Trade experts counsel measured response to China tariffs
Warning there may be more pain ahead, speakers at an international trade conference offered do's and don'ts for mitigating the impact of higher tariffs on Chinese goods.
Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
The Trump Administration's decision to impose tariffs of 10 percent and 25 percent on some $250 billion worth of products imported from China has forced many U.S. importers to either raise their prices or absorb the added cost. But the tariffs' impact goes far beyond product costs and shrinking margins, according to speakers at the Coalition of New England Companies for Trade (CONECT) 23rd Annual Northeast Trade & Transportation Conference, held earlier this month in Newport, R.I. Shippers' attempts to avoid the tariffs proved disruptive across the supply chain, they said, and there could be more pain on the horizon: Although the imposition of 25 percent tariffs on $267 billion worth of Chinese goods is temporarily on hold, some observers worry that the new duties may become permanent.
The punitive tariffs are a serious threat for importers that source almost exclusively in China, explained Nate Herman, senior vice president, supply chain, for the American Apparel and Footwear Association, which represents manufacturers, retailers, and suppliers of apparel, footwear, and textiles. He cited the example of travel goods, such as luggage, backpacks, and travel accessories, which are sourced almost entirely from China. Previously, backpacks from China carried a duty rate of 17.6 percent on the product's value, Herman said. An additional 10 percent tariff brought that up to 27.6 percent. If raised by another 25 percent, the duty rate would reach 42.6 percent—nearly half the product's value.
When the Trump Administration in late September announced plans to raise the punitive tariffs on many Chinese goods from 10 percent to 25 percent, effective January 1, 2019, some importers went into overdrive, pushing their suppliers to ship as much merchandise as possible into the U.S. before the end of 2018. Ocean carriers put on extra sailings, and major seaports across the country saw record-high levels of imports in November, December, and into January. The Port of Long Beach, for example, experienced a "huge influx of import containers that strained our capacity," said Ken Uriu, the port's business development manager-import cargo. This unexpected wave of "beat the tariffs" cargo taxed not only seaports' operations but also those of ocean carriers, railroads, and drayage truckers. Delays, bottlenecks, and equipment shortages were widespread throughout the transportation system. Uriu said ports and terminal operators "didn't realize all of the downstream effects" the tariffs would have on their operations.
One importer that strove to bring in as much merchandise as possible before January was Bob's Discount Furniture, based in Manchester, Conn. The company shifted some 200 containers' worth of orders that had been planned for Q1 2019 delivery to Q4 2018. With so many other importers adopting a similar strategy, problems quickly developed. Some ocean carriers with which the retailer had contracts were able to accommodate added volume, said Amy Elmore, the company's director, international logistics. However, she said the additional containers often could not move at the contract rates, so freight costs were higher than usual. Some carriers were not able to take extra bookings, and Elmore said she and her team had to turn to ocean consolidators for additional capacity. Still, demand was so high that containers were regularly held at the origin port and rolled over to a later sailing.
"We put all this extra supply into the pipeline and then had to deal with the consequences," she said.
Although Elmore said some ocean carriers "did a remarkable job," she added that "there was not a lot of dialogue about how this all would play out at the destination. ... people kept saying 'yes' but didn't think through the consequences for the ports." The fallout included containers that arrived as much as two months later than expected, chassis shortages, and delays of two to four weeks in loading containers onto intermodal rail. All the while, accurate information about shipment status and realistic arrival times was hard to come by.
Based on her experience, Elmore shared strategies for managing through transportation disruption:
Track "aging" shipments and expected milestones, and send carriers a daily list of what's overdue. "This forced the carriers to follow up with the terminals on our behalf," Elmore said.
Work with your company's merchandising group to review and, if necessary, revise safety-stock policies, lead-time requirements, and policies on risk and service levels.
Develop alternate routings to your distribution centers and options for in-transit cargo diversions. Adjust your booking allocations to leverage "non-stressed" ports.
Demand accurate, up-to-date information from carriers. Some carriers did not change their estimated arrival dates for intermodal containers even though the gateway ports had weeks-long backlogs, Elmore said. "If I'd known that a container with a 'not available' status in January would not arrive on the East Coast until the end of March, I would not have been happy, but at least I could have made better decisions," she said.
Be prepared for more of the same
As for the tariffs themselves, there are several ways importers could potentially mitigate their impact, according to Herman. One is to shift sourcing to another country. That strategy—which has been underway for some time due to rising production and labor costs in China—has some drawbacks. For one thing, he said, "no single country has the capacity to replace China" as a supplier of apparel. For example, although approximately 13 percent of U.S. apparel imports now originate in Vietnam, there are not enough factories or transportation infrastructure to handle a huge increase in demand. Importers could also reduce the cost of goods sourced in other countries by taking greater advantage of free trade agreements, and by urging lawmakers to update laws to make apparel and footwear eligible for benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which reduces duties on certain goods from developing countries.
Erin Ennis, senior vice president of the U.S.-China Business Council, advised importers to be prepared to deal with continued uncertainty. It is "fully unclear" how far apart China and the U.S. are in the current round of trade negotiations, and "there is absolutely no clarity" on what will happen if there is no agreement, she said. It's uncertain what enforcement mechanisms would be adopted if an agreement is reached, she added. Ennis said she and other China watchers are concerned that President Trump will leave the tariffs in place if China does not fully accede to all of the administration's demands as laid out in a negotiating document that she said has been described to her as "detailed but not realistic." It is possible, she cautioned, that the punitive tariffs "may continue in perpetuity."
Transportation leaders, policymakers, administrators, and researchers from government, industry, and academia will gather January 5-9, 2025, in Washington, D.C., for the 104th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board (TRB), sponsored by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The meeting’s program covers all modes of transportation and features hundreds of sessions and workshops on various transportation-related topics. The theme for this year’s conference is how innovations in technology, business, and processes help support transportation’s role in a thriving society, according to TRB.
Speakers at this year’s event include TRB executives as well as federal, state, and international government leaders and policymakers. Discussions on zero-emissions freight, supply chain shifts, automated vehicles and roadway digital infrastructure, National Transportation Safety Board investigations, and other topics will take place throughout the week, according to TRB. Held every January in Washington, D.C., the TRB Annual Meeting attracts more than 13,000 attendees from throughout the United States and around the world.
It’s probably safe to say that no one chooses a career in logistics for the glory. But even those accustomed to toiling in obscurity appreciate a little recognition now and then—particularly when it comes from the people they love best: their kids.
That familial love was on full display at the 2024 International Foodservice Distributor Association’s (IFDA) National Championship, which brings together foodservice distribution professionals to demonstrate their expertise in driving, warehouse operations, safety, and operational efficiency. For the eighth year, the event included a Kids Essay Contest, where children of participants were encouraged to share why they are proud of their parents or guardians and the work they do.
Prizes were handed out in three categories: 3rd–5th grade, 6th–8th grade, and 9th–12th grade. This year’s winners included Elijah Oliver (4th grade, whose parent Justin Oliver drives for Cheney Brothers) and Andrew Aylas (8th grade, whose parent Steve Aylas drives for Performance Food Group).
Top honors in the high-school category went to McKenzie Harden (12th grade, whose parent Marvin Harden drives for Performance Food Group), who wrote: “My dad has not only taught me life skills of not only, ‘what the boys can do,’ but life skills of morals, compassion, respect, and, last but not least, ‘wearing your heart on your sleeve.’”
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.