudent to be proactive now — while there is still an empty container supply extant in North America. </div>

As agricultural exports enter their traditional peak season, it is prudent to be proactive now — while there is still an empty container supply extant in North America.

<div class="phx-topic">“Where Have All the Flowers Gone?” is a folk song written by American singer-songwriter Pete Seeger. Legend has it that he wrote it while on an airplane to play at Oberlin College, one of the few locations willing to defy the McCarthy hiring blacklist imposed on him. Subsequently, the song became a mainstay of the anti-war movement during the Vietnam War and has been covered by many artists and in many languages. The song utilizes the image of flowers and the cycle of life to depict the cyclical and destructive nature of war. And while I recognize that applying this metaphor to our industry’s cyclicality may be a step too far, I believe that the plaintive refrain, “Oh when will you/we ever learn; Oh, when will you/we ever learn?” certainly applies. In today’s transportation industry, there are very few of us that can remember the days of regulation when we struggled in an economy beset by stagflation. President Jimmy Carter then liberated our sector with deregulation. Because regulation — by design — was intended to ensure excess capacity, two decades of halcyon growth followed as this capacity was redeployed to productive applications. Along with globalization and outsourcing, logistics and supply chain management became industries in their own right, and intermodal was a key driver. However, about 25 years ago, the “free” capacity unleashed by deregulation had been consumed and growth needed to be supported by investment. Coincidentally, these changes took place against the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attack. A bipartisan blue-ribbon commission was established, and three years later, they released their report. The findings were extensive. The government was not prepared and did not know how to respond. Problems with intelligence collection, analysis, sharing across agencies, and a lack of coordination among federal agencies exacerbated the challenges. In fact, the whole structure represented a maze of siloed and disaggregated responsibilities. When I read the report, I was struck by the potential for a future commission assembled to write many of the same findings about the transportation network in our country. I actually wrote a white paper in 2004 claiming that it would be unnecessary to convene an investigation of the inevitable supply chain meltdown because it was already written. All that was necessary was to take the 9/11 report and replace “national security” with “supply chain.” <h3>COVID-19 drove changes </h3>Of course, our industry did nothing to address these structural shortcomings and muddled on until COVID-19 struck. At that time, it seemed that our entire industry adopted the “4C” excuse — everything was the fault of COVID, China, Congestion and Chassis. Everyone was surprised that such a terrible fate could befall our industry. Even worse, our industry seemed to be represented by our least qualified spokespeople and most of the media had no idea of basic facts. Somehow, we all survived that mess. Many of the problems impacted the entire network. The maelstrom of detention and demurrage bills gave rise to the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). It increased the authority of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) to promote the growth and development of US exports through an ocean transportation system that is competitive, efficient and economical. Beyond its mandate addressing complaints about detention and demurrage charges, OSRA-22 prohibits common ocean carriers, marine terminal operators or ocean transportation intermediaries from unreasonably refusing cargo space when available or resorting to other unfair or unjustly discriminatory methods. These protections were welcomed by the export community. However, we have to recognize that a complaint process after the fact may be insufficient to provide adequate protection if there is no effective remedy available. At times of high demand (and rates) for imports from Asia to North America, ocean carriers frequently evacuate all containers as soon as their import cargo is devanned. This moots the question of available space because there may be vessel space — but no empty containers.  As agricultural exports enter their traditional peak season, we believe that it is prudent to be proactive now, while there is still an empty container supply extant in North America. The Agriculture Transportation Coalition convenes June 16 for its annual meeting. I am sure Executive Director Peter Friedmann will have this high on the agenda; we do not want to be wondering where all the containers have gone. Contact Ted Prince at <a href="mailto:ted@tricitiesintermodal.com">ted@tricitiesintermodal.com</a>.</div>

“Where Have All the Flowers Gone?” is a folk song written by American singer-songwriter Pete Seeger. Legend has it that he wrote it while on an airplane to play at Oberlin College, one of the few locations willing to defy the McCarthy hiring blacklist imposed on him. Subsequently, the song became a mainstay of the anti-war movement during the Vietnam War and has been covered by many artists and in many languages. The song utilizes the image of flowers and the cycle of life to depict the cyclical and destructive nature of war. And while I recognize that applying this metaphor to our industry’s cyclicality may be a step too far, I believe that the plaintive refrain, “Oh when will you/we ever learn; Oh, when will you/we ever learn?” certainly applies. In today’s transportation industry, there are very few of us that can remember the days of regulation when we struggled in an economy beset by stagflation. President Jimmy Carter then liberated our sector with deregulation. Because regulation — by design — was intended to ensure excess capacity, two decades of halcyon growth followed as this capacity was redeployed to productive applications. Along with globalization and outsourcing, logistics and supply chain management became industries in their own right, and intermodal was a key driver. However, about 25 years ago, the “free” capacity unleashed by deregulation had been consumed and growth needed to be supported by investment. Coincidentally, these changes took place against the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attack. A bipartisan blue-ribbon commission was established, and three years later, they released their report. The findings were extensive. The government was not prepared and did not know how to respond. Problems with intelligence collection, analysis, sharing across agencies, and a lack of coordination among federal agencies exacerbated the challenges. In fact, the whole structure represented a maze of siloed and disaggregated responsibilities. When I read the report, I was struck by the potential for a future commission assembled to write many of the same findings about the transportation network in our country. I actually wrote a white paper in 2004 claiming that it would be unnecessary to convene an investigation of the inevitable supply chain meltdown because it was already written. All that was necessary was to take the 9/11 report and replace “national security” with “supply chain.” COVID-19 drove changes Of course, our industry did nothing to address these structural shortcomings and muddled on until COVID-19 struck. At that time, it seemed that our entire industry adopted the “4C” excuse — everything was the fault of COVID, China, Congestion and Chassis. Everyone was surprised that such a terrible fate could befall our industry. Even worse, our industry seemed to be represented by our least qualified spokespeople and most of the media had no idea of basic facts. Somehow, we all survived that mess. Many of the problems impacted the entire network. The maelstrom of detention and demurrage bills gave rise to the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). It increased the authority of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) to promote the growth and development of US exports through an ocean transportation system that is competitive, efficient and economical. Beyond its mandate addressing complaints about detention and demurrage charges, OSRA-22 prohibits common ocean carriers, marine terminal operators or ocean transportation intermediaries from unreasonably refusing cargo space when available or resorting to other unfair or unjustly discriminatory methods. These protections were welcomed by the export community. However, we have to recognize that a complaint process after the fact may be insufficient to provide adequate protection if there is no effective remedy available. At times of high demand (and rates) for imports from Asia to North America, ocean carriers frequently evacuate all containers as soon as their import cargo is devanned. This moots the question of available space because there may be vessel space — but no empty containers.  As agricultural exports enter their traditional peak season, we believe that it is prudent to be proactive now, while there is still an empty container supply extant in North America. The Agriculture Transportation Coalition convenes June 16 for its annual meeting. I am sure Executive Director Peter Friedmann will have this high on the agenda; we do not want to be wondering where all the containers have gone. Contact Ted Prince at ted@tricitiesintermodal.com .

Act now before we wonder where all the containers have gone

World

Asia

China

Purchasing managers’ index (PMI) datasets are compiled from questionnaire responses from a survey panel of senior purchasing executives (or similar) from about 400 companies. For each variable, the index is the sum of the percentage of “higher” responses and half the percentage of “no change” responses. PMIs range from 0 to 100, with a reading above 50 indicating an overall increase compared to the previous month and readings below 50 indicating an overall decrease. S&P Global compiles the China PMI in conjunction with Caixin. [S&P Global](https://ihsmarkit.com/products/pmi.html)

World, US, Asia, China and EU manufacturing PMIs (S&P Global)

World, US, Asia China, EU US PMI Manufacturing (PMI) by S&P Global Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The surge, however brief, will nonetheless be a welcome boost in business for the ports after a lackluster May and early June.</div>

The surge, however brief, will nonetheless be a welcome boost in business for the ports after a lackluster May and early June.

<div class="phx-topic">Ports along the US West Coast are due to experience a short-lived cargo surge over the next few weeks as importers rush to bring goods into the country ahead of the expiry of temporary tariff relief implemented by the Trump administration. The surge, however brief, will nonetheless be a welcome boost in business for the ports after a lackluster May and early June. Kip Louttit, executive director of the Marine Exchange of Southern California, told the Journal of Commerce that vessel arrivals scheduled for the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in the coming weeks “are the highest container ships on-the-way levels since January 2025 and July and September 2024.” According to the ports’ websites, Los Angeles projects that imports this week will total 138,519 TEUs before dipping to 124,713 TEUs next week and 101,003 TEUs for the week of July 6. Long Beach is forecasting its imports will total 84,109 TEUs this week before jumping to 125,286 TEUs next week and 116,947 TEUs the week of July 6. Further out, 93,797 TEUs are expected for the week of July 13, rising again to 114,073 TEUs for the week of July 20. The ports consider 100,000 TEUs or greater to be a strong week. In May, Los Angeles totaled 358,351 TEUs in imports, or approximately 83,337 TEUs a week, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Long Beach saw 310,365 TEUs, or about 72,177 TEUs weekly. The import boost expected over the next few weeks comes ahead of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trans-pacific-spot-rates-falling-as-tariff-linked-demand-surge-loses-steam-6027420">two key dates put in place by the White House — July 9 and Aug. 14</a>. The first is when a 90-day reprieve on higher tariffs against essentially all US trading partners expires; the second is when similar relief on imports from China ends. What will happen after those dates is unknown. The Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) of Seattle and Tacoma, meanwhile, forecasts 55 vessel arrivals for June, 49 in July and 48 in August. That’s up from 46 in May. “Looking forward, numbers will likely increase for the last two weeks in June,” a spokesperson for the NWSA told the Journal of Commerce. “There are both fewer blank sailings and additional cargo that is anticipated for the second half of the month.” West Coast ports should not face any significant congestion issues handling the spike in imports in the coming few weeks given the weak month of May. <h3>Could rate decline pause? </h3>An increase in import volumes over the coming weeks could slow the ongoing decline in spot rates in the eastbound trans-Pacific. The rate from Asia to the West Coast as of Monday was $2,900 per FEU, down 10% on the week and 50% lower than the recent high of $6,040 per FEU on June 6, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&amp;P Global. “The trans-Pac just seems to be such a moving target,” a forwarder in the Pacific Northwest told the Journal of Commerce. “We’re updating our rates almost daily.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="e8c13a3e-9f5a-412f-8741-adbf5e1a7779"></dynamic-object></div>The import surge on the West Coast also seems to be additional proof that the peak shipping season — normally August through October — has come early this year. The most recent <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/pause-on-tariffs-prompts-us-retailers-to-upgrade-summer-import-forecast-6022230">Global Port Tracker</a> published by the National Retail Federation and Hackett Associates forecasts that US imports will decline 8.1% in July, 14.7% in August, 21.8% in September and 19.8% in October compared with the same months in 2024. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Ports along the US West Coast are due to experience a short-lived cargo surge over the next few weeks as importers rush to bring goods into the country ahead of the expiry of temporary tariff relief implemented by the Trump administration. The surge, however brief, will nonetheless be a welcome boost in business for the ports after a lackluster May and early June. Kip Louttit, executive director of the Marine Exchange of Southern California, told the Journal of Commerce that vessel arrivals scheduled for the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in the coming weeks “are the highest container ships on-the-way levels since January 2025 and July and September 2024.” According to the ports’ websites, Los Angeles projects that imports this week will total 138,519 TEUs before dipping to 124,713 TEUs next week and 101,003 TEUs for the week of July 6. Long Beach is forecasting its imports will total 84,109 TEUs this week before jumping to 125,286 TEUs next week and 116,947 TEUs the week of July 6. Further out, 93,797 TEUs are expected for the week of July 13, rising again to 114,073 TEUs for the week of July 20. The ports consider 100,000 TEUs or greater to be a strong week. In May, Los Angeles totaled 358,351 TEUs in imports, or approximately 83,337 TEUs a week, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Long Beach saw 310,365 TEUs, or about 72,177 TEUs weekly. The import boost expected over the next few weeks comes ahead of two key dates put in place by the White House — July 9 and Aug. 14 . The first is when a 90-day reprieve on higher tariffs against essentially all US trading partners expires; the second is when similar relief on imports from China ends. What will happen after those dates is unknown. The Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) of Seattle and Tacoma, meanwhile, forecasts 55 vessel arrivals for June, 49 in July and 48 in August. That’s up from 46 in May. “Looking forward, numbers will likely increase for the last two weeks in June,” a spokesperson for the NWSA told the Journal of Commerce. “There are both fewer blank sailings and additional cargo that is anticipated for the second half of the month.” West Coast ports should not face any significant congestion issues handling the spike in imports in the coming few weeks given the weak month of May. Could rate decline pause? An increase in import volumes over the coming weeks could slow the ongoing decline in spot rates in the eastbound trans-Pacific. The rate from Asia to the West Coast as of Monday was $2,900 per FEU, down 10% on the week and 50% lower than the recent high of $6,040 per FEU on June 6, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&P Global. “The trans-Pac just seems to be such a moving target,” a forwarder in the Pacific Northwest told the Journal of Commerce. “We’re updating our rates almost daily.” The import surge on the West Coast also seems to be additional proof that the peak shipping season — normally August through October — has come early this year. The most recent Global Port Tracker published by the National Retail Federation and Hackett Associates forecasts that US imports will decline 8.1% in July, 14.7% in August, 21.8% in September and 19.8% in October compared with the same months in 2024. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .

Port News

North American ports

Quick-hit, tariff-driven import surge on tap for US West Coast ports

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">In a statement posted on the FMC’s website, Sola said his last day at the agency would be June 30 and did not give a reason for his departure.</div>

In a statement posted on the FMC’s website, Sola said his last day at the agency would be June 30 and did not give a reason for his departure.

<div class="phx-topic">Chairman Louis Sola announced Tuesday he is leaving the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) a mere five months after being <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trump-appoints-louis-sola-to-chairmans-slot-at-fmc-5926442">appointed to lead the agency</a> responsible for regulating ocean trade to and from US ports. In a statement posted on the FMC’s website, Sola said his last day at the agency will be June 30. He did not give a reason for his departure. “I have had the privilege of helping safeguard the integrity of the US maritime industry, bringing greater transparency to port operations, and overseeing a supply chain that moves more than $5 trillion in goods annually,” Sola said in the statement. Sola, appointed to the commission in 2018 during President Donald Trump’s first term, pointed to work he did as a commissioner during the pandemic to resolve supply chain-related disruptions, as well as a recent investigation into flags of convenience, which resulted in calls for the deflagging of more than 140 sanctioned vessels. On Jan. 20, Trump elevated Sola to replace previous FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei, with a mandate to support initiatives around balanced trade and an emphasis on enhancing trade to and from Latin America. Early in his brief tenure as chairman, Sola was outspoken about whether the Panama Canal was a <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-chair-questions-level-playing-field-in-panama-canal-operations-5932469">“level playing field”</a> for US shippers due to Chinese operational involvement in ports on both ends of the canal. He also was leading an investigation into whether global chokepoints, primarily major canals, were hurting US maritime transportation interests. Sola formerly served on the Florida Board of Pilots Commissioners and as CEO of a ship and yacht brokerage before being nominated to the FMC. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Chairman Louis Sola announced Tuesday he is leaving the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) a mere five months after being appointed to lead the agency responsible for regulating ocean trade to and from US ports. In a statement posted on the FMC’s website, Sola said his last day at the agency will be June 30. He did not give a reason for his departure. “I have had the privilege of helping safeguard the integrity of the US maritime industry, bringing greater transparency to port operations, and overseeing a supply chain that moves more than $5 trillion in goods annually,” Sola said in the statement. Sola, appointed to the commission in 2018 during President Donald Trump’s first term, pointed to work he did as a commissioner during the pandemic to resolve supply chain-related disruptions, as well as a recent investigation into flags of convenience, which resulted in calls for the deflagging of more than 140 sanctioned vessels. On Jan. 20, Trump elevated Sola to replace previous FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei, with a mandate to support initiatives around balanced trade and an emphasis on enhancing trade to and from Latin America. Early in his brief tenure as chairman, Sola was outspoken about whether the Panama Canal was a “level playing field” for US shippers due to Chinese operational involvement in ports on both ends of the canal. He also was leading an investigation into whether global chokepoints, primarily major canals, were hurting US maritime transportation interests. Sola formerly served on the Florida Board of Pilots Commissioners and as CEO of a ship and yacht brokerage before being nominated to the FMC. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

FMC’s Sola to leave agency months after being elevated to chairman’s slot

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The railroad said the disruptions were the result of the switchover to a new operating system in early May, with the technology integration intended to unify old KCS systems into the CP network.</div>

The railroad said the disruptions were the result of the switchover to a new operating system in early May, with the technology integration intended to unify old KCS systems into the CP network.

<div class="phx-topic">Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) has acknowledged to US regulators that its customers have experienced poor service from the railroad since early May and vowed to fix the core issue — a messy transition from legacy Kansas City Southern (KCS) computer systems to CP networks. <a href="https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1750688210397/309692.pdf">A letter from CPKC</a> to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), dated June 20, outlined how the railroad will restore service to normal levels within the next month. The disruptions have centered not on the trains themselves but rather on the first and last miles of journeys, with the problems linked to terminals and switch yards. “CPKC’s level of service performance on the legacy KCS network since May 3, 2025 … does not measure up to CPKC’s standards for the quality of service it provides customers or the efficient operation of its network,” the railroad wrote to the STB. “CPKC also wishes to reassure the board that there is no broader underlying service problem.” CPKC said the disruptions were the result of the switchover to a new operating system in early May. The technology integration was intended to unify old KCS systems into the CP network. But CPKC wrote that the rollout encountered critical failures that disrupted car tracking, customer billing and switching operations. The ripple effects were significant, forcing crews to manually reconstruct data. Congestion soon mounted across the former KCS network, and some of the railroad’s customers were caught unprepared. <h3>Impact on intermodal and manifest trains </h3>In the initial weeks of the disruption, truck drivers were <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cpkc-grapples-with-complaints-over-us-canada-terminal-operations-6009914">spending hours waiting in lines</a> at terminals as crews had to be stationed at the gate to write receipts by hand. One CPKC customer had containers stuck inside the Wylie terminal in Texas for 10 days, according to data from GPS devices on the boxes. Two high-volume intermodal customers told the Journal of Commerce they pulled freight off the CPKC network in response. But Schneider National, CPKC’s top US partner, said the disruption was a minor blip. While CPKC’s letter to the STB focused on non-containerized freight, manifest and intermodal trains can impact one another in Laredo and Wylie, Texas, because they often share the same human resources, equipment and infrastructure. CPKC said the on-time performance of manifest trains, which hold a mixture of cargo, fell to 57.3% in a rolling four-week average ending June 13, dropping each week since the May 3 transition. Prior to May, on-time performance was regularly 75% to 85%. The situation was serious enough that CPKC created a “war room” in early May to troubleshoot issues. CPKC also flew in top executives, including COO Mark Redd, from Calgary to locations in Texas and the Gulf Coast to organize remedial efforts. “CPKC soon established cross-functional ‘SWAT-like’ support teams [comprised of experts from Operations, IT, and Network Support, and Marketing &amp; Sales, and including senior executives] to work through the issues arising from the IT transition,” CPKC wrote in the STB letter. “CPKC understands that some customer interactions with CPKC customer service personnel during the period may have been frustrating as a result of the issues with data visibility.” CPKC said it will continue to file weekly supplemental reports to update US regulators on the status of recovery efforts. “This report, along with the weekly cadence of updates we anticipate filing with the board as noted below, will provide those stakeholders with up-to-date data reflecting progress towards a return to normal service,” the railroad wrote. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) has acknowledged to US regulators that its customers have experienced poor service from the railroad since early May and vowed to fix the core issue — a messy transition from legacy Kansas City Southern (KCS) computer systems to CP networks. A letter from CPKC to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), dated June 20, outlined how the railroad will restore service to normal levels within the next month. The disruptions have centered not on the trains themselves but rather on the first and last miles of journeys, with the problems linked to terminals and switch yards. “CPKC’s level of service performance on the legacy KCS network since May 3, 2025 … does not measure up to CPKC’s standards for the quality of service it provides customers or the efficient operation of its network,” the railroad wrote to the STB. “CPKC also wishes to reassure the board that there is no broader underlying service problem.” CPKC said the disruptions were the result of the switchover to a new operating system in early May. The technology integration was intended to unify old KCS systems into the CP network. But CPKC wrote that the rollout encountered critical failures that disrupted car tracking, customer billing and switching operations. The ripple effects were significant, forcing crews to manually reconstruct data. Congestion soon mounted across the former KCS network, and some of the railroad’s customers were caught unprepared. Impact on intermodal and manifest trains In the initial weeks of the disruption, truck drivers were spending hours waiting in lines at terminals as crews had to be stationed at the gate to write receipts by hand. One CPKC customer had containers stuck inside the Wylie terminal in Texas for 10 days, according to data from GPS devices on the boxes. Two high-volume intermodal customers told the Journal of Commerce they pulled freight off the CPKC network in response. But Schneider National, CPKC’s top US partner, said the disruption was a minor blip. While CPKC’s letter to the STB focused on non-containerized freight, manifest and intermodal trains can impact one another in Laredo and Wylie, Texas, because they often share the same human resources, equipment and infrastructure. CPKC said the on-time performance of manifest trains, which hold a mixture of cargo, fell to 57.3% in a rolling four-week average ending June 13, dropping each week since the May 3 transition. Prior to May, on-time performance was regularly 75% to 85%. The situation was serious enough that CPKC created a “war room” in early May to troubleshoot issues. CPKC also flew in top executives, including COO Mark Redd, from Calgary to locations in Texas and the Gulf Coast to organize remedial efforts. “CPKC soon established cross-functional ‘SWAT-like’ support teams [comprised of experts from Operations, IT, and Network Support, and Marketing & Sales, and including senior executives] to work through the issues arising from the IT transition,” CPKC wrote in the STB letter. “CPKC understands that some customer interactions with CPKC customer service personnel during the period may have been frustrating as a result of the issues with data visibility.” CPKC said it will continue to file weekly supplemental reports to update US regulators on the status of recovery efforts. “This report, along with the weekly cadence of updates we anticipate filing with the board as noted below, will provide those stakeholders with up-to-date data reflecting progress towards a return to normal service,” the railroad wrote. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

CPKC acknowledges service woes to US regulators, vows remediation

Use code SKSGW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SUMMER SALE EXTENDED

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Use code SKSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

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

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SkSW25 at checkout to save 25% on a SIlver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code SKSGW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code SKSW25 to save 25% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code SKSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

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

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

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 trade group of ocean carriers is exempt from US antitrust scrutiny under an agreement it filed with the FMC five years ago, but the agency is now questioning that arrangement. </div>

The trade group of ocean carriers is exempt from US antitrust scrutiny under an agreement it filed with the FMC five years ago, but the agency is now questioning that arrangement.

<div class="phx-topic">The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is reviewing why the World Shipping Council should fall under US shipping law, a probe that could end the antitrust exemption for the WSC’s ocean carrier members to discuss cooperative matters. The FMC announced Thursday it was investigating the “working arrangement” between WSC’s members and whether that agreement violates US shipping law. Under US shipping law, ocean carriers or other regulated entities must file agreements to cooperate on commercial matters, exempting them from antitrust claims. WSC filed its cooperation agreement with the FMC in 2020, two decades after it was formed. The FMC ordered the WSC to show why the agency has “jurisdiction over the agreement and should not cancel the agreement as outside the agency’s jurisdiction.” The WSC agreement does not cover rates, operations, capacity or other strictly commercial matters. However, the group said it filed the agreement so members could discuss other issues such as safety, environmental and legal matters that could fall under FMC jurisdiction. But the FMC questioned that view in its Thursday order. The agency said the WSC may not be a regulated entity under the Shipping Act because it does not provide ocean transportation services. While its members are ocean carriers, within the confines of the agreement filed with the FMC, the members are not acting under their capacity as regulated carriers, the agency said. “An entity engaged only in the discussion and lobbying activities under the agreement would not qualify as an ‘ocean common carrier’ under the Shipping Act because it is performing none of the functions that define a common carrier,” the FMC said. The agency conceded that the WSC’s work on cargo screening may fall under the type of operational activities that are covered in FMC-filed agreements. But the agency said courts have previously ruled the WSC’s type of agreement “was meant as a narrow catch-all closely related to other explicitly operations-focused agreement categories” in US shipping law. While FMC agreements allow carriers and others to avoid antitrust scrutiny, “a trade association not involved in providing ocean transportation service does not appear to be engaged in the type of conduct Congress intended to immunize from scrutiny by antitrust enforcers and private plaintiffs,” the FMC’s order said. <h3>Two months to reply</h3>The FMC has given the WSC two months to reply to the order, with the agency’s final decision expected next March. WSC said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce that its 2020 agreement was filed “in accordance with its legal obligation (under US shipping law) and with the encouragement of the FMC.” “As a global trade association, the World Shipping Council takes its regulatory compliance responsibilities very seriously,” WSC said. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> </div>

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is reviewing why the World Shipping Council should fall under US shipping law, a probe that could end the antitrust exemption for the WSC’s ocean carrier members to discuss cooperative matters. The FMC announced Thursday it was investigating the “working arrangement” between WSC’s members and whether that agreement violates US shipping law. Under US shipping law, ocean carriers or other regulated entities must file agreements to cooperate on commercial matters, exempting them from antitrust claims. WSC filed its cooperation agreement with the FMC in 2020, two decades after it was formed. The FMC ordered the WSC to show why the agency has “jurisdiction over the agreement and should not cancel the agreement as outside the agency’s jurisdiction.” The WSC agreement does not cover rates, operations, capacity or other strictly commercial matters. However, the group said it filed the agreement so members could discuss other issues such as safety, environmental and legal matters that could fall under FMC jurisdiction. But the FMC questioned that view in its Thursday order. The agency said the WSC may not be a regulated entity under the Shipping Act because it does not provide ocean transportation services. While its members are ocean carriers, within the confines of the agreement filed with the FMC, the members are not acting under their capacity as regulated carriers, the agency said. “An entity engaged only in the discussion and lobbying activities under the agreement would not qualify as an ‘ocean common carrier’ under the Shipping Act because it is performing none of the functions that define a common carrier,” the FMC said. The agency conceded that the WSC’s work on cargo screening may fall under the type of operational activities that are covered in FMC-filed agreements. But the agency said courts have previously ruled the WSC’s type of agreement “was meant as a narrow catch-all closely related to other explicitly operations-focused agreement categories” in US shipping law. While FMC agreements allow carriers and others to avoid antitrust scrutiny, “a trade association not involved in providing ocean transportation service does not appear to be engaged in the type of conduct Congress intended to immunize from scrutiny by antitrust enforcers and private plaintiffs,” the FMC’s order said. Two months to reply The FMC has given the WSC two months to reply to the order, with the agency’s final decision expected next March. WSC said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce that its 2020 agreement was filed “in accordance with its legal obligation (under US shipping law) and with the encouragement of the FMC.” “As a global trade association, the World Shipping Council takes its regulatory compliance responsibilities very seriously,” WSC said. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com

FMC probes legal standing of World Shipping Council agreement

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Peak shipping season began early on both trade lanes, but the advancing of US orders from China will hit trans-Pacific demand in the second half of the year.</div>

Peak shipping season began early on both trade lanes, but the advancing of US orders from China will hit trans-Pacific demand in the second half of the year.

<div class="phx-topic">China-US trade in the second half of 2025 will be characterized by sharply falling rates and volume as frontloading momentum peters out and shippers sit with bloated inventories, while the demand outlook for Asia-Europe is far brighter, shipping analysts say. Just two weeks remain before the 90-day pause on global tariffs by the US ends on July 9, with a similar pause on China tariffs expiring Aug. 14. Although the outcome of Washington’s negotiations with its trading partners remains uncertain, declining demand on the trans-Pacific is expected whatever the result of talks. “Demand is expected to drop significantly, even if lower tariffs continue after the 90-day pause,” said Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. “Shippers have been frontloading imports throughout 2024 and early 2025 so inventories will be brimming once the current cargo rush is over.” Ports along the US West Coast are due to experience a short-lived cargo surge over the next few weeks, which may slow the ongoing decline in spot rates in the eastbound trans-Pacific. The rate from Asia to the West Coast as of Tuesday was $2,800 per FEU, down 13% on the week and 54% lower than the recent high of $6,040 per FEU on June 6, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&amp;P Global. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="bea6613f-87e3-42b2-84e2-aa2fd6f34f8f"></dynamic-object></div>Niels Rasmussen, chief shipping analyst at Bimco, said when the 90-day pause on tariffs ends, US importers will turn to the inventories they built up through frontloading in the first half of the year. “We expect that US import volume growth will suffer under the increased import tariffs and weaker economic growth,” Rasmussen noted in Bimco’s latest container shipping outlook released Wednesday. “We therefore estimate that the year-to-date frontloading of cargo will result in an equal downturn in imports during the second half of 2025,” he added. “In fact, we expect the downturn to be even more pronounced as the 55% tariff on Chinese goods gets implemented and the reciprocal tariff increases announced in April are implemented following the 90-day delay.” The import tariff for China went as high as 145% but was later lowered to 30% for the 90-day period ending Aug. 14. Last week, President Donald Trump wrote on his social media platform that an agreement had been reached with China that will set the tariff applied on Chinese imports to 55%, although that has yet to be officially confirmed. A trade agreement has been reached between the US and UK that will lower the general tariff level for imports from the UK to 10%. And although negotiations are continuing with the European Union, it is likely the EU will face a 10% baseline tariff on all its US exports. Bimco has adjusted its 2025 volume growth forecast for the European and Mediterranean region upward from 3.5% to 6% to reflect the stronger-than-expected year-to-date volumes. “Volume to the region grew 7.3% during the first four months of the year and economic conditions are improving with lower inflation, lower interest rates, lower unemployment than before COVID and a stronger euro all contributing to a brighter outlook,” Rasmussen said. “In the EU, consumers appear significantly better off as retail volumes have seen robust growth compared to a very weak second half of 2024, and consumer confidence remains mostly stable,” he added. <h3>Rates flatten on Asia-North Europe </h3>The peak season on Asia-Europe has begun and spot rates of $2,842 per FEU are up 49% since May 31, according to Xeneta. Rates have flattened out following the June freight-all-kinds (FAK) increases, but ocean carriers are planning to significantly reduce the deployed capacity on Asia-North Europe in August. If demand remains strong, rates are sure to rise. Data from visibility provider eeSea shows that the expected capacity on Asia-North Europe will fall by 90,000 TEUs in August from July, with blank capacity up 25% to 105,000 TEUs. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="6a5146cf-79d1-41fa-85fb-c1916fc625ac"></dynamic-object></div>Rasmussen noted that the conflict between Israel and Iran may have further delayed when ships will return to normal Red Sea and Suez Canal routings, and the Bimco outlook assumes no change in the diversions around southern Africa. When ships do return to Suez transits, Bimco is forecasting a 10% reduction in ship demand because of the shorter sailing distances. S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence has not recorded a Houthi militant attack on commercial shipping in the Red Sea since Dec. 10, 2024. While an apparent ceasefire was agreed to between the Houthis and the US in May, the US Department of Defense says the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier strike group intercepted approximately 160 Houthi drone and missile attacks over its five-month deployment in the Red Sea that ended in May, an indication of the resilience of Houthi attack capabilities. “Houthi attacks on US-affiliated shipping are likely to resume in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden at volumes probably not exceeding previous attacks and maintaining a severe risk to all vessels in transit due to uncertainties around Houthi targeting selection,” Jack Kennedy, head of Middle East and North Africa country risk at S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, wrote in a report this week. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

China-US trade in the second half of 2025 will be characterized by sharply falling rates and volume as frontloading momentum peters out and shippers sit with bloated inventories, while the demand outlook for Asia-Europe is far brighter, shipping analysts say. Just two weeks remain before the 90-day pause on global tariffs by the US ends on July 9, with a similar pause on China tariffs expiring Aug. 14. Although the outcome of Washington’s negotiations with its trading partners remains uncertain, declining demand on the trans-Pacific is expected whatever the result of talks. “Demand is expected to drop significantly, even if lower tariffs continue after the 90-day pause,” said Peter Sand, chief analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. “Shippers have been frontloading imports throughout 2024 and early 2025 so inventories will be brimming once the current cargo rush is over.” Ports along the US West Coast are due to experience a short-lived cargo surge over the next few weeks, which may slow the ongoing decline in spot rates in the eastbound trans-Pacific. The rate from Asia to the West Coast as of Tuesday was $2,800 per FEU, down 13% on the week and 54% lower than the recent high of $6,040 per FEU on June 6, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&P Global. Niels Rasmussen, chief shipping analyst at Bimco, said when the 90-day pause on tariffs ends, US importers will turn to the inventories they built up through frontloading in the first half of the year. “We expect that US import volume growth will suffer under the increased import tariffs and weaker economic growth,” Rasmussen noted in Bimco’s latest container shipping outlook released Wednesday. “We therefore estimate that the year-to-date frontloading of cargo will result in an equal downturn in imports during the second half of 2025,” he added. “In fact, we expect the downturn to be even more pronounced as the 55% tariff on Chinese goods gets implemented and the reciprocal tariff increases announced in April are implemented following the 90-day delay.” The import tariff for China went as high as 145% but was later lowered to 30% for the 90-day period ending Aug. 14. Last week, President Donald Trump wrote on his social media platform that an agreement had been reached with China that will set the tariff applied on Chinese imports to 55%, although that has yet to be officially confirmed. A trade agreement has been reached between the US and UK that will lower the general tariff level for imports from the UK to 10%. And although negotiations are continuing with the European Union, it is likely the EU will face a 10% baseline tariff on all its US exports. Bimco has adjusted its 2025 volume growth forecast for the European and Mediterranean region upward from 3.5% to 6% to reflect the stronger-than-expected year-to-date volumes. “Volume to the region grew 7.3% during the first four months of the year and economic conditions are improving with lower inflation, lower interest rates, lower unemployment than before COVID and a stronger euro all contributing to a brighter outlook,” Rasmussen said. “In the EU, consumers appear significantly better off as retail volumes have seen robust growth compared to a very weak second half of 2024, and consumer confidence remains mostly stable,” he added. Rates flatten on Asia-North Europe The peak season on Asia-Europe has begun and spot rates of $2,842 per FEU are up 49% since May 31, according to Xeneta. Rates have flattened out following the June freight-all-kinds (FAK) increases, but ocean carriers are planning to significantly reduce the deployed capacity on Asia-North Europe in August. If demand remains strong, rates are sure to rise. Data from visibility provider eeSea shows that the expected capacity on Asia-North Europe will fall by 90,000 TEUs in August from July, with blank capacity up 25% to 105,000 TEUs. Rasmussen noted that the conflict between Israel and Iran may have further delayed when ships will return to normal Red Sea and Suez Canal routings, and the Bimco outlook assumes no change in the diversions around southern Africa. When ships do return to Suez transits, Bimco is forecasting a 10% reduction in ship demand because of the shorter sailing distances. S&P Global Market Intelligence has not recorded a Houthi militant attack on commercial shipping in the Red Sea since Dec. 10, 2024. While an apparent ceasefire was agreed to between the Houthis and the US in May, the US Department of Defense says the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier strike group intercepted approximately 160 Houthi drone and missile attacks over its five-month deployment in the Red Sea that ended in May, an indication of the resilience of Houthi attack capabilities. “Houthi attacks on US-affiliated shipping are likely to resume in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden at volumes probably not exceeding previous attacks and maintaining a severe risk to all vessels in transit due to uncertainties around Houthi targeting selection,” Jack Kennedy, head of Middle East and North Africa country risk at S&P Global Market Intelligence, wrote in a report this week. S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific sailing into slowdown; Asia-Europe outlook brightens: analysts

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Tariff uncertainty, weakening demand and an abundance of capacity are hanging over the container shipping industry, the global bank said in a report Thursday. </div>

Tariff uncertainty, weakening demand and an abundance of capacity are hanging over the container shipping industry, the global bank said in a report Thursday.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean carriers can expect a sharp decline in earnings over the next three years as overcapacity potentially triggers “an aggressive price war,” with 2027 representing the bottom of the profitability “trough,” HSBC said Thursday in its latest container shipping report. Transportation analysts at the global bank indicated in the report that while carriers will remain profitable through the period, it will be nowhere near the three record years of 2021, 2022 and 2024. “We expect tariff uncertainties to weigh on demand from [the second half of 2025] and bring the focus back to overcapacity and earnings downside,” the report stated. HSBC is expecting a 45% year-over-year <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/global-uncertainty-to-erode-ocean-carrier-profits-in-2025-6016400">decline in profits for the container shipping</a> industry this year, a steeper 61% decline in profits in 2026 and a further 10% slide in 2027. No profit amounts were provided. “We expect profits for the sector through 2027, but an aggressive price war by carriers could drive losses,” the bank said. Carriers earned close to $60 billion in operating profits in 2024, which followed a $1.4 billion loss the previous year. Pandemic-driven profits in 2022 hit a record $208 billion, beating the previous record of $110 billion set in 2021. Fast-declining rates will impact earnings over the next three years, with HSBC expecting the Shanghai Containerized Freight Index (SCFI) to drop by 35% in 2025 and 2026 and another 15% in 2027. <h3>Profit-slashing forecasts </h3>HSBC’s prediction is the latest in a series of profit-slashing forecasts from industry analysts as momentum is expected to slow on the trans-Pacific after existing tariff reprieves end and concerns grow of a destocking cycle in the US. The 90-day pause on global tariffs by the US ends on July 9, with a similar pause on China tariffs expiring Aug. 14. Among nine publicly traded ocean carriers, revenue for 2025 is expected to reach $138.2 billion, according to Capital IQ Estimates, down from $155.5 billion in 2024. Capital IQ is a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Drewry earlier this month outlined its profit forecast for carriers, expecting operating profit for the industry to fall to $20 billion this year, down from over $50 billion in 2024. Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen and Yang Ming have maintained their 2025 profit forecasts, while Maersk, HMM and Ocean Network Express have cut their full-year guidance because of the uncertainty surrounding tariffs. “Frontloading in the trans-Pacific on tariff concerns buoyed first-quarter earnings, while a tariff pause-led cargo rush drove a 73% surge in the SCFI during the second quarter,” the HSBC report noted. Spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast peaked on June 6 at $6,040 per FEU but have fallen 55% since then to $2,700 per FEU as of Wednesday, down 16% on the week, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&amp;P Global. <h3>Red Sea diversions elevate rates </h3>Rates on the Asia-Europe trade lane have held at elevated levels because of the ongoing longer transits around southern Africa to avoid potential Houthi militant attacks in the Red Sea, HSBC said. Following the latest Middle East conflict between Israel and Iran, those diversions will persist until at least mid-2026, according to the bank. “We expect effective [capacity] supply growth of 6.5% in 2026 and around 10% in 2027, against nominal fleet growth of 3% to 4%, due to unwinding of Red Sea rerouting and demand growth of just 2% in 2025–27,” the report said. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="69b3a8ec-2292-4049-b638-cc81b01d32ad"></dynamic-object></div>Shipping association Bimco was less optimistic about a return of commercial shipping to Red Sea transits next year. “We expect the supply-demand balance to weaken only slightly in 2025 and 2026 as our ship demand growth forecast now excludes a return to normal Red Sea and Suez Canal routings,” Niels Rasmussen, the group’s chief shipping analyst, wrote in a report this week. Bimco has forecast the global fleet will grow to 33.6 million TEUs by the end of 2026, up 2.8 million TEUs in 24 months, although ship scrapping is expected to increase as market conditions worsen. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Ocean carriers can expect a sharp decline in earnings over the next three years as overcapacity potentially triggers “an aggressive price war,” with 2027 representing the bottom of the profitability “trough,” HSBC said Thursday in its latest container shipping report. Transportation analysts at the global bank indicated in the report that while carriers will remain profitable through the period, it will be nowhere near the three record years of 2021, 2022 and 2024. “We expect tariff uncertainties to weigh on demand from [the second half of 2025] and bring the focus back to overcapacity and earnings downside,” the report stated. HSBC is expecting a 45% year-over-year decline in profits for the container shipping industry this year, a steeper 61% decline in profits in 2026 and a further 10% slide in 2027. No profit amounts were provided. “We expect profits for the sector through 2027, but an aggressive price war by carriers could drive losses,” the bank said. Carriers earned close to $60 billion in operating profits in 2024, which followed a $1.4 billion loss the previous year. Pandemic-driven profits in 2022 hit a record $208 billion, beating the previous record of $110 billion set in 2021. Fast-declining rates will impact earnings over the next three years, with HSBC expecting the Shanghai Containerized Freight Index (SCFI) to drop by 35% in 2025 and 2026 and another 15% in 2027. Profit-slashing forecasts HSBC’s prediction is the latest in a series of profit-slashing forecasts from industry analysts as momentum is expected to slow on the trans-Pacific after existing tariff reprieves end and concerns grow of a destocking cycle in the US. The 90-day pause on global tariffs by the US ends on July 9, with a similar pause on China tariffs expiring Aug. 14. Among nine publicly traded ocean carriers, revenue for 2025 is expected to reach $138.2 billion, according to Capital IQ Estimates, down from $155.5 billion in 2024. Capital IQ is a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Drewry earlier this month outlined its profit forecast for carriers, expecting operating profit for the industry to fall to $20 billion this year, down from over $50 billion in 2024. Hapag-Lloyd, Evergreen and Yang Ming have maintained their 2025 profit forecasts, while Maersk, HMM and Ocean Network Express have cut their full-year guidance because of the uncertainty surrounding tariffs. “Frontloading in the trans-Pacific on tariff concerns buoyed first-quarter earnings, while a tariff pause-led cargo rush drove a 73% surge in the SCFI during the second quarter,” the HSBC report noted. Spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast peaked on June 6 at $6,040 per FEU but have fallen 55% since then to $2,700 per FEU as of Wednesday, down 16% on the week, according to Platts, a Journal of Commerce sister company within S&P Global. Red Sea diversions elevate rates Rates on the Asia-Europe trade lane have held at elevated levels because of the ongoing longer transits around southern Africa to avoid potential Houthi militant attacks in the Red Sea, HSBC said. Following the latest Middle East conflict between Israel and Iran, those diversions will persist until at least mid-2026, according to the bank. “We expect effective [capacity] supply growth of 6.5% in 2026 and around 10% in 2027, against nominal fleet growth of 3% to 4%, due to unwinding of Red Sea rerouting and demand growth of just 2% in 2025–27,” the report said. Shipping association Bimco was less optimistic about a return of commercial shipping to Red Sea transits next year. “We expect the supply-demand balance to weaken only slightly in 2025 and 2026 as our ship demand growth forecast now excludes a return to normal Red Sea and Suez Canal routings,” Niels Rasmussen, the group’s chief shipping analyst, wrote in a report this week. Bimco has forecast the global fleet will grow to 33.6 million TEUs by the end of 2026, up 2.8 million TEUs in 24 months, although ship scrapping is expected to increase as market conditions worsen. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Ocean carriers face three-year decline in profitability: HSBC

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">A new service from Green Tide Logistics will connect Veracruz to Philadelphia in five to six days via truck and multi-purpose vessels capable of handling 1,200 to 1,700 TEUs. </div>

A new service from Green Tide Logistics will connect Veracruz to Philadelphia in five to six days via truck and multi-purpose vessels capable of handling 1,200 to 1,700 TEUs.

<div class="phx-topic">A Mexico City-based logistics company will launch a twice-monthly combined ocean-trucking service between Mexico’s Gulf Coast and the US East Coast in late July, offering shippers a way to avoid cross-border surface delays and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/congress-makes-fresh-attempt-to-target-cargo-theft-in-us-5982118">security concerns</a>. The service by Green Tide Logistics will connect Veracruz to Philadelphia in five to six days via truck and multi-purpose vessels (MPVs) capable of handling 1,200 to 1,700 TEUs. Via truck only, the route typically takes up to 10 days. Green Tide CEO Hans Schriwer said the service will start July 28 with a single time-chartered MPV; the company has plans to expand to a weekly service using two vessels in the fourth quarter. “There’s huge potential in terms of steering stuff away from nearly all truck, to a combination of truck and ocean,” Schriwer told the Journal of Commerce. “With nearshoring, we felt that the timing now was appropriate to push this through.” The service will handle inland Mexico via truck and then move cargo out of Tuxpan and Coatzacoalcos via ocean to Philadelphia. Once in the US, Schriwer said customers can choose truck or rail to get the shipment to its destination. The Green Tide offering is the latest service aimed at tapping the shifting US-Mexico ocean trade — which represents less than half a percent of total US ocean imports — even though Mexico-to-US ocean volumes have shrunk considerably since 2019. Most recently, US-based ocean carrier Crowley started a three-day ocean service from Tuxpan to Gulfport, Mississippi, in May. That came on the heels of another <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/crowley-cn-strike-mexico-intermodal-deal-through-port-of-mobile-5220379">multimodal Mexico-US Crowley service</a> launched in 2023. <h3>Serving a niche market </h3>The Green Tide vessels will move forty-foot-equivalent units, twenty-foot-equivalent units, 53-foot containers, refrigerated containers and bulk options, Schriwer said. According to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, the top commodities moved via ocean on the lane so far this year have been beer, liqueurs, watermelons, ethyl alcohol and coffee. Mexico shipped 2,749 TEUs via ocean into the East Coast of North America (ECNA) in May, according to the most recent PIERS data available. That marked a 26% month-over-month increase but a 29% reduction on the year. Overall, the ocean trade has shrunk 51% since May 2019, when ECNA received 5,619 TEUs from Mexico. Despite the small market, Schriwer said there is growing demand for the Mexico-US service. According to the United States Trade Representative, the US imported almost $506 billion worth of cargo from Mexico last year, up 6.4% from 2023 — mostly via truck. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  </div>

A Mexico City-based logistics company will launch a twice-monthly combined ocean-trucking service between Mexico’s Gulf Coast and the US East Coast in late July, offering shippers a way to avoid cross-border surface delays and security concerns . The service by Green Tide Logistics will connect Veracruz to Philadelphia in five to six days via truck and multi-purpose vessels (MPVs) capable of handling 1,200 to 1,700 TEUs. Via truck only, the route typically takes up to 10 days. Green Tide CEO Hans Schriwer said the service will start July 28 with a single time-chartered MPV; the company has plans to expand to a weekly service using two vessels in the fourth quarter. “There’s huge potential in terms of steering stuff away from nearly all truck, to a combination of truck and ocean,” Schriwer told the Journal of Commerce. “With nearshoring, we felt that the timing now was appropriate to push this through.” The service will handle inland Mexico via truck and then move cargo out of Tuxpan and Coatzacoalcos via ocean to Philadelphia. Once in the US, Schriwer said customers can choose truck or rail to get the shipment to its destination. The Green Tide offering is the latest service aimed at tapping the shifting US-Mexico ocean trade — which represents less than half a percent of total US ocean imports — even though Mexico-to-US ocean volumes have shrunk considerably since 2019. Most recently, US-based ocean carrier Crowley started a three-day ocean service from Tuxpan to Gulfport, Mississippi, in May. That came on the heels of another multimodal Mexico-US Crowley service launched in 2023. Serving a niche market The Green Tide vessels will move forty-foot-equivalent units, twenty-foot-equivalent units, 53-foot containers, refrigerated containers and bulk options, Schriwer said. According to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, the top commodities moved via ocean on the lane so far this year have been beer, liqueurs, watermelons, ethyl alcohol and coffee. Mexico shipped 2,749 TEUs via ocean into the East Coast of North America (ECNA) in May, according to the most recent PIERS data available. That marked a 26% month-over-month increase but a 29% reduction on the year. Overall, the ocean trade has shrunk 51% since May 2019, when ECNA received 5,619 TEUs from Mexico. Despite the small market, Schriwer said there is growing demand for the Mexico-US service. According to the United States Trade Representative, the US imported almost $506 billion worth of cargo from Mexico last year, up 6.4% from 2023 — mostly via truck. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com . 

Strong China demand buoys intra-Asia rates despite capacity surge

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

Quick-hit, tariff-driven import surge on tap for US West Coast ports

FMC’s Sola to leave agency months after being elevated to chairman’s slot

CPKC acknowledges service woes to US regulators, vows remediation

Recent Commentary

Be open to new ways to support your risk management strategy

Act now before we wonder where all the containers have gone

Top 5 Most Read Stories