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">We are now at the midpoint of the second year of the authorized 10-year program to subsidize U.S.-fl</div>

We are now at the midpoint of the second year of the authorized 10-year program to subsidize U.S.-fl

<div>We are now at the midpoint of the second year of the authorized 10-year program to subsidize U.S.-flag ships. Although the program is authorized for 10 years, expiring in 2006, its funding must be authorized and appropriated each fiscal year. This brings us to the question: ''Will it survive fiscal year 2002?''As we are all aware, the Maritime Security Program provides for a militarily useful fleet of 47 vessels. There are currently 42 vessels in the fleet. An additional three vessels will be enrolled this month and the final two in January.The owner-operator of each enrolled vessel receives $2.1 million...

We are now at the midpoint of the second year of the authorized 10-year program to subsidize U.S.-flag ships. Although the program is authorized for 10 years, expiring in 2006, its funding must be authorized and appropriated each fiscal year. This brings us to the question: ''Will it survive fiscal year 2002?'' As we are all aware, the Maritime Security Program provides for a militarily useful fleet of 47 vessels. There are currently 42 vessels in the fleet. An additional three vessels will be enrolled this month and the final two in January.The owner-operator of each enrolled vessel receives $2.1 million annually. However, these payments must be budgeted, authorized and appropriated each fiscal year. The MSP is not an entitlement program as was the Operating Differential Subsidy program. The size of this MSP fleet can be adjusted only downward based on need and funds available. It can be assumed with a degree of accuracy that the Military Sealift Command, which uses its own ships, sees its controlled fleet - not the MSP ships - to be in the best interest of the country, the military and in national emergencies. MSC'S CONFLICT WITH MSP AND READY RESERVE FLEET Such an approach provides MSC with the ability to control the sealift capability from the standpoint of new buildings, conversions, maintenance, fleet operations, manning and more importantly, budgeting and financial responsibility. However, such an approach will come into conflict with both the Maritime Security Program fleet and the Ready Reserve fleet. The thrust will be to reduce the Ready Reserve fleet to be able to transfer those savings to MSC to offset the operation of its 19 new pre-positioned ships. Should MSC decide to proceed to build or acquire its own fleet of pre-positioned self-sustaining container ships, the need for the MSP fleet will be reduced and along with that, the number of ships required. LABOR AND MANAGEMENT MUST TRACK BUDGET I believe that both labor and management must devote time and effort to track MSC's budget proposals for fiscal years 2000, 2001 and 2002. These budget requests are an important source of MSC's thinking. The industry must be ever watchful. A couple of things are happening that could lead in the direction of the MSC fleet growing at the expense of MSP vessels. The Ready Reserve Fleet is shrinking. It consists of 89 vessels, down from 94 vessels in the prior year. I believe that by FY 2001 that it will be reduced to 66 vessels. This is based on the MSC's new, pre-positioned roll-on, roll-offs being delivered and its own tanker fleet. These reductions in the Ready Reserve Fleet will not be offset by new purchases. MSC's new vessels will negate the need to increase the Ready Reserve Fleet. It is also possible that in FY 2003 the Ready Reserve will reduce its size to 53 vessels. Undoubtedly MSC has carefully reviewed the actual logistics, requirements and performance in supplying material from the United States and Europe to the Persian Gulf during the Persian Gulf War. It is quite evident that one of the results of the review is MSC's building program covering 19 roll-on, roll-off ships to augment the 13 vessels that are pre-positioned, fully loaded with Marine Corps equipment. It is in the realm of possibility that we could see in MSC's budget request for FY 2001 funds to commence construction of up to 12 self-sustaining container ships to join the 32 prepositioned roll-on, roll-offs. The result: A controlled MSC fleet. DECLINE OF THE AMERICAN-FLAG FLEET I believe the maritime industry, labor and management included, must work together to support, and force into being the ''build and charter concept'' for the next series of vessels for sealift, whether they be roll-on, roll-offs, self-sustaining container ships or tankers. If not, we will certainly see a further decline in the privately owned American-flag fleet. And if the MSP fails to survive we may very well see the demise of the American flag in the foreign trades. The question must be taken seriously by labor and management, particularly labor, which stands to lose more than anyone else. FY 2002 is only three years away, 1095 days, a short time indeed in which to find a solution to the inevitable downsizing of the MSP fleet. The question of whether the Maritime Security Program will survive FY 2002 must be addressed.

LABOR, MANAGEMENT MUST BACK MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM TO SAVE US-FLAG SHIPS

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Months of frontloading explain the sharp volume slowdown in the final months of 2025, and with consumer sentiment weak and long-term trade policies still uncertain, US retailers are keeping inventories lean in early 2026. </div>

Months of frontloading explain the sharp volume slowdown in the final months of 2025, and with consumer sentiment weak and long-term trade policies still uncertain, US retailers are keeping inventories lean in early 2026.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The big picture: After an earlier-than-usual July peak season caused by tariff-related frontloading, the trans-Pacific trade enters 2026 in the midst of a deepening demand slowdown. Carriers are hoping a traditional pre-Lunar New Year rush will boost volumes and help buoy spot rates on the largest US trade lane, but the chances of a significant uptick are dwindling rapidly. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6143172_0.1.jpg"></img></div>A look back: Ocean container trade between Asia and the US in 2025 was marked primarily by retailers frontloading imports to reduce the pricing impact of Trump administration tariffs. The administration throughout the year issued more than 100 tariff decisions affecting imports from virtually every country in the world, with the largest increases in duty rates on goods made in China. As a result, containerized US imports from Asia grew 3.2% in the first eight months of 2025 before tumbling 8.8% year over year from September through November, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. That volatility in volumes was also evident in the two large spikes in spot rates recorded in the first half, both of which were followed by swift declines. Average pricing from Asia to the US West Coast rose above $5,000 per FEU in early January, fell to $1,600 per FEU in March, rose to a 2025 high of $6,000 per FEU in June and then dropped to $1,700 per FEU in July, according to Platts, also part of S&amp;P Global. Starting Oct. 1, carriers launched a series of bimonthly general rate increases (GRIs) in an attempt to prevent spot rates from collapsing, but the effect of each GRI was short-lived, and by mid-December, Asia–US West Coast spot rates had fallen to $1,270 per FEU, the lowest reading since July 2023. A look ahead: Months of frontloading explain the harsh volume slowdown in the final months of 2025, and with consumer sentiment weak and long-term trade policies still uncertain, US retailers are keeping inventories lean in early 2026. Despite a one-year negotiating pause in reciprocal US–China tariffs that began in November, imports from China still face an effective duty rate of 47%. Retailers are placing orders for spring merchandise cautiously, and the typical rush of factory production and container vessel bookings in the lead up to Lunar New Year celebrations in China are expected to fall flat, leaving volumes well below the levels recorded in 2025. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="a04e27f7-b2bc-4d9d-b3cc-b14fb864d836"></dynamic-object></div>Total US imports are forecast to fall 10.3% year over year in January, 8.5% in February, 16.8% in March and 10.9% in April, according to the latest Global Port Tracker from Hackett Associates and the National Retail Federation (NRF). Carriers have not dismissed the possibility of additional GRIs in the new year, but like in the latter part of 2025, their efforts will be focused more on maintaining a floor on spot rates as opposed to increasing the ceiling. The next inflection: Trans-Pacific carriers and their customers are looking ahead to two possible developments in 2026 that could further depress freight rates: a forecasted 4% increase in global container ship capacity and whether carriers will return to regular transits through the Suez Canal, which could increase effective capacity from Asia to the US East Coast. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The big picture: After an earlier-than-usual July peak season caused by tariff-related frontloading, the trans-Pacific trade enters 2026 in the midst of a deepening demand slowdown. Carriers are hoping a traditional pre-Lunar New Year rush will boost volumes and help buoy spot rates on the largest US trade lane, but the chances of a significant uptick are dwindling rapidly. A look back: Ocean container trade between Asia and the US in 2025 was marked primarily by retailers frontloading imports to reduce the pricing impact of Trump administration tariffs. The administration throughout the year issued more than 100 tariff decisions affecting imports from virtually every country in the world, with the largest increases in duty rates on goods made in China. As a result, containerized US imports from Asia grew 3.2% in the first eight months of 2025 before tumbling 8.8% year over year from September through November, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. That volatility in volumes was also evident in the two large spikes in spot rates recorded in the first half, both of which were followed by swift declines. Average pricing from Asia to the US West Coast rose above $5,000 per FEU in early January, fell to $1,600 per FEU in March, rose to a 2025 high of $6,000 per FEU in June and then dropped to $1,700 per FEU in July, according to Platts, also part of S&P Global. Starting Oct. 1, carriers launched a series of bimonthly general rate increases (GRIs) in an attempt to prevent spot rates from collapsing, but the effect of each GRI was short-lived, and by mid-December, Asia–US West Coast spot rates had fallen to $1,270 per FEU, the lowest reading since July 2023. A look ahead: Months of frontloading explain the harsh volume slowdown in the final months of 2025, and with consumer sentiment weak and long-term trade policies still uncertain, US retailers are keeping inventories lean in early 2026. Despite a one-year negotiating pause in reciprocal US–China tariffs that began in November, imports from China still face an effective duty rate of 47%. Retailers are placing orders for spring merchandise cautiously, and the typical rush of factory production and container vessel bookings in the lead up to Lunar New Year celebrations in China are expected to fall flat, leaving volumes well below the levels recorded in 2025. Total US imports are forecast to fall 10.3% year over year in January, 8.5% in February, 16.8% in March and 10.9% in April, according to the latest Global Port Tracker from Hackett Associates and the National Retail Federation (NRF). Carriers have not dismissed the possibility of additional GRIs in the new year, but like in the latter part of 2025, their efforts will be focused more on maintaining a floor on spot rates as opposed to increasing the ceiling. The next inflection: Trans-Pacific carriers and their customers are looking ahead to two possible developments in 2026 that could further depress freight rates: a forecasted 4% increase in global container ship capacity and whether carriers will return to regular transits through the Suez Canal, which could increase effective capacity from Asia to the US East Coast. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Tariffs, economic uncertainty weigh on pre-Lunar New Year trans-Pac volumes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">While Union Pacific plans to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make a combined railroad run smoothly, there are locations where service could degrade should the merger be approved by federal regulators. </div>

While Union Pacific plans to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make a combined railroad run smoothly, there are locations where service could degrade should the merger be approved by federal regulators.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) proposed $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) would set up some shippers for faster transits while others will find that new investments on some routes will come at their expense. UP will spend $507 million for dozens of rail infrastructure upgrades across what would be the newly combined network and $516 million to upgrade or expand a dozen terminals expected to see a surge in containers, automobiles and manifest trains should the merger happen. “To achieve the transit-time improvements on certain routes requires making trade-offs,” Union Pacific wrote in the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-in-merger-filing-vows-to-convert-millions-of-loads-to-intermodal-annually-6138380">formal merger application</a> it filed Dec. 19 with federal regulators. “[This] requires changes that have the opposite impact on a route with less traffic.” Fresh investment will go into supporting a new single-line train from Southern California to New Jersey through Kansas City, bypassing Chicago. At UP’s Inland Empire intermodal terminal in Southern California, daily lifts are projected to rise by approximately 400%. To handle the increase, the railroad plans to invest $58 million there. The Norfolk Southern terminals in Cincinnati and Toledo, Ohio, are expected to see daily lifts more than double within three years of the merger, prompting a combined $52.5 million in planned investment. In Council Bluffs, Iowa, where lifts are projected to increase 163%, UP plans to spend $75.4 million to expand capacity. Track infrastructure supporting the trains also will be upgraded. The combined railroad would invest $136.6 million in infrastructure between Kansas City and Butler, Indiana, to support faster Southern California-Northeast intermodal trains. Another $172.3 million would be spent between New Orleans and Atlanta to strengthen the Laredo and Houston intermodal trains. The money will go to more than two dozen projects to improve the tracks and bridges in those areas to handle the additional post-merger volume. Achieving that vision, however, requires trade-offs that could leave other shippers disadvantaged. Rail rivals have warned about those risks in filings with the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), arguing that UP’s merger application understates the downside. Canadian National Railway said the application omits required market analyses, while CSX Transportation wrote that UP’s growth plan relies on outdated or incomplete data, overemphasizing the benefits while masking where service would degrade. In comments filed with the STB earlier this week, the two railroads asked regulators to deem UP’s application incomplete. The STB must decide whether the application is complete before Jan. 20; if the application is deemed incomplete, UP would need to fix any deficiencies and resubmit the document before regulators can resume their review. <h3>Terminals that could be logjammed </h3>While several intermodal terminals would be expanded post-merger, others will have a sharp increase in volume but receive little or no investment. In Minneapolis, container lifts are projected to increase 343%, yet no terminal upgrades are planned. UP said the intermodal terminal would be overcapacity post-merger, only a few years after <a href="https://www.up.com/news/service/twin-cities-intermodal-it-221212">hundreds of millions</a> were poured into the facility. UP said intermodal volume increased 94% in Minneapolis between 2023 and 2024, but there was “<a href="https://www.up.com/news/growth/twin-cities-intermodal-it-250317">ample capacity remaining for future expansion</a>.” Instead, UP wrote in the application that mitigation in Minneapolis would include working with customers to reduce container dwells and exploring off-site parking options. In Tacoma, Washington, container lifts are expected to rise 44%, also without terminal investment. UP said it would seek to address capacity constraints by coordinating with the terminal operator to extend operating hours. The Tacoma terminal was one location that saw <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/tacoma-marine-terminals-grappling-with-heavy-import-rail-congestion-5706377">a massive influx in international intermodal volume</a> in 2024. At NS’ Croxton terminal in Jersey City, daily lifts would rise 67% but receive only $7.3 million in capital spending. UP said it may reopen NS’ E-Rail terminal in nearby Elizabeth, if necessary. In Atlanta, container lifts at the Austell terminal would increase by 24%. The land-constrained terminal would not receive new capital investments, but UP will revive intermodal operations in Birmingham, Alabama, and NS also owns a smaller yard about 15 minutes away near downtown Atlanta. <h3>Shippers who might not benefit </h3>One group of shippers who would experience longer transits post-merger are those using trains from Southern California to Memphis and St. Louis. UP identified 191 domestic containers per day that will be removed in Greggton, Texas — between Dallas and Shreveport — and transferred to a second train to Memphis and St. Louis post-merger. On an annual basis, nearly 70,000 containers currently moving on a direct train would face at least a four-hour layover. That delay assumes the first and second trains run on time, much like two connecting flights at an airport. UP said the Memphis diversions are necessary to build new expedited intermodal trains over the Meridian Speedway to Atlanta, Charlotte, and Jacksonville, saving shippers between 70 and 96 hours of transit time. The Meridian Speedway itself, a nearly 300-mile corridor linking Shreveport, Louisiana, and Meridian, Mississippi, presents additional uncertainty. UP’s merger application calls for the new trains to average nearly 11,000 feet long, but Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC), which owns 75% of the Meridian joint venture to NS’ 25%, limits train lengths to 8,500 feet. UP acknowledged that Meridian Speedway expedited trains “might be split into a second train,” introducing additional dwell that would cut into the 70- to 96-hour savings. Union Pacific also highlighted how 185 intermodal routes, totaling more than 300,000 containers annually, would see fewer handlings or layovers under a post-merger operating plan. However, UP provided no details on 62 of the routes representing about 20,000 containers that would see additional handling. “Any change to train and blocking plans and any yard or terminal rationalization creates a risk of service degradation to the extent plans are flawed in design or execution,” Union Pacific wrote in its application. “[We] will not make any merger-related changes that cannot be reversed, if necessary.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) proposed $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) would set up some shippers for faster transits while others will find that new investments on some routes will come at their expense. UP will spend $507 million for dozens of rail infrastructure upgrades across what would be the newly combined network and $516 million to upgrade or expand a dozen terminals expected to see a surge in containers, automobiles and manifest trains should the merger happen. “To achieve the transit-time improvements on certain routes requires making trade-offs,” Union Pacific wrote in the formal merger application it filed Dec. 19 with federal regulators. “[This] requires changes that have the opposite impact on a route with less traffic.” Fresh investment will go into supporting a new single-line train from Southern California to New Jersey through Kansas City, bypassing Chicago. At UP’s Inland Empire intermodal terminal in Southern California, daily lifts are projected to rise by approximately 400%. To handle the increase, the railroad plans to invest $58 million there. The Norfolk Southern terminals in Cincinnati and Toledo, Ohio, are expected to see daily lifts more than double within three years of the merger, prompting a combined $52.5 million in planned investment. In Council Bluffs, Iowa, where lifts are projected to increase 163%, UP plans to spend $75.4 million to expand capacity. Track infrastructure supporting the trains also will be upgraded. The combined railroad would invest $136.6 million in infrastructure between Kansas City and Butler, Indiana, to support faster Southern California-Northeast intermodal trains. Another $172.3 million would be spent between New Orleans and Atlanta to strengthen the Laredo and Houston intermodal trains. The money will go to more than two dozen projects to improve the tracks and bridges in those areas to handle the additional post-merger volume. Achieving that vision, however, requires trade-offs that could leave other shippers disadvantaged. Rail rivals have warned about those risks in filings with the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), arguing that UP’s merger application understates the downside. Canadian National Railway said the application omits required market analyses, while CSX Transportation wrote that UP’s growth plan relies on outdated or incomplete data, overemphasizing the benefits while masking where service would degrade. In comments filed with the STB earlier this week, the two railroads asked regulators to deem UP’s application incomplete. The STB must decide whether the application is complete before Jan. 20; if the application is deemed incomplete, UP would need to fix any deficiencies and resubmit the document before regulators can resume their review. Terminals that could be logjammed While several intermodal terminals would be expanded post-merger, others will have a sharp increase in volume but receive little or no investment. In Minneapolis, container lifts are projected to increase 343%, yet no terminal upgrades are planned. UP said the intermodal terminal would be overcapacity post-merger, only a few years after hundreds of millions were poured into the facility. UP said intermodal volume increased 94% in Minneapolis between 2023 and 2024, but there was “ ample capacity remaining for future expansion .” Instead, UP wrote in the application that mitigation in Minneapolis would include working with customers to reduce container dwells and exploring off-site parking options. In Tacoma, Washington, container lifts are expected to rise 44%, also without terminal investment. UP said it would seek to address capacity constraints by coordinating with the terminal operator to extend operating hours. The Tacoma terminal was one location that saw a massive influx in international intermodal volume in 2024. At NS’ Croxton terminal in Jersey City, daily lifts would rise 67% but receive only $7.3 million in capital spending. UP said it may reopen NS’ E-Rail terminal in nearby Elizabeth, if necessary. In Atlanta, container lifts at the Austell terminal would increase by 24%. The land-constrained terminal would not receive new capital investments, but UP will revive intermodal operations in Birmingham, Alabama, and NS also owns a smaller yard about 15 minutes away near downtown Atlanta. Shippers who might not benefit One group of shippers who would experience longer transits post-merger are those using trains from Southern California to Memphis and St. Louis. UP identified 191 domestic containers per day that will be removed in Greggton, Texas — between Dallas and Shreveport — and transferred to a second train to Memphis and St. Louis post-merger. On an annual basis, nearly 70,000 containers currently moving on a direct train would face at least a four-hour layover. That delay assumes the first and second trains run on time, much like two connecting flights at an airport. UP said the Memphis diversions are necessary to build new expedited intermodal trains over the Meridian Speedway to Atlanta, Charlotte, and Jacksonville, saving shippers between 70 and 96 hours of transit time. The Meridian Speedway itself, a nearly 300-mile corridor linking Shreveport, Louisiana, and Meridian, Mississippi, presents additional uncertainty. UP’s merger application calls for the new trains to average nearly 11,000 feet long, but Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC), which owns 75% of the Meridian joint venture to NS’ 25%, limits train lengths to 8,500 feet. UP acknowledged that Meridian Speedway expedited trains “might be split into a second train,” introducing additional dwell that would cut into the 70- to 96-hour savings. Union Pacific also highlighted how 185 intermodal routes, totaling more than 300,000 containers annually, would see fewer handlings or layovers under a post-merger operating plan. However, UP provided no details on 62 of the routes representing about 20,000 containers that would see additional handling. “Any change to train and blocking plans and any yard or terminal rationalization creates a risk of service degradation to the extent plans are flawed in design or execution,” Union Pacific wrote in its application. “[We] will not make any merger-related changes that cannot be reversed, if necessary.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

UP-NS deal could benefit some shippers, while others face longer transits

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The use of real-time cargo status data is expected to make trade finance more efficient, reducing credit costs and processing and payment times, the Hong Kong government said.</div>

The use of real-time cargo status data is expected to make trade finance more efficient, reducing credit costs and processing and payment times, the Hong Kong government said.

<div class="phx-topic">Hong Kong will launch a multi-modal digital cargo tracking and data exchange network in January that will initially focus on cargo flows between Hong Kong and China but is expected to be extended to other countries. Willy Lin, chairman of the Hong Kong Shippers’ Council (HKSC), said the port community system (PCS) will be a “game changer” for shippers and Hong Kong’s port community by improving cargo visibility and operational efficiencies. The use of real-time cargo status data is expected to make trade finance more efficient, reducing credit costs and processing and payment times, the Hong Kong government said. Government officials estimate the PCS could generate cost savings of $406 million a year by improving cargo handling efficiency for ocean, air and landside operators while costing a total of just $28 million to operate for the first three years. “The benefits to shippers include real time track and trace, increased transparency of the status of cargo shipments including customs clearance, and the automatic transmission of data and documents," Sunny Ho, HKSC’s executive director, told the Journal of Commerce. Ho said the system will be free for users, at least initially. “There is no promise that it will be free forever,” he said. “The system needs maintenance and regular updates, and these could be expensive. We’ve had no answers from the government on [who] would be paying for these.” Ho described the issues as “teething problems.” <h3>Wide range of expected users </h3>The Hong Kong government expects about 50,000 users, including shippers, freight forwarders, customs brokers carriers, terminal operators, airlines and trucking companies to sign up to use the system and incorporate their own digital platforms. These include Crown Logistics, which will integrate its proprietary platform, CrownCompass, with the PCS network. This will provide its customers with real-time tracking of shipments and “automate workflows for customs declarations, cargo release, and trucker assignments, significantly reducing administrative overheads,” Crown Logistics said. The system will be operated by the Hong Kong government-backed Logistics and Supply Chain MultiTech R&amp;D Centre (LSCM) to maintain its neutrality and ensure commercial confidentiality, Ho said. LSCM has signed an agreement with the Guangdong e-Port Management Company that will allow the system to complete and submit ocean manifests before vessels enter ports in South China to provide faster Chinese customs clearance. “This digital collaborative platform will provide cargo tracking functions and connect sea, land and air transport networks, enhancing cross-sector information interconnectivity and increasing the Hong Kong Port’s efficiency and overall competitiveness,” Mable Chan, Hong Kong’s secretary for transport and logistics, said. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Hong Kong will launch a multi-modal digital cargo tracking and data exchange network in January that will initially focus on cargo flows between Hong Kong and China but is expected to be extended to other countries. Willy Lin, chairman of the Hong Kong Shippers’ Council (HKSC), said the port community system (PCS) will be a “game changer” for shippers and Hong Kong’s port community by improving cargo visibility and operational efficiencies. The use of real-time cargo status data is expected to make trade finance more efficient, reducing credit costs and processing and payment times, the Hong Kong government said. Government officials estimate the PCS could generate cost savings of $406 million a year by improving cargo handling efficiency for ocean, air and landside operators while costing a total of just $28 million to operate for the first three years. “The benefits to shippers include real time track and trace, increased transparency of the status of cargo shipments including customs clearance, and the automatic transmission of data and documents," Sunny Ho, HKSC’s executive director, told the Journal of Commerce. Ho said the system will be free for users, at least initially. “There is no promise that it will be free forever,” he said. “The system needs maintenance and regular updates, and these could be expensive. We’ve had no answers from the government on [who] would be paying for these.” Ho described the issues as “teething problems.” Wide range of expected users The Hong Kong government expects about 50,000 users, including shippers, freight forwarders, customs brokers carriers, terminal operators, airlines and trucking companies to sign up to use the system and incorporate their own digital platforms. These include Crown Logistics, which will integrate its proprietary platform, CrownCompass, with the PCS network. This will provide its customers with real-time tracking of shipments and “automate workflows for customs declarations, cargo release, and trucker assignments, significantly reducing administrative overheads,” Crown Logistics said. The system will be operated by the Hong Kong government-backed Logistics and Supply Chain MultiTech R&D Centre (LSCM) to maintain its neutrality and ensure commercial confidentiality, Ho said. LSCM has signed an agreement with the Guangdong e-Port Management Company that will allow the system to complete and submit ocean manifests before vessels enter ports in South China to provide faster Chinese customs clearance. “This digital collaborative platform will provide cargo tracking functions and connect sea, land and air transport networks, enhancing cross-sector information interconnectivity and increasing the Hong Kong Port’s efficiency and overall competitiveness,” Mable Chan, Hong Kong’s secretary for transport and logistics, said. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Hong Kong to launch digital cargo tracking, data exchange network

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">While some gateways are expanding their intermodal access to vie for discretionary cargo destined for inland locations, others are moving full speed ahead with capacity expansions that will allow them to handle more and larger ships. </div>

While some gateways are expanding their intermodal access to vie for discretionary cargo destined for inland locations, others are moving full speed ahead with capacity expansions that will allow them to handle more and larger ships.

<div class="phx-topic">The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook.The big picture: Ports along the US East and Gulf coasts rode a similar wave of strong tariff-induced imports in the first half of the year and receding volumes — with some gateways registering double-digit percentage declines — in the second half. Ongoing infrastructure expansion and upgrades will continue this year, and with volumes forecast to remain weak at least through the fourth quarter, coastal competition for discretionary cargoes is likely to heat up. A look back: Amid an up-and-down year for cargo activity spurred by stop-start US tariff actions, total laden container imports through East and Gulf coast ports rose 2.5% year over year in the first 11 months of 2025, with inbound shipments to the East Coast climbing 3% and Gulf Coast imports ticking up 0.3%, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. But those totals don’t tell the whole story. For example, annual growth rates at Port Houston, by far the busiest port on the Gulf Coast and a bellwether for the region, ranged from negative 11.5% in February to positive 33.1% in April. The Port of New York and New Jersey, the largest on either coast, handled as few as 354,697 TEUs in June and as many as 420,495 TEUs in August, a nearly 66,000-TEU swing. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6135207_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Despite the month-to-month volatility, however, East and Gulf coast ports faced few delays in vessel and cargo handling. Container ships spent an average of 27.6 hours on port calls to the US East Coast in 2025 and 33.1 hours on Gulf Coast calls, according to Sea-web, also part of S&amp;P Global, both within the normal range that indicates fluid terminal operations. The South Carolina Port Authority (SC Ports) in October named Micah Mallace as its new president and CEO. Mallace, who previously served as SC Ports’ chief commercial officer before heading up a regional logistics provider, took the helm after Barbara Melvin exited following delays and cost overruns at the Port of Charleston’s yet-to-be-completed near-dock rail terminal. A look ahead: While some East and Gulf coast gateways are expanding their intermodal access to vie for discretionary cargo destined for inland locations, others are moving full speed ahead with capacity expansions that will allow them to handle more and larger ships. The Navy Base Intermodal Facility (NBIF), now expected to begin operations in October 2026, will connect Charleston’s marine terminals with Inland Ports Greer and Dillon, increasing intermodal capacity to and from Southeast markets such as Atlanta, Memphis, Nashville and Louisville. Completion of CSX Transportation’s Howard Street Tunnel project, expected in the first quarter, will allow for double-stack rail service from the Port of Baltimore, opening additional capacity to Chicago and other Midwest markets. The Port of Houston is expected to finish widening the ship channel leading into the port’s Barbours Cut terminal early in 2026, allowing for more two-way ship transits. A new wharf at Houston’s Bayport terminal, also expected at some point in 2026, will allow the terminal to handle five ships simultaneously and, eventually, vessels of up to 17,000 TEUs, which are commonly deployed on trans-Pacific services. After dredging its harbor to 50 feet, which will allow it to serve large container ships, the Port of Mobile and APM Terminals are in the process of completing a container yard expansion and other capital projects that will increase its handling capacity to just over 1 million TEUs per year. The Port of Virginia is expected to complete dredging of its harbor to 55 feet by the end of December, coinciding with the commissioning of new cranes at its Norfolk International Terminal south berth for handling ultra-large container vessels. The next inflection: Anticipating that ocean carriers will eventually deploy the ultra-large container ships currently serving the Asia-Europe trade on Asia-US East Coast routes, the Port of New York and New Jersey is looking to fund a US Army Corps of Engineers study on the feasibility of dredging to a 55-foot depth, allowing it to handle ships of 18,000 TEUs or more. The Port of Savannah will also complete upgrades to its Ocean Terminal in 2027 that will allow it to handle two post-Panamax ships simultaneously. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. The big picture: Ports along the US East and Gulf coasts rode a similar wave of strong tariff-induced imports in the first half of the year and receding volumes — with some gateways registering double-digit percentage declines — in the second half. Ongoing infrastructure expansion and upgrades will continue this year, and with volumes forecast to remain weak at least through the fourth quarter, coastal competition for discretionary cargoes is likely to heat up. A look back: Amid an up-and-down year for cargo activity spurred by stop-start US tariff actions, total laden container imports through East and Gulf coast ports rose 2.5% year over year in the first 11 months of 2025, with inbound shipments to the East Coast climbing 3% and Gulf Coast imports ticking up 0.3%, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. But those totals don’t tell the whole story. For example, annual growth rates at Port Houston, by far the busiest port on the Gulf Coast and a bellwether for the region, ranged from negative 11.5% in February to positive 33.1% in April. The Port of New York and New Jersey, the largest on either coast, handled as few as 354,697 TEUs in June and as many as 420,495 TEUs in August, a nearly 66,000-TEU swing. Despite the month-to-month volatility, however, East and Gulf coast ports faced few delays in vessel and cargo handling. Container ships spent an average of 27.6 hours on port calls to the US East Coast in 2025 and 33.1 hours on Gulf Coast calls, according to Sea-web, also part of S&P Global, both within the normal range that indicates fluid terminal operations. The South Carolina Port Authority (SC Ports) in October named Micah Mallace as its new president and CEO. Mallace, who previously served as SC Ports’ chief commercial officer before heading up a regional logistics provider, took the helm after Barbara Melvin exited following delays and cost overruns at the Port of Charleston’s yet-to-be-completed near-dock rail terminal. A look ahead: While some East and Gulf coast gateways are expanding their intermodal access to vie for discretionary cargo destined for inland locations, others are moving full speed ahead with capacity expansions that will allow them to handle more and larger ships. The Navy Base Intermodal Facility (NBIF), now expected to begin operations in October 2026, will connect Charleston’s marine terminals with Inland Ports Greer and Dillon, increasing intermodal capacity to and from Southeast markets such as Atlanta, Memphis, Nashville and Louisville. Completion of CSX Transportation’s Howard Street Tunnel project, expected in the first quarter, will allow for double-stack rail service from the Port of Baltimore, opening additional capacity to Chicago and other Midwest markets. The Port of Houston is expected to finish widening the ship channel leading into the port’s Barbours Cut terminal early in 2026, allowing for more two-way ship transits. A new wharf at Houston’s Bayport terminal, also expected at some point in 2026, will allow the terminal to handle five ships simultaneously and, eventually, vessels of up to 17,000 TEUs, which are commonly deployed on trans-Pacific services. After dredging its harbor to 50 feet, which will allow it to serve large container ships, the Port of Mobile and APM Terminals are in the process of completing a container yard expansion and other capital projects that will increase its handling capacity to just over 1 million TEUs per year. The Port of Virginia is expected to complete dredging of its harbor to 55 feet by the end of December, coinciding with the commissioning of new cranes at its Norfolk International Terminal south berth for handling ultra-large container vessels. The next inflection: Anticipating that ocean carriers will eventually deploy the ultra-large container ships currently serving the Asia-Europe trade on Asia-US East Coast routes, the Port of New York and New Jersey is looking to fund a US Army Corps of Engineers study on the feasibility of dredging to a 55-foot depth, allowing it to handle ships of 18,000 TEUs or more. The Port of Savannah will also complete upgrades to its Ocean Terminal in 2027 that will allow it to handle two post-Panamax ships simultaneously. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

US East, Gulf coast ports expanding intermodal access, vessel capacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">With demand conditions unlikely to improve in the short term, LTL carriers are putting more of their capacity, old and new, into reserve. </div>

With demand conditions unlikely to improve in the short term, LTL carriers are putting more of their capacity, old and new, into reserve.

<div class="phx-topic">The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook.The big picture: US less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers are girding for market changes in 2026, led by the spin-off of FedEx Freight, and hoping for a resurgence in industrial freight to help fill partially empty trailers and terminals. LTL pricing remains elevated, but continued weak demand will likely put further rate increases and carrier expansion plans on hold. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6135207_0.1.jpg"></img></div>A look back: The dust thrown up by the collapse of Yellow, the third-largest LTL carrier when it declared bankruptcy in 2023, and the resulting LTL land rush finally settled last year. With almost all of Yellow’s terminals sold by November, several of the largest LTL carriers ended the year with more terminals despite having less freight to haul. But excess capacity isn’t the negative for LTL providers that it is for truckload carriers. In fact, some LTL carriers aim to keep up to 30% excess capacity in their networks to ensure freight “fluidity” and to provide surge protection and room to grow. What’s more, the LTL sector as a whole still has approximately 6% less capacity — i.e., terminals and doors — than it did before Yellow’s demise and 10% less than in 2020. That capacity shortfall has supported sustained yield and pricing gains, despite most carriers reporting a drop in average daily shipment counts. Average LTL rates in September slipped slightly after climbing to new heights in August, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) long-distance LTL producer price index, but remained 9.9% higher than in September 2024 and 15.7% higher than in July 2023, the last full month Yellow was in operation. A look ahead: Shippers reported LTL pricing flattening in contract talks late last year, with some carriers offering lower rates in certain lanes to maintain density and “protect their turf.” With demand conditions unlikely to improve in the short term, LTL carriers are putting more of their capacity, old and new, into reserve. Terminals added to networks are likely to remain open, but with fewer active doors, and some lower-volume properties will likely be put in mothballs until the industrial economy gathers steam. LTL capacity may have dropped, but freight demand seems to have fallen farther, so the question now becomes how much longer carriers can avoid deeper cuts. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="44e2ce58-00cd-4b4a-88b2-950f4328ca58"></dynamic-object></div>The next inflection: Unlike their truckload counterparts, LTL carriers can’t rely on capacity cuts alone to drive rate growth. With more than half of LTL freight generated by domestic manufacturing, LTL operators need an industrial revival, but ongoing political and economic uncertainty makes that an unlikely proposition. Carriers are also hoping that lower interest and tax rates will boost consumer spending to an extent that would lift manufacturing output. If, on the other hand, demand continues to fall, that would put more pressure on LTL networks and the industry’s famed “pricing discipline.” Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The following is part of the Journal of Commerce’s 2026 Annual Review and Outlook. The big picture: US less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers are girding for market changes in 2026, led by the spin-off of FedEx Freight, and hoping for a resurgence in industrial freight to help fill partially empty trailers and terminals. LTL pricing remains elevated, but continued weak demand will likely put further rate increases and carrier expansion plans on hold. A look back: The dust thrown up by the collapse of Yellow, the third-largest LTL carrier when it declared bankruptcy in 2023, and the resulting LTL land rush finally settled last year. With almost all of Yellow’s terminals sold by November, several of the largest LTL carriers ended the year with more terminals despite having less freight to haul. But excess capacity isn’t the negative for LTL providers that it is for truckload carriers. In fact, some LTL carriers aim to keep up to 30% excess capacity in their networks to ensure freight “fluidity” and to provide surge protection and room to grow. What’s more, the LTL sector as a whole still has approximately 6% less capacity — i.e., terminals and doors — than it did before Yellow’s demise and 10% less than in 2020. That capacity shortfall has supported sustained yield and pricing gains, despite most carriers reporting a drop in average daily shipment counts. Average LTL rates in September slipped slightly after climbing to new heights in August, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) long-distance LTL producer price index, but remained 9.9% higher than in September 2024 and 15.7% higher than in July 2023, the last full month Yellow was in operation. A look ahead: Shippers reported LTL pricing flattening in contract talks late last year, with some carriers offering lower rates in certain lanes to maintain density and “protect their turf.” With demand conditions unlikely to improve in the short term, LTL carriers are putting more of their capacity, old and new, into reserve. Terminals added to networks are likely to remain open, but with fewer active doors, and some lower-volume properties will likely be put in mothballs until the industrial economy gathers steam. LTL capacity may have dropped, but freight demand seems to have fallen farther, so the question now becomes how much longer carriers can avoid deeper cuts. The next inflection: Unlike their truckload counterparts, LTL carriers can’t rely on capacity cuts alone to drive rate growth. With more than half of LTL freight generated by domestic manufacturing, LTL operators need an industrial revival, but ongoing political and economic uncertainty makes that an unlikely proposition. Carriers are also hoping that lower interest and tax rates will boost consumer spending to an extent that would lift manufacturing output. If, on the other hand, demand continues to fall, that would put more pressure on LTL networks and the industry’s famed “pricing discipline.” Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

US LTL providers carefully managing capacity in changing market

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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 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.

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

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

Tariffs, economic uncertainty weigh on pre-Lunar New Year trans-Pac volumes

UP-NS deal could benefit some shippers, while others face longer transits

Hong Kong to launch digital cargo tracking, data exchange network