image.png

Subscription Sale Pop Up - Anonymous

Events

Maritime

Surface

Air Cargo

Magazine

Newsletters

Multimedia

White Papers

Supply chain

Resources

Gateway

Breakbulk News

Container Shipping News

Port News

Trucking News

Rail News

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo Carriers News

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Logistics Technology News

Cool Cargo News

Special Reports

Press Releases

Marine terminals

International ports

Longshore labor

Last Mile News

Industrial Real Estate News

Media Kit

Other

Breakbulk carriers

Ro/ro cargo

Energy projects

Heavy-haul transport

Project cargo

Container lines

Trans-Atlantic

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Drayage

Port infrastructure

Breakbulk ports

North American ports

Truckload

Truck brokers

Flatbed

Trucking labor

North-American rail

International rail

Intermodal providers

Commentary

Podcasts

Webcasts

Videos

Annual Review and Outlook

Top Rankings

Quarterly Intelligence Report

Intermodal Savings Index

Domestic Intermodal Service Scorecard

Breakbulk Quarterly Intelligence

Platts Containers Update

Top 100 US Exporters

Top 100 US Importers

Top 25 LTL Trucking Companies

Top 25 North American Ports

Top 25 Truckload Companies

Top 40 Container Carriers

Top 50 3PLs

Top 50 Global Container Ports

Top 50 Global Transportation Providers

Top 50 Trucking Companies

Editorial Calendar

Rail Directories

Custom Content

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US importers say they face a lack of alternatives, feedback, and proactive sourcing information from enforcement officials when treated and apparently compliant wood packaging materials (WPM) fail ISPM 15 inspection.</div>

US importers say they face a lack of alternatives, feedback, and proactive sourcing information from enforcement officials when treated and apparently compliant wood packaging materials (WPM) fail ISPM 15 inspection.

3612221_FI.jpg

<div>Project and breakbulk shippers often feel battered and unsure of where to turn in the face of expensive re-exportation requirements for wood packaging materials (WPM) they thought were in compliance with phytosanitary measures aimed at keeping invasive pests out of the United States.“It’s unfortunate” that importers are liable when infested WPM forces re-exportation, with all of its attendant costs, says Osama El-Lissy, deputy administrator of Plant Protection and Quarantine with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), an agency of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). “The supplier and the exporter should be liable or responsible. The importer does...

Project and breakbulk shippers often feel battered and unsure of where to turn in the face of expensive re-exportation requirements for wood packaging materials (WPM) they thought were in compliance with phytosanitary measures aimed at keeping invasive pests out of the United States. “It’s unfortunate” that importers are liable when infested WPM forces re-exportation, with all of its attendant costs, says Osama El-Lissy, deputy administrator of Plant Protection and Quarantine with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), an agency of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). “The supplier and the exporter should be liable or responsible. The importer does not have control at the importing end of this. The exporter should be reaching out to the NPPO [National Plant Protection Organization] of that country where the commodity was sourced, and making sure that the WPM is in compliance. The bottom line is that [the USDA] wants to facilitate trade, and we are willing and prepared to do whatever it takes to help and work with them,” he said. But importers say when treated and apparently compliant WPM nonetheless fails inspection, they face a lack of alternatives, feedback, and proactive sourcing information from enforcement officials. “Both sides want compliance. [The industry] is willing to do what it takes, but they don’t know what to do,” Dominic Sun, director of trade development with the port of Houston, told JOC.com. Holding ships ‘hostage’ One of the primary goals of Lake Shore Associates, a group formed to help address the effects of the International Standards For Phytosanitary Measures No. 15 (ISPM 15) on US breakbulk and project cargo imports, is to help importers be more selective in terms of loading ports when it comes to dunnage and WPM. Another is to create a Houston-based solution, such as a USDA-approved incinerator, that would allow for an option other than re-exportation, at least for dunnage. Currently there is only one USDA-approved incinerator in the US, on the Delaware River, that can be used to dispose of non-compliant dunnage. The Delaware incinerator, a pilot project, represents a “common-sense approach” to ISPM 15 enforcement, El-Lissy said. If infested dunnage is found, “Do you reject the entire shipment? In theory, to completely safeguard, we reject, but in practice it doesn’t make sense,” he said, adding that it will be at least six months before the pilot is complete and APHIS is able to study the data and assess the safety of the project. Peter Svensson, senior vice president and head of Clipper Americas, said that the industry is paying close attention to the tests at the Delaware incinerator. Disposing of infested dunnage there is expensive, but “not as expensive as re-exporting,” he said. If an incinerator is available, “the ship does not become a hostage.” The port of Houston has spoken to several terminal operators in the ship channel about possibly establishing a Houston incinerator, Sun said. “The importers are very frustrated,” he said. “They are wanting to comply, and yet infestation is found in the WPM and dunnage … We are looking at correlations, at whether current ways of treating are sufficient. Should it be done at a higher heat? For a longer time? Right now, yes, there is frustration, because they are following the mandate but inspectors are still finding infestation.” Looking for solutions “We never get to see the evidence,” Svensson said. “We can’t track back to the source. I don’t get to see the [infested] piece of dunnage … How can I go back to my supplier?” Clipper loads more than 1 million metric tons of steel out of Antwerp annually and is looking at alternatives to wooden dunnage such as reusable plastics and rubber. The carrier currently spends $2 million buying dunnage per year and another $1 million disposing of it. “All of our dunnage is physically inspected by two people before being loaded aboard our ships in Antwerp,” Svensson said. “What are we doing wrong? What are you [US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)] doing differently that our people are missing?” Given more feedback, Svensson said he could go back to his team and tell them exactly what to look for. While industry members may believe they are already being proactive, importers must emphasize to their subcontractors that they source WPM from reliable sources that have a good understanding of the ISPM 15 requirements, said John Sagle, director of Agriculture Safeguarding, Agriculture Programs, and trade liaison with CBP. “CBP has an open door,” Sagle said. “We encourage [industry] to get boots on the ground on the export side, to do intensive research on supplier compliance and potential gaps in ISPM conformance. We will see where these investigations go into what is causing this. Is it a treatment issue? Is there potential for more pre-emptive inspection? That’s a good best practice.” Complicating matters, neither USDA nor APHIS provides a public-facing list where industry members can find information on compliant or non-compliant WPM providers. “Importers need to call the NPPO for the exporting country. Typically, that is the Ministry of Agriculture or the Department of Agriculture for the nation, the quarantine authority within that country,” El-Lissy said. The importer or concerned party would say that they have a shipment coming into the US and that they want to be sure any WPM used poses no threat. “So no, there’s no central database, but this is how to get information.” There is also no public information available on emergency action notices (EANs) or re-exportations. Taking action When non-compliant WPM is found during ISPM 15 inspection, action is taken against the bill of lading, Sagle told JOC.com. “That is the common denominator that we have to work with,” he said. This can be particularly problematic in the case of project cargo, where many thousands of freight tons, all related to a time-sensitive project, can be on a single bill of lading. “What can we do as importers to be better protected and get a more reasonable response from the government? Is it reasonable to quarantine [and re-export] the entire shipment, or just [the segment of cargo affected by] the wood packaging?” asked one engineering, procurement, and construciton (EPC) cargo owner adversely affected by re-exportation. In some instances where infestations were found, the importers have been able to work with ports, revise the bill of lading, and re-export only the affected portion of the cargo, Sagle said. “It depends on how the cargo is stowed or packed, and if there’s dock space such that would allow separation to occur. Can the port take this on? It can be proposed at the port level … the importer of record and/or their customs brokers then work with port and facilitate the request. So, if there is cargo that is clearly non-associated with any kind of wood crating or boxes, something completely separated from the issues, the bill of lading can be revised and the cargo separated.” However, revising a bill of lading in this way could trigger tariff issues. When initially importing, using separate bills of lading for the various pieces of cargo is not a viable solution, the EPC cargo owner said. “You don’t do that on the same vessel with the same shipper. You don’t make multiple entries. You are importing main equipment and all the parts that go with it, claiming low duty. You’ll pay astronomically more if you import the cargo separately. It’s a whole unit disassembled for transport, and that’s how it has to be brought in.” Sun said a few importers have broken down individual parcels into separate bills of lading, which could also help them know which vendor to penalize for non-compliance. However, he also noted that once the cargo is broken down, customs no longer deems the importation to be part of one specific project, and it may then be subject to separate tariffs, making it much more expensive to import. Like every other industry member who discussed issues with enforcement of ISPM 15 rules with JOC.com, Svensson emphasized that he and his company wish to protect the US from dangerous invasive pests. “I don’t want to turn around and not see any trees. But we need [CBP and the USDA’s] help,” he said. “We want to have a fruitful conversation. Not yelling or in attack mode, but, ‘Let’s have a talk. This is a problem.’” Diana Davila, Houston-based director of projects with UTC Overseas and chair of an Exporter’s Competitive Maritime Council committee on ISPM 15, said shippers “don’t want to import the beetles, but we need to make sure it doesn’t keep happening, and also to ensure that all of these findings are going somewhere. What is [the USDA’s] next action, beyond just penalizing the receiver? It’s not just the USDA. It’s IPPC [the International Plant Protection Convention]. How does that information get back to the IPPC? Who is actioning on this and how do we follow up with that? “How do we know who the perpetrators are? What can we do about them?” she asked. “There is a lack of transparency. We have to get to the root cause.” Industry members interested in learning more about association efforts and CBP’s policies and recommendations regarding ISPM 15 can contact: Diana Davila, UTC Overseas and ECMC ( d.davila@utcoverseas.com ); Rich Brazzale, Lake Shore Associates LLC ( rabrazzale@hotmail.com ); and John Sagle, CBP ( john.sagle@cbp.dhs.gov )Contact Janet Nodar at janet.nodar@ihsmarkit.com and follow her on Twitter: @janet_nodar .

ISPM 15 enforcement leaves shippers with few options

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The fee — generally in the range of $200 per TEU and $450 per FEU — was introduced by the carrier in January 2024 following the industry-wide rerouting of vessels via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa.</div>

The fee — generally in the range of $200 per TEU and $450 per FEU — was introduced by the carrier in January 2024 following the industry-wide rerouting of vessels via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The measured return to the Red Sea/Suez Canal that Maersk signaled with the <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fmaersk-takes-significant-step-toward-return-to-red-sea-transits-6138361&amp;data=05%7C02%7Civan.klos%40spglobal.com%7C4ad5df2715c64edce6ce08de479deeaf%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C639026940817212672%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=P55mf7Gh505VzMNu6iiHFQU9Ms8Sbw4npPyAK8sy1Nw%3D&amp;reserved=0">recent MECL service sailing from India to the US East Coast</a> seems to have set the stage for the end of emergency surcharges on the route charged by the carrier. Maersk extended Indian customers a waiver of its “transit disruption surcharge” (TDS) on cargo moved on the Singapore-flagged Maersk Sebarok, which departed Nhava Sheva in India on Dec. 12 and sailed through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait Dec. 18, local forwarder sources told the Journal of Commerce. The TDS — generally in the range of $200 per TEU and $450 per FEU across westbound trades — was introduced by Maersk in January 2024 following the industry-wide rerouting of vessels via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa as attacks against commercial shipping by Houthi militants in Yemen heated up. Maersk didn’t respond to a request for comment on the matter. But forwarder sources explained that the TDS add-on has usually been applied on Maersk’s Indian contract customers, while large global accounts typically negotiate volume-based special rate deals. “We have not noticed so-called disruption surcharges from other major carriers,” said a Mumbai-based forwarding executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sources at CMA CGM in India said the carrier did not seek additional disruption surcharges for bookings on its “Indamex” India–USEC service. The TDS waiver is an indication that a Red Sea/Suez schedule operation for the 6,500-TEU Sebarok had been known to Maersk’s major clients in advance, given the context of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/hapag-lloyd-india-shippers-resist-prospect-of-suez-return-in-short-term-6137557">hotly-debated cargo insurance implications</a>. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="56199e2b-5df4-468f-a149-b18ae7c32e51"></dynamic-object></div>Riding on capacity and schedule enhancements implemented on the MECL in February, Maersk has been able to regain a significant portion of Indian customer support it lost to competitors over the past decade on the India-US trade lane, industry data obtained by the Journal of Commerce suggests. To put that in perspective, Maersk handled approximately 231,000 TEUs out of the 1.3 million TEUs shipped from India to the US this year through November, commanding nearly 18% of the market. Meanwhile, schedule disruptions on the India–USEC trade persist, market updates indicate. Sources have reported four blank sailings through January across the networks operated by CMA CGM (Indamex), Mediterranean Shipping Co. (Indus) and Ocean Network Express (WIN). Additionally, Maersk has told Indian customers the MECL vessel for Week 4, the Maersk Hartford, will omit Mundra and Pipavav on the Indian leg, which normally features a rotation of Jebel Ali, Mundra, Pipavav, Nhava Sheva, Salalah, Newark, Charleston, Savannah, Houston, Norfolk, Newark, Tangier and Salalah. “Ocean cargo ex-Mundra/Pipavav will be transshipped on the extra-loader Ren Jian 26 to connect the Maersk Hartford in Salalah,” the carrier said. Rates on the India–USEC trade have slipped from $1,440 per FEU earlier this month to $1,300 as of Monday, according to data from Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>. </div>

The measured return to the Red Sea/Suez Canal that Maersk signaled with the recent MECL service sailing from India to the US East Coast seems to have set the stage for the end of emergency surcharges on the route charged by the carrier. Maersk extended Indian customers a waiver of its “transit disruption surcharge” (TDS) on cargo moved on the Singapore-flagged Maersk Sebarok, which departed Nhava Sheva in India on Dec. 12 and sailed through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait Dec. 18, local forwarder sources told the Journal of Commerce. The TDS — generally in the range of $200 per TEU and $450 per FEU across westbound trades — was introduced by Maersk in January 2024 following the industry-wide rerouting of vessels via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa as attacks against commercial shipping by Houthi militants in Yemen heated up. Maersk didn’t respond to a request for comment on the matter. But forwarder sources explained that the TDS add-on has usually been applied on Maersk’s Indian contract customers, while large global accounts typically negotiate volume-based special rate deals. “We have not noticed so-called disruption surcharges from other major carriers,” said a Mumbai-based forwarding executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sources at CMA CGM in India said the carrier did not seek additional disruption surcharges for bookings on its “Indamex” India–USEC service. The TDS waiver is an indication that a Red Sea/Suez schedule operation for the 6,500-TEU Sebarok had been known to Maersk’s major clients in advance, given the context of hotly-debated cargo insurance implications . Riding on capacity and schedule enhancements implemented on the MECL in February, Maersk has been able to regain a significant portion of Indian customer support it lost to competitors over the past decade on the India-US trade lane, industry data obtained by the Journal of Commerce suggests. To put that in perspective, Maersk handled approximately 231,000 TEUs out of the 1.3 million TEUs shipped from India to the US this year through November, commanding nearly 18% of the market. Meanwhile, schedule disruptions on the India–USEC trade persist, market updates indicate. Sources have reported four blank sailings through January across the networks operated by CMA CGM (Indamex), Mediterranean Shipping Co. (Indus) and Ocean Network Express (WIN). Additionally, Maersk has told Indian customers the MECL vessel for Week 4, the Maersk Hartford, will omit Mundra and Pipavav on the Indian leg, which normally features a rotation of Jebel Ali, Mundra, Pipavav, Nhava Sheva, Salalah, Newark, Charleston, Savannah, Houston, Norfolk, Newark, Tangier and Salalah. “Ocean cargo ex-Mundra/Pipavav will be transshipped on the extra-loader Ren Jian 26 to connect the Maersk Hartford in Salalah,” the carrier said. Rates on the India–USEC trade have slipped from $1,440 per FEU earlier this month to $1,300 as of Monday, according to data from Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

Maersk waives ‘disruption surcharge’ for Red Sea sailing on India–USEC trade

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The strength of holiday retail sales in the final month of 2025 and inventory levels approaching the Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in February will be the major factors determining the extent of pricing power in trans-Pacific contract talks. </div>

The strength of holiday retail sales in the final month of 2025 and inventory levels approaching the Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in February will be the major factors determining the extent of pricing power in trans-Pacific contract talks.

<div class="phx-topic">The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6135206_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The big picture: A weakening US economy, depressed imports due to continued tariff uncertainty and plummeting spot rates in late 2025 will weigh heavily in favor of shippers during trans-Pacific service contract negotiations this spring. A look back: Midsize importers and their core carriers last spring signed 2025–26 service contracts with rates of around $2,000 per FEU from Asia to the US West Coast and $3,000 per FEU to the East Coast. Market conditions in the Asia–US trade in late 2024 and early 2025 — when the largest retailers typically begin their contract negotiations — were markedly different than today. Fueled by frontloading of seasonal merchandise to get ahead of higher tariffs threatened by the Trump administration, monthly US imports from Asia were increasing by an average of roughly 15% year over year, according to data from PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&amp;P Global. Average spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast eclipsed $5,000 per FEU in January, according to Platts, also part of S&amp;P Global. In the environment of surging spot rates and tight vessel space, and with importers anticipating continued strength in imports in 2025 and prioritizing locking in guarantees of vessel space through their minimum quantity commitments (MQCs), carriers generally had the upper hand in pricing negotiations. The fixed rates in service contracts are normally lower than the spot rates for much of the year, but most carriers aim to fill at least half of their vessel space via MQCs from their largest customers. Service contract rates paid by midsize and smaller importers, and by forwarders, are generally several hundred dollars per FEU higher than those paid by the largest retailers. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="2b46cea3-3ad9-4793-8381-ca1cdffe6797"></dynamic-object></div>A look ahead: Rates in 2026–27 service contracts, most of which will run from May 1, 2026, through April 30, 2027, will most likely be lower than in the previous contract, but how much lower remains to be seen. Outside of a brief fillip in June that coincided with a spike in spot rates, average pricing from Asia to the US West Coast in long-term contracts followed a downward trajectory all year, according to rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. Rising inflation, growing unemployment, weak consumer sentiment and persistent tariff uncertainty point to continued declines in US freight demand. And with vessel space abundant, importers will likely hold off on signing service contracts for as long as they can. Inventory replenishment after the Lunar New Year holiday in Asia, which begins Feb. 17, could boost volumes and help carriers keep spot rates from collapsing. But new, larger vessels that will be deployed in the trans-Pacific and the possibility of a return to the Suez Canal could add effective capacity to the trade, giving importers additional leverage in contract rate talks. The next inflection: The strength of holiday retail sales in the final month of 2025 and inventory levels approaching the Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in February will be the major factors determining pricing power in trans-Pacific contract talks. If replenishment demand and spring volumes cause vessel space to tighten, importers could again prioritize MQCs, rather than extracting the lowest possible price. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. The big picture: A weakening US economy, depressed imports due to continued tariff uncertainty and plummeting spot rates in late 2025 will weigh heavily in favor of shippers during trans-Pacific service contract negotiations this spring. A look back: Midsize importers and their core carriers last spring signed 2025–26 service contracts with rates of around $2,000 per FEU from Asia to the US West Coast and $3,000 per FEU to the East Coast. Market conditions in the Asia–US trade in late 2024 and early 2025 — when the largest retailers typically begin their contract negotiations — were markedly different than today. Fueled by frontloading of seasonal merchandise to get ahead of higher tariffs threatened by the Trump administration, monthly US imports from Asia were increasing by an average of roughly 15% year over year, according to data from PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&P Global. Average spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast eclipsed $5,000 per FEU in January, according to Platts, also part of S&P Global. In the environment of surging spot rates and tight vessel space, and with importers anticipating continued strength in imports in 2025 and prioritizing locking in guarantees of vessel space through their minimum quantity commitments (MQCs), carriers generally had the upper hand in pricing negotiations. The fixed rates in service contracts are normally lower than the spot rates for much of the year, but most carriers aim to fill at least half of their vessel space via MQCs from their largest customers. Service contract rates paid by midsize and smaller importers, and by forwarders, are generally several hundred dollars per FEU higher than those paid by the largest retailers. A look ahead: Rates in 2026–27 service contracts, most of which will run from May 1, 2026, through April 30, 2027, will most likely be lower than in the previous contract, but how much lower remains to be seen. Outside of a brief fillip in June that coincided with a spike in spot rates, average pricing from Asia to the US West Coast in long-term contracts followed a downward trajectory all year, according to rate benchmarking platform Xeneta. Rising inflation, growing unemployment, weak consumer sentiment and persistent tariff uncertainty point to continued declines in US freight demand. And with vessel space abundant, importers will likely hold off on signing service contracts for as long as they can. Inventory replenishment after the Lunar New Year holiday in Asia, which begins Feb. 17, could boost volumes and help carriers keep spot rates from collapsing. But new, larger vessels that will be deployed in the trans-Pacific and the possibility of a return to the Suez Canal could add effective capacity to the trade, giving importers additional leverage in contract rate talks. The next inflection: The strength of holiday retail sales in the final month of 2025 and inventory levels approaching the Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in February will be the major factors determining pricing power in trans-Pacific contract talks. If replenishment demand and spring volumes cause vessel space to tighten, importers could again prioritize MQCs, rather than extracting the lowest possible price. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Shippers to regain leverage in trans-Pacific contract negotiations

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Those factors will lift volumes, but true organic expansion depends on a recovery in the truckload market. </div>

Those factors will lift volumes, but true organic expansion depends on a recovery in the truckload market.

<div class="phx-topic">The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6135205_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The big picture: The defining storyline of 2026 for North American intermodal rail will be how federal regulators respond to the proposed merger of Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Norfolk Southern Railway (NS). The deal has already pushed competing railroads to launch new intermodal lanes and accelerate transit times, ripple effects that could set the stage for measurable volume gains, even without a spike in demand. A look back: The proposed $85 billion UP-NS transaction would create the first single-line transcontinental US railroad. And before regulators even had a chance to assess the potential competitive effects of the deal, the July 29 announcement triggered similar moves from the other US Class I railroads. Just three weeks later, BNSF Railway and CSX Transportation unveiled new “coast-to-coast” long-haul lanes — including Los Angeles-Charlotte, North Carolina; Los Angeles-Jacksonville, Florida; and Phoenix–Atlanta — along with faster transit times on nine additional routes between Los Angeles and the Ohio Valley and US Northeast. The UP-NS deal also resulted in a leadership shakeup at CSX, where the board fired CEO Joe Hinrichs amid pressure from an activist investor who demanded the eastern railroad pursue its own merger with BNSF, Canadian National Railway or Canadian Pacific Kansas City. UP and NS launched their first joint intermodal service, a route that connects the US West Coast, Mexico and Texas with Louisville in October. During contract bid season, UP captured meaningful market share from its West Coast competitor, BNSF, boosting volumes for Hub Group and Schneider National and dragging J.B. Hunt’s shipment counts lower. It was a year of posturing, positioning and railroads racing not to be left behind. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="61898d91-8751-4681-a545-1f386dd7ac78"></dynamic-object></div>A look ahead: Domestic intermodal could see further growth this year — total 53-foot volumes rose 3.5% year over year through October, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA) — thanks to the new lanes and improved transit times railroads introduced in 2025, rather than a macroeconomic catalyst driving demand. Most shippers that spoke with the Journal of Commerce believe rates in early first-quarter intermodal contracts will be mostly flat compared with the previous year, with some increases on outbound lanes from the West Coast, particularly Southern California. After losing market share to its competitors, J.B. Hunt could become more aggressive in its pricing, especially during peak season. And as J.B. Hunt shifts freight onto BNSF-CSX joint services, Hub Group and Swift Intermodal will compete for new slots on NS trains. Additional BNSF-CSX single-line opportunities to the Northeast will become available when double-stacking service through Baltimore begins in the spring. If this prompts J.B. Hunt to shift more of its volumes to CSX, it will create even more opportunities for Hub Group and Swift. The US Surface Transportation Board (STB) likely won’t issue its final decision on the UP-NS transaction until 2027, but one former board member thinks regulators are “leaning more toward approval.” Citing President Donald Trump’s influence and the political alignment of the current board — with a third Republican pending Senate confirmation and just one Democrat — Daniel Elliott III, who served two nonconsecutive terms as STB chairman between 2009 and 2017, said it will be “very difficult” for members to vote against the merger if the administration continues to support it publicly. The next inflection: New lanes and faster service will lift volumes, but true organic expansion depends on a recovery in the truckload market. Some shippers only increase their use of intermodal rail when they are struggling to secure over-the-road capacity, which remains abundant. Until US manufacturing output and other major sources of surface freight such as new home construction improve and truckload capacity tightens, intermodal volumes and rates will grow only modestly. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. The big picture: The defining storyline of 2026 for North American intermodal rail will be how federal regulators respond to the proposed merger of Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Norfolk Southern Railway (NS). The deal has already pushed competing railroads to launch new intermodal lanes and accelerate transit times, ripple effects that could set the stage for measurable volume gains, even without a spike in demand. A look back: The proposed $85 billion UP-NS transaction would create the first single-line transcontinental US railroad. And before regulators even had a chance to assess the potential competitive effects of the deal, the July 29 announcement triggered similar moves from the other US Class I railroads. Just three weeks later, BNSF Railway and CSX Transportation unveiled new “coast-to-coast” long-haul lanes — including Los Angeles-Charlotte, North Carolina; Los Angeles-Jacksonville, Florida; and Phoenix–Atlanta — along with faster transit times on nine additional routes between Los Angeles and the Ohio Valley and US Northeast. The UP-NS deal also resulted in a leadership shakeup at CSX, where the board fired CEO Joe Hinrichs amid pressure from an activist investor who demanded the eastern railroad pursue its own merger with BNSF, Canadian National Railway or Canadian Pacific Kansas City. UP and NS launched their first joint intermodal service, a route that connects the US West Coast, Mexico and Texas with Louisville in October. During contract bid season, UP captured meaningful market share from its West Coast competitor, BNSF, boosting volumes for Hub Group and Schneider National and dragging J.B. Hunt’s shipment counts lower. It was a year of posturing, positioning and railroads racing not to be left behind. A look ahead: Domestic intermodal could see further growth this year — total 53-foot volumes rose 3.5% year over year through October, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA) — thanks to the new lanes and improved transit times railroads introduced in 2025, rather than a macroeconomic catalyst driving demand. Most shippers that spoke with the Journal of Commerce believe rates in early first-quarter intermodal contracts will be mostly flat compared with the previous year, with some increases on outbound lanes from the West Coast, particularly Southern California. After losing market share to its competitors, J.B. Hunt could become more aggressive in its pricing, especially during peak season. And as J.B. Hunt shifts freight onto BNSF-CSX joint services, Hub Group and Swift Intermodal will compete for new slots on NS trains. Additional BNSF-CSX single-line opportunities to the Northeast will become available when double-stacking service through Baltimore begins in the spring. If this prompts J.B. Hunt to shift more of its volumes to CSX, it will create even more opportunities for Hub Group and Swift. The US Surface Transportation Board (STB) likely won’t issue its final decision on the UP-NS transaction until 2027, but one former board member thinks regulators are “leaning more toward approval.” Citing President Donald Trump’s influence and the political alignment of the current board — with a third Republican pending Senate confirmation and just one Democrat — Daniel Elliott III, who served two nonconsecutive terms as STB chairman between 2009 and 2017, said it will be “very difficult” for members to vote against the merger if the administration continues to support it publicly. The next inflection: New lanes and faster service will lift volumes, but true organic expansion depends on a recovery in the truckload market. Some shippers only increase their use of intermodal rail when they are struggling to secure over-the-road capacity, which remains abundant. Until US manufacturing output and other major sources of surface freight such as new home construction improve and truckload capacity tightens, intermodal volumes and rates will grow only modestly. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Domestic intermodal to benefit from new lanes, faster service in 2026

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The change, effective Jan. 2, allows importers to digitally designate customs brokers to receive bills, checks and liquidation notices on behalf of clients. </div>

The change, effective Jan. 2, allows importers to digitally designate customs brokers to receive bills, checks and liquidation notices on behalf of clients.

<div class="phx-topic">US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as of Friday will allow importers to immediately assign a customs broker or other representative as a so-called “notify party” on all CBP notices through the agency’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) portal. The change will allow importers to address communication from CBP around key issues such as bills, refunds or liquidation notices in a timelier manner, said Lori Mullins, director of operations at Houston customs broker Rogers &amp; Brown. Mullins said it’s common for CBP to send checks, notices and mail only to large importers, and not to the notify parties assigned by those importers. “And they end up getting lost on someone’s desk who doesn’t understand where they belong,” she said. “Because CBP documents, letters, and checks don’t have a contact name attached to them, they could end up on an [accounts receivable] desk or a receptionist to determine the correct [recipient]. “With tight deadlines for response or missed opportunities altogether to reply to a CBP inquiry that could result in increased duties, having a broker who can easily get them to the importer to manage the process is sometimes very helpful,” Mullins added. The process change allows importers to authorize notify parties “in real-time” as of Jan. 2, according to a Dec. 22 ACE notice. <h3>‘Huge step forward’ </h3>Mullins, who also serves as president of the Houston Customs Brokers &amp; Freight Forwarders Association, said the process to add notify parties — via a CBP 4811 form — has long been fraught. “When CBP moved into ACE, the 4811 process was broken and inconsistent,” she said. “Even if a 4811 was sent to CBP, CBP would not manage the process correctly and fail to follow Importer 4811 instructions with entries because there was no electronic means for CBP to capture the notify party.” Mullins said the ability for importers to add notify parties digitally through ACE is still in its early stage, but is a “huge step forward for the importing community.” “It gives the decisions regarding how these documents are handled truly back to the importer and holds CBP accountable for following them by putting the data in ACE connected to the importer records,” she said. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as of Friday will allow importers to immediately assign a customs broker or other representative as a so-called “notify party” on all CBP notices through the agency’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) portal. The change will allow importers to address communication from CBP around key issues such as bills, refunds or liquidation notices in a timelier manner, said Lori Mullins, director of operations at Houston customs broker Rogers & Brown. Mullins said it’s common for CBP to send checks, notices and mail only to large importers, and not to the notify parties assigned by those importers. “And they end up getting lost on someone’s desk who doesn’t understand where they belong,” she said. “Because CBP documents, letters, and checks don’t have a contact name attached to them, they could end up on an [accounts receivable] desk or a receptionist to determine the correct [recipient]. “With tight deadlines for response or missed opportunities altogether to reply to a CBP inquiry that could result in increased duties, having a broker who can easily get them to the importer to manage the process is sometimes very helpful,” Mullins added. The process change allows importers to authorize notify parties “in real-time” as of Jan. 2, according to a Dec. 22 ACE notice. ‘Huge step forward’ Mullins, who also serves as president of the Houston Customs Brokers & Freight Forwarders Association, said the process to add notify parties — via a CBP 4811 form — has long been fraught. “When CBP moved into ACE, the 4811 process was broken and inconsistent,” she said. “Even if a 4811 was sent to CBP, CBP would not manage the process correctly and fail to follow Importer 4811 instructions with entries because there was no electronic means for CBP to capture the notify party.” Mullins said the ability for importers to add notify parties digitally through ACE is still in its early stage, but is a “huge step forward for the importing community.” “It gives the decisions regarding how these documents are handled truly back to the importer and holds CBP accountable for following them by putting the data in ACE connected to the importer records,” she said. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

CBP to let importers tie ‘notify parties’ to key portal communications

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Taiwanese carrier said the box orders were split between three different suppliers, including its own manufacturing subsidiary.</div>

The Taiwanese carrier said the box orders were split between three different suppliers, including its own manufacturing subsidiary.

<div class="phx-topic">Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine is paying $174 million to buy 52,000 dry freight and reefer containers, the carrier said in a Taiwan stock exchange filing. Evergreen said the container orders were split between three different suppliers, including its own manufacturing subsidiary Evergreen Heavy Industrial Corporation based in Malaysia. The largest of the three orders, worth almost $65.6 million, was placed with Dong Fang International Container (Hong Kong) for 12,000 dry freight and 7,000 reefer containers. Evergreen Heavy Industrial Corporation (Malaysia) secured a $57.3 million contract to supply 18,000 containers, although Evergreen did not specify the size or type of boxes. The final order, valued at $51.2 million, was awarded to China’s Guangdong Fuwa Equipment Manufacturing Company for 12,000 dry cargo and 3,000 reefer containers. The purchase of the containers coincides with a <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/evergreen-says-will-spend-almost-3-billion-on-14-new-lng-fueled-ships-6114739">significant fleet expansion by Evergreen</a>, which is set to take delivery of 846,000 TEUs of additional shipping capacity through 2030. <h3>Weak outlook for 2026 </h3>The container orders from Evergreen come as Hong Kong-listed box maker Singamas Container Holdings and maritime consultancy Drewry have predicted a weaker outlook for the container market after output peaked at 8.3 million TEUs in 2024. The impact from the overproduction of dry freight containers in 2024 “is becoming increasingly apparent, with supply significantly outstripping demand, resulting in selling prices trending downward,” Singamas said in a market commentary. “Additionally, overcapacity in the container shipping market will exert downward pressure on freight rates and container demand, which will be exacerbated once the Red Sea crisis is resolved,” Singamas added. Drewry predicted container production will slump to 1.8 million TEUs in 2026, down from a forecast of 4.9 million TEUs this year, according to the consultancy’s third-quarter container equipment report. Production to 2029 will be primarily driven by replacement demand, the report added. The average price for a 20-foot container is set to slip to about $1,500 next year, down from $1,680 this year and about $2,100 in 2024, according to the Drewry forecast. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine is paying $174 million to buy 52,000 dry freight and reefer containers, the carrier said in a Taiwan stock exchange filing. Evergreen said the container orders were split between three different suppliers, including its own manufacturing subsidiary Evergreen Heavy Industrial Corporation based in Malaysia. The largest of the three orders, worth almost $65.6 million, was placed with Dong Fang International Container (Hong Kong) for 12,000 dry freight and 7,000 reefer containers. Evergreen Heavy Industrial Corporation (Malaysia) secured a $57.3 million contract to supply 18,000 containers, although Evergreen did not specify the size or type of boxes. The final order, valued at $51.2 million, was awarded to China’s Guangdong Fuwa Equipment Manufacturing Company for 12,000 dry cargo and 3,000 reefer containers. The purchase of the containers coincides with a significant fleet expansion by Evergreen , which is set to take delivery of 846,000 TEUs of additional shipping capacity through 2030. Weak outlook for 2026 The container orders from Evergreen come as Hong Kong-listed box maker Singamas Container Holdings and maritime consultancy Drewry have predicted a weaker outlook for the container market after output peaked at 8.3 million TEUs in 2024. The impact from the overproduction of dry freight containers in 2024 “is becoming increasingly apparent, with supply significantly outstripping demand, resulting in selling prices trending downward,” Singamas said in a market commentary. “Additionally, overcapacity in the container shipping market will exert downward pressure on freight rates and container demand, which will be exacerbated once the Red Sea crisis is resolved,” Singamas added. Drewry predicted container production will slump to 1.8 million TEUs in 2026, down from a forecast of 4.9 million TEUs this year, according to the consultancy’s third-quarter container equipment report. Production to 2029 will be primarily driven by replacement demand, the report added. The average price for a 20-foot container is set to slip to about $1,500 next year, down from $1,680 this year and about $2,100 in 2024, according to the Drewry forecast. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Evergreen to invest $174 million on new containers 

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

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

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

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

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

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SEASON"S SAVINGS

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

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SEASON'S SAVINGS

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

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

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

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


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

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

Upgrade Subscription

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

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

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

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

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

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

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

The Journal of Commerce has covered breakbulk shipping — the mode by which all dry cargo was shipped prior to containers — since its 1827 founding. Following the 1950s onset of containerization, modern breakbulk has come to mean a small but important subset of global freight movement, one that includes oversized, out-of-gauge industrial equipment and machinery, rolling stock, non-containerized steel and forest products, palletized and bagged cargo, and energy-related equipment. Led by associate editor Carly Fields and senior research analyst Susan Oatway, the Journal of Commerce addresses topics such as supply and demand, the specialized multipurpose vessel fleet, and the geopolitical, economic and regulatory forces that shape this sector. The annual Journal of Commerce <a href="https://breakbulk.joc.com/en">Breakbulk and Project Cargo Conference</a> brings together decision-makers and industry stakeholders to provide relevant analysis and critical networking opportunities.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Maersk waives ‘disruption surcharge’ for Red Sea sailing on India–USEC trade

Shippers to regain leverage in trans-Pacific contract negotiations

Domestic intermodal to benefit from new lanes, faster service in 2026