The first signs of guidance on how tariffs could play out over the next few months was issued this week by a leading expert on US trade policy.

At a webinar organised by the European Shippers’ Council (ESC), Eugene Laney, CEO of the American Association of Importers and Exporters (AAIE), said his organisation was beginning to get a sense of where US tariff levels will eventually settle.

With the 90-day pause of the US’s so-called reciprocal tariffs on its trade with the rest of world set to expire on 9 July, and the 90-day window of reduced tariffs between China and the US due to expire on 12 August, Mr Laney said: “We really believe the place that they’re going to settle on 9 July will be 50% for China and 10% for everyone else.

“But, of course, all of this can change, as we’ve seen over the last few weeks,” he added.

Describing the 145% tariff on Chinese imports as “basically an embargo”, Mr Laney explained some of the knock-on effects the tariff chaos had had on American importers, and why so many smaller firms immediately cancelled shipments.

“There’s a huge cost for US importers, as it relates to import bonds – every time the tariffs go up here in the US, you need an import bond to facilitate that customs transaction at the border,” he said.

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency requires a bond, which will cover all duties on any import valued at more than $2,500, and can either be bought on a single-entry basis, or annually, covering multiple imports.

“If you’re bringing in $3m of imports and then the tariffs go up 145%, you then have to increase your import bonds, and you have to carry that bond for up to a year,” said Mr Laney.

“We’re seeing a lot of companies having to put down higher collateral to get these import bonds, and we’re also seeing a lot of small- and medium-sized businesses unable to meet collateral needs to get a bond, so they’re being forced to walk away from some imports.” he said.

He warned that this would likely lead to some shortages of products – particularly low-value items – across the US in the coming months, as the tariff shock worked through the supply chain and importers focused on higher-value goods, with which they were more confident of being able to pass on the tariff cost increases.

“If they bring goods in, they’re focusing more on the premium imports. In other words, imports where they can pass on the tariffs into the price; versus the low-cost consumer goods, which you’re seeing being removed from a lot of the imports because you’re not going to be able to recoup your costs.

“We undoubtedly think you’re going to see some summer and autumn shortages of goods. I know the news is predicting that’s not going to happen, but the reality is that it will, because you’re just not seeing the type of velocity of goods coming into the US. What you’re seeing is everyone trying to stockpile, to try to make it through the best way they can through autumn and summer,” he said, and added that efforts to try and get exporters to US to absorb some of the higher costs had largely failed.

“They’re having a hard time applying pressure on suppliers, mainly because we’re seeing a lot of suppliers fearing national retaliation. A lot of Chinese suppliers have the Chinese government telling them they cannot absorb those tariff costs.

“We’re seeing that in other countries – most foreign suppliers are not absorbing the cost. They’re asking US importers to take on that cost. There’s not a true share burden around the tariffs,” he said.

Container spot freight rates on the transpacific continued to trend upwards this week, albeit at a far gentler pace than last week’s GRI-induced double-digit growth, as carriers rushed to return capacity in anticipation of at least a short-term demand bounce.

There are only rough estimates as to how much ready-to-load cargo has built up in China, waiting to ship to the US, since President Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariff announcement.

Sea Intelligence consulting suggested a broad range, of 180,000-540,00 teu, this week; and this was given some credence by Jim Boone, chief commercial officer at US intermodal provider CSX, who told a Wolfe Research event this week according to DeskOne: “We expect a lot of volume coming into the ports here as we move into July and into the third quarter with the 90-day relief on the tariffs from China.

“And we’ve heard from a number of customers, there’s 700,000 to 800,000 loaded containers ready to go,” he added.

Carriers have reacted incredibly quickly: consultant Linerlytica yesterday reported that “all of the Far East-US west coast transpacific services that were withdrawn in April and May will be fully re-instated following the rebound in cargo demand” with the China-US détente.

And today, Drewry warned that “carriers are reinstating suspended services and upsizing vessels to meet booming demand, yet near-term capacity remains tight due to redeployments and congestion, especially at Chinese ports”.

The effect on spot rates this week was muted however, with WCI’s Shanghai-Los Angeles leg showing a 2% week-on-week gain, to $3,197 per 40ft, while the Shanghai-New York spot rate rose 4%, to $4,257 per 40ft, and the Shanghai Containerised Freight Index (SCFI) saw week-on-week rises of 5% on both routes, to reach $3,275 and $4,284 per 40ft, respectively.

The acid test for the trade, and the prognosis for the remainder of the tariff time-out period to 9 July, are likely to be the stickiness of two general rate increases (GRIs), of $1,000-$3,000 per 40ft, slated for 1 and 15 June.

It is also unclear whether 90 days of reduced tariffs will be enough to boost demand. A Freightos survey of more than 100 US small-to-medium importers found there was still considerable concern over remaining tariffs, and which would likely be exacerbated by sharp freight rate rises.

“The 90-day tariff implementation delay hasn’t done much to ease importer concerns,” Freightos said. “Smaller importers remain deeply anxious, and are shifting behaviour – including changing shipment timing or even contending winding down their businesses – and are starting to adapt for the long term.

“While some are assessing domestic manufacturing, very few actually have. Meanwhile, delays in shipments as a result of tariffs led to significant gaps that importers are struggling to fill,” it added.

Meanwhile, spot rates on the Asia-Europe trade continued to flatline – the WCI’s Shanghai-Rotterdam leg was unchanged, at $2,030 per 40ft, while the Shanghai-Genoa leg was up 4% week on week, to $2,841 per 40ft.

With a series of rising carrier FAK spot rates due on 1 June, which would mean a 50% hike of current prices, forwarders and shippers will begin to see how demand is shaping for the peak season: whether capacity continues to outmatch demand; and the effect of the growing port congestion in Europe.

Outside the two largest east-west trades, evidence emerged this week that spot rates on some secondary trades were being hit by the capacity reshuffling on the transpacific.

The Ningbo Containerised Freight Index noted that spot rates on the Asia-South America west coast had surged over the past week.

“Affected by increased demand in North America, some box liners have significantly redeployed capacity from these routes, resulting in space shortages and substantial freight rate increases,” reported an NCFI commentary; its Ningbo-west South America rate up 71.7% against last week.

Similarly, the SCFI’s Shanghai-Manzanillo route showed a 50% week-on-week gain, to end at $2,387 per 40ft.

In the early days of the Houthis’ Red Sea denial, the rebel militia, known to be working with Iran, professed to be attacking ships with connections to Israel. It was soon discovered, however, that trying to figure out which ships were linked to which countries was harder than sighting them up for missile strikes.

Before even the tangled business of ownership comes into play, a ship might be built in China, managed in Singapore, on charter to a German liner, with a crew of Filipinos. In this context, some tenuous business link to Israel was inevitable for almost any ship.

This prompted remarks from a frustrated Lars Jensen, Vespucci Maritime CEO, that as well as the UK, the targeted bulk carrier Rubymar had links with Belize, whose flag it flew, the Marshall Islands, Lebanon, Honduras, UAE, Bulgaria, and Saudi Arabia.

“It serves as a good illustration as to the futility of trying to assign a single ‘nationality’ to a vessel,” Mr Jensen said. “Shipping is simply too global and complex for that approach to have much meaning.”

Moving freely about in the world and, irrespective of location, having the power to decide which country’s laws to follow, and whose police would come after you if you broke them; for now, even the loftiest billionaires could but dream of such free rein for themselves. But for a ship, it is another matter. Vessels can fly the flag of a country that no-one involved in its ordering, construction, or operation need ever have visited.

The practice of flagging your ship in a country with business-friendly provisions has been given the moniker ‘flag of convenience’, or FOC. But while flagging a vessel in a country that does not intend to impose taxes on it is even easier than opening a Bermuda bank account, there is a lot more than money at stake in case of a ship registry.

A flag provides a regulatory framework to be applied to the ship, in matters of labour and crewing, technical specification, safety, and pollution. It also pledges a degree of protection, both legal and, in some cases, military.

By contrast, the US flag is a special case. A protectionist local content law, the Jones Act, strives to keep US ships owned, built, and crewed by Americans. A high cost of entry for the US market does not sit well with globalised maritime players, and the US-flagged fleet has been contracting for decades, dwindling to fewer than 200 ships.

For the Trump administration, this is a matter of some embarrassment, and something must be done.

Tariffs and US Trade Representative (USTR) port call levies on foreign ships would, it hoped, give the US the means to reinvigorate US shipyards and build a new US fleet sufficiently big and beautiful for the modern age.

But a separate plot is under way. One group is hoping to persuade the administration to open a new US flag of convenience, the proposed US Virgin Islands (USVI) registry. Vessels would call freely at US ports, while decisively undercutting the US flag.

It is the second attempt to get this flag started, following an attempt in 2022 which seemed to be shunned by the pro-union Biden Administration.

“The initiative makes sense and is in alignment with the Trump administration’s initiative to strengthen American shipping,” Virgin Islands Governor Albert Bryan told Reuters. “We are very excited and look forward to being able to support this initiative to its fruition.”

The scheme’s advocates will not be reassured by a new Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) investigation into FOCs announced this week. Opening a 90-day public comment period, FMC is looking for “unfavourable flagging laws, regulations, and practices” that, from a US point of view, “endanger the efficiency and reliability of the ocean shipping supply chain”.

Not unexpectedly, following the tantrum at MEPC 83, this has involved lashing out at the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which is supposed to agree on a law of the sea (UNCLOS) to provide a minimum code of ethics for even the most feckless flags to follow. IMO “has not brought about meaningful change nor deterrence to what is clearly a growing problem” argues the FMC. Instead, global flag administrations have been encouraged to participate in a “race to the bottom”.

The commission added: “By offering to register and flag vessels with little or no oversight or regulation, countries may compete against one another to gain revenue from the associated fees, and to minimise the expenses associated with inspecting vessels, and ensuring compliance with appropriate maintenance and safety requirements.”

The US has determined that it must have its own shipping fleet, but faced with two opposed strategies for achieving this, the Trump administration must now choose between doing it the hard way, or the way of convenience.

Supply chain leaders have given a mixed response to France and Germany’s calls to abolish the EU Corporate and Sustainability Due Diligence directive (CSDD).

Coming hot on the heels of newly elected German chancellor Friedrich Merz’s demand for the CSDD’s “complete repeal” this month, French president Emmanuel Macron echoed that sentiment on Monday in a speech at Versailles.

Eliciting cheers from an audience of business executives, Mr Macron said: “CSDD and other regulations have to not just be postponed, but need to be taken off the table completely.”

Supply chain executives in Berlin and Paris have varyingly described the CSDD – it requires companies to monitor global supply chains for human rights abuses and sustainability violations – as “onerous” and “essential”.

One forwarder told that the call was a “smart one”, believing the directive meant Europe was “shooting itself in the foot” and putting businesses on the continent at a “major disadvantage” to global competitors.

They added: “I want to stress that my objection to the directive is nothing to do with the issue of environmental and human rights abuses – all companies are addressing this themselves. What I object to are these onerous norms that penalise EU companies for what happens on the other side of the planet.

“We are in a global economy – why is it that European firms are taking the hit for exploitative practices that everyone else is capitalising on?”

Since 2010, demand for cobalt has more than trebled as a consequence of surging demand for electronics, including smart phones, laptops, and electric vehicles. Leading the supply is the Democratic Republic of Congo – which has the world’s largest cobalt reserves – and in that period, Amnesty International claims, the DRC has witnessed an escalation in human rights abuses, including forced evictions to access mines.

Secretary general of the European Shippers Council Godfried Smit told that while the CSDD’s objective is important, the way it was addressing these challenges “was causing a high level of administrative burden,” noting that smaller businesses are particularly exposed to negative impacts.

Mr Smit added: “Starting with leading companies might be a good choice. We hear from these companies that they are well prepared. Abolishing the objective would lead to disinvestment by these companies. If serious cases of bad practice are reported, there remains an obligation to investigate. If the Commission does not proceed, there is a risk of a patchwork of national legislations.”

However, another European forwarder warned that “scrapping or weakening these frameworks may offer short-term relief to some but also risks sending the wrong signal when unified and credible standards are more necessary than ever”.

There are suggestions that the call from France and Germany is a response to the current belief in Washington that business is now being prioritised above all else, as the bloc looks to secure trade deals with the Trump administration.

They told: “Fragmentation across member states could lead to even greater uncertainty in the long run. The directive gave structure and visibility to that work.

“We experienced genuine appreciation from clients, partners, and stakeholders for taking these responsibilities seriously. The goal should a balanced, practical implementation – one safeguarding competitiveness without compromising collective sustainability commitments.”

Noting similar pushback on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), they said that the framework had provided “a strategic advantage – it helps build trust with partners, ensures future readiness, and strengthens positioning in sustainability-driven markets”.

Both forwarders noted that the societal push seemed firmly rooted in adopting humane, sustainable practices and that while short-term limitations may keep the market open for abuses, businesses needed to be looking to the long-term, with those failing to heed the ground shift setting themselves up for failure.

One forwarder said: “CSRD can, and should, be seen as an opportunity to establish transparency, credibility, and long-term resilience in our business practices”.

Welcome a new company on MaxModal. You can see Blue Ocean Freight System Ltd services on their business profile, drop them a message, add them to your contacts or submit a special request to them

Transpacific shippers keen to take advantage of the 90-day tariff time-out are likely to be faced with tight capacity and soaring freight rates as new volumes collide with delayed cargo.

According to new analysis from Sea-Intelligence Consulting, there is 180,000-540,000 teu of cargo in China that formed a ‘cargo pool’ in the immediate aftermath of President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement on 2 April.

The estimate is based on widespread reports of a 30-40% decline in bookings post tariffs, and an assumption that between 25% and 55% of the cancelled bookings was for cargo already produced and subsequently stored in bonded warehouses and container freight stations in China.

Sea-Intelligence analysts further calculate that if this pool were added to the normal transpacific cargo flows over the remainder of this month, it would lead to a demand surge of 16%-48%; while if shipped during May and June, demand would grow by a far more manageable 5%-16%.

But they added: “It does not take into account that we might expect a clear and rapid surge in peak season cargo, as US importers will attempt to move as much product as possible before 14 August.”

Indeed, OceanX founder Ruben Huber noted: “The reprieve from the US-China agreement for the next 90 days seems to have a triggered an early peak season, with bookings back up and importers embracing the window of certainty, even though at a still high tariff and likely higher ocean rates too.”

Despite the demand swing, carriers have yet to return capacity to the trade en masse, said Sea-Intelligence, noting that capacity on Asia-US west coast services is down 5% this week and down 3% next week, year on year.

And, while the week beginning 2 June could see capacity 5% up year on year, according to current service announcements from carriers, it is expected to decline again and, by the end of the month, is expected to be almost 10% down year on year.

The Asia-US east coast trade currently appears to be better equipped to handle an early peak season – this week’s capacity is at the same level as last year and is expected to rise throughout June to hit a 30% year-on-year increase at the end of the month.

Sea-Intelligence explained that it expected to see fresh capacity injections announced in the coming days, but questioned whether it would be enough to mitigate sharp freight rate increases.

“It is very likely that we will see a substantial increase of cargo in the coming weeks. This can better be managed if the [waiting] pool is distributed over the next six weeks – or longer.

“However, it is very likely that shippers will be anxious to move their cargo as fast as possible, before they are blindsided by new tariff changes.

“Consequently, we expect to see a sharp rise in spot rates in the coming weeks, as well as much more capacity insertion into the transpacific – at the expense of blanked sailings in other Asian export trades,” it said.

In April, the Port of Charleston handled 215,804 TEUs and 118,215 pier containers, which is flat compared to the year prior.

Container volumes remained relatively consistent in April, following two months of container growth, according to SC Ports.

Vehicle imports and exports at the Port of Charleston totaled 12,339 in April, representing a 32% decrease from last year, while railed cargo continues to be a bright spot, with both Inland Ports Greer and Dillon handling strong volumes in recent months.

Inland Port Greer achieved a record April with 18,394 rail moves, representing 14% growth from last April. Greer's recent expansion increases cargo capacity by 50%, enabling the rail-served inland port to handle 300,000 rail lifts to support growing customer demand in the region.

Inland Port Dillon handled 4,213 rail moves in April. This is down 11% year-over-year, but breaks 4,000 rail moves for the first time this fiscal year.

"We are proactively investing in our port terminals and rail infrastructure to support the growth occurring in the Southeast for the long-term," said SC Ports President and CEO

Barbara Melvin. "As volumes fluctuate in the short term, we are committed to providing fluidity for companies' supply chains."

Maersk has joined its peers in implementing ’emergency operational surcharges’ on cargo in and out of Pakistan that has been disrupted due to the recent trade cut-off with India.

The Danish carrier will begin charging $500 per container for Pakistan exports to major western markets and $300 per box on the inbound leg, starting on 21 May for non-regulated countries, and 13 June for regulated trades – with the exception of Vietnam where it starts on 29 May.

But Pakistan exports within the region, mainly the Persian Gulf and subcontinent, will attract $300 per container.

“In light of the recent developments that are impacting the movement of cargo between India and Pakistan, there have been restrictions on trade and marine traffic between the two countries,” Maersk said.

“To ensure we continue providing a high level of service we have made changes to our network and operations and these have necessitated implementing an emergency operational cost recovery surcharge.”

Additionally, the carrier explained, the restrictions at both ends were constantly evolving, Pakistan now allowing Indian exports/imports remaining on board to transit its ports, and India updating its protocols to permit Pakistan ‘imports only’ to pass through its ports.

The surcharge scale compares with the $800 per container levy announced by CMA CGM and MSC for shipments out of Pakistan.

Maersk, in a separate trade advisory, noted that port activity in the region, which had seen some disruption due to the military face-off, were now back to near normal operation. That concern in large part surrounded repeated operational suspensions at Mundra port in India, because of the then high security threat.

The carrier had already cut back on its direct coverage of Pakistan trade by removing a call at Karachi on its MECL service connecting to North America, and replacing it with Mundra as part of global network adjustments in tandem with the Gemini Cooperation launch in February.

Maersk, through Gemini and independently, is increasingly concentrating West Asia operations at Salalah port in Oman.

With the India-Pakistan trade disruption, Maersk’s Gemini, partner Hapag-Lloyd, has also begun using Salalah for Pakistan transhipment.

More carriers have reorganised their Indian subcontinent operations in anticipation of “prolonged supply chain pressures”, as both governments are unlikely to budge on their trade embargoes and other diplomatic positions, despite talks taking place at military level, sources believe.

ONE has now halted direct Karachi calls on its standalone WIN service between India and North America, but it will instead use Sri Lanka’s Colombo port for connecting Pakistan exports, and Singapore port for transhipment of Pakistan imports. Its reworked TIG and TIP services, covering Asian trades, will essentially handle Pakistan cargo relays.

Pakistan trade, hit by Indian port access restrictions, now faces a wave of emergency surcharges from container lines.

The latest moves come from MSC — a hefty $800 per container fee for all Pakistan exports on major westbound routes, which include Europe, the US and Africa markets.

The carrier has also announced an extra $300 per container charge for intra-regional trades, including the Middle East and Indian subcontinent.

The levies are set to begin on 19 May for all trades except to the US, which will start on 11 June, due to FMC filing requirements.

“In order to maintain the continuity, safety and reliability of its services in Pakistan due to the ongoing geopolitical challenges, MSC announces the implementation of an emergency operation surcharge applicable to all shipments (exports and imports) from Pakistan,” the carrier said.

Several carriers have already announced or implemented similar charges on Pakistan bookings following the diplomatic/trade ‘tit for tat’ cutoff with India.

However, the port embargo imposed by both sides has opened a lucrative opportunity for feeder operators, as mainliners are forced to reroute Pakistan cargo to hub ports such as Sri Lanka’s Colombo and Salalah and Jebel Ali in the Middle East.

Hapag-Lloyd has announced the launch of a second, dedicated feeder capacity option for Pakistan transhipment cargo, as industry sources do not expect the regional trade deadlock to settle any time soon.

The new Sophia Express will run on a rotation of Salalah-Port Qasim-Karachi-Salalah, and complements Hapag-Lloyd’s Pakistan Shuttle service (PKS) between Hutchison Port Holdings’ South Asia Pakistan Terminal (SAPT) in Karachi and Salalah.

“In response to the current trade and operational restrictions, we are adjusting our service network to ensure seamless connectivity for cargo flows to/from Pakistan,” the carrier said. “This solution will enable smooth movement of cargo across our global network, with seamless connections through Salalah – a key hub in our Gemini Cooperation.”

The move follows the German carrier’s announcement of a contingency surcharge of $500 per container for Pakistan cargo moving to Europe from mid-May.

Hapag-Lloyd had regular weekly calls at ports in Pakistan on its TPI service connecting the Indian subcontinent to the US east coast, as well as on a regional string between India/Pakistan and the Gulf, called the IG1, according to available data.

Employment in the US logistics sector changed course to cuts last month, and predictions envisage massive layoffs soon.

Meanwhile, professionals at the top are in high demand, as companies look for leaders with expanded skill sets to navigate the ongoing volatility.

UPS made headlines last month with its plans to cut 40,000 jobs – about 4% of its workforce. This prompted immediate pledges of resistance from the Teamsters union and signalled a drastic deterioration in labour relations at the integrator.

But UPS is no outlier; other logistics firms have announced job cuts – albeit of a lesser magnitude, but that could well change, according to predictions from Apollo Global Management, which anticipates a recession that will ravage employment in transport and retail.

The slump in imports triggered by the Trump administration’s tariff moves, especially on imports from China, is going to cause a sharp slowdown in domestic freight activity, Apollo predicted, noting that imports make up around 20% of US trucking volumes. Its analysts expect the slowdown to unfold by mid-May, followed by hefty layoffs.

By one estimate, the domestic freight market could contract by as much as 5%, potentially causing similar bloodletting in employment that could translate into more than 400,000 jobs disappearing.

Apollo warned that the economy could fall into ‘stagflation’, a protracted period of economic woe. And more jobs could disappear if companies buckle under. S&P Global Ratings recently noted that risk of corporate defaults have increased in the wake of the tariff offensive.

“The longer tariff uncertainty lasts – or if it worsens – the greater the likelihood that speculative-grade corporate default rates increase. Our pessimistic cases are 6% for the US and 6.25% for Europe, respectively,” the ratings agency warned.

Hiring was still up in March (although recent numbers have adjusted earlier reports downward). However, those gains were largely related to a surge in front-loading activity, momentum which slowed sharply in April. After 7,000 jobs had been added in transport in March, last month saw an increase of 1,400 jobs – less than a tenth of a percent, according to Bureau of Labor statistics. Employment in trucking was down 3.2% from a year earlier. The rail industry added 100 jobs in April.

Meanwhile, the view from the top is strikingly different. At executive level, the logistics industry shows no signs of impact from the economic headwinds. The 2025 Logistics Salary Survey. produced by Peerless Research for Logistics Management. shows a picture of executives satisfied with their situation, notwithstanding an increase in their responsibilities.

The authors of the study, which was based on input from over 200 qualified respondents, wrote that demand for qualified professionals was outpacing supply as companies try to engineer more resilient and agile supply chains. This keeps leaders in the position of high esteem attained in the volatility since the pandemic. Plus, it ensures fairly attractive remuneration.

If anything, their importance has grown as their range of responsibilities has expanded. Two-thirds of the respondents (67%) reported an increase in the number of job functions they perform over the past two years. And this does not appear to have weighed on their job satisfaction, as 93% said they were satisfied with their careers.

At the top end of the pay scale, 24% of the respondents earned more than $150,000 a year, whereas 8% received less than $50,000. People at VP or general manager rank topped the scale, with an average salary of $208,300.

After years of increases, the average salary actually slipped, from $128,300 last year to $120,600, but this can be attributed to demographics, as top earners – typically aged between 55 and 64 – retired. Only 10% of the respondents reported a decrease in their pay in the past 12 months.

And the wage gap between male and female employees appears to be narrowing. The average annual salary for men sank from $145,200 in 2024 to $133,400, while for female managers it climbed from $101,700 last year to $120,500.

However, women may earn significantly less than their male counterparts the longer they stay in the industry, commented Abe Eshkenazi, CEO of the Association for Supply Chain Management.

But for employees down the hierarchy facing the possible loss of their jobs, the improvements for senior executives are cold comfort.