Connect with us

Non classé

The 2025 Trade War Impact on Small Businesses: Rising Costs and an Uncertain Future

Published

on

The 2025 Trade War Impact on Small Businesses: Rising Costs and an Uncertain Future

September 10, 2025

Blog

SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS: Nearly 3/4 of small importers report significant cost increases from tariffs, with half reducing shipments entirely. 44% face cost spikes of 20%+ while 52% expect weaker holiday sales, according to a new Freightos/Clearit survey of 390+ North American businesses.

This snapshot reveals just the surface of how deeply the ongoing trade tensions are affecting small and medium-sized businesses. As tariff policies become clearer, the outlook grows increasingly concerning for these companies. Below, we explore the comprehensive findings from our latest survey and what they mean for businesses navigating the uncertain trade landscape in 2025.

Businesses Under Pressure: The Widening Effects of Trade Disruption

A recent Freightos/Clearit survey of 390+ North American importers paints a concerning picture of the trade war’s ongoing impact on businesses. Companies are feeling the squeeze, with significant disruptions to their operations so far this year. And now that tariff policies are becoming clearer, the outlook on costs and sales is increasingly worrying, as most respondents believe the worst may be yet to come.

72% of businesses reported moderate to significant increases in landed costs and nearly 50% have reduced shipping activity due to tariffs already in place; over half expect weaker sales as a result. Importers say the 90-day extension of 30% US tariffs on China will not lead to a significant freight rebound this year for several reasons, including earlier frontloading and the status quo already pricing some shippers out.

The findings suggest broader economic consequences, including:

Diminished international trade relationships

Decreased consumer strength

Potentially existential threats for some businesses, especially SMBs

One importer summed it up as follows: “The tariffs combined with the sinking value of the dollar have created a 30% increase in costs just in a few months. Devastating to our bottom line.”

Note that this survey is the third in a series of surveys conducted across small importers. For previous versions, please see here and here.

Tariff Business Impact: Costs Rising, Shipments Falling

This year has been punctuated by tariff announcements including the “Liberation Day” 10 % universal tariff on April 5, country-specific reciprocal tariffs that were announced on April 2 and later paused twice, first until July 8, then again until August 7, when they finally went live. Many of these announcements were provided with what businesses felt were insufficient warning, leading to uncertainty.

Clarity…and Concern

Now, as recent trade agreements and additional sectoral tariffs are clearer, most (56%) businesses report more concern about negative impacts than they had due to earlier tariff changes.

This worry for the future is particularly striking when taking into account how dramatically their businesses have already been impacted:

Widespread disruption: 84% said frequent tariff changes have been disruptive or very disruptive to business.

Substantial cost increases: 72% reported that tariffs have already increased their costs by at least 5%. A shocking 44% say costs have climbed by 20% or more.

Reduced shipping: This has already led to reduced import volumes from small businesses; 50% of businesses have reduced shipment volumes due to higher costs.

Growing concern: 57% are more concerned about tariffs negatively impacting their business than they were earlier in the year. For comparison, when we asked this question in May, only 31% were more concerned than they were earlier in the year.

Consumer weakness: Concern about the downfunnel impact of weaker demand is growing. Slightly more than half (52%) expected weaker back-to-school and holiday sales than last year, compared to only 35% who had expected lower Memorial Day sales due to tariffs when asked back in May.

International standing: Whether the tariffs are removed or not, there could be long-lasting consequences. Some 60% think the trade war has weakened the standing of US businesses as trading partners.

How am I supposed to stay in business if I have $400 tariffs and fees on a $700 order that the client won’t pay?”

– Small importer reporting 20%+ cost increases

Freight Impact: Scrambling for Strategy

Rapid changes are also sending shippers scrambling for strategies to help mitigate the trade war’s impact, taking action such as accelerating orders, changing production centers, or even cancelling. Beyond the 50% who have reduced shipment volumes due to higher costs, about 15% each have:

Pulled holiday orders forward

Paused or delayed holiday orders

Canceled manufacturing mid-order

Moved some sourcing to US

We paused for a period of time when [tariffs were] initially announced. Now we feel there is some stability with the pauses being extended, but before that the uncertainty was so high that we decided to wait to see what would happen.

– Furniture importer

Adapting to these changes has not been one-size-fits-all – businesses are reaching for anything that works to manage the unpredictability.

90-Day China Tariff Extension: Limited Relief

In May and June, the initial postponement of China tariffs led to a brief spike in shipments, as importers accelerated their shipments to beat the tariffs. This front-loading, however, was quite short-lived, as demonstrated in the chart below:

The recent postponement did not have a similar effect.

While some importers said the recent extension of the 30% US tariff on Chinese imports is allowing them to restart shipments, overall, the extension is not triggering a second peak season wave. Instead, it’s having diverse effects on different businesses:

Many are unaffected due to prior frontloading or because sectoral tariffs are a bigger challenge

Others expected the 30% to remain in place and have continued shipping as usual

Some are already priced out by 30% baseline tariffs

As one importer said: “We had to buy more than usual while we could get product at a lower price. 2025 costs will be higher than usual with a greater risk of deadstock”

Another described uncertainty that prompted them to restructure their entire supply chain: “Most if not all my importing has moved out of China. I’m too worried tariffs could switch from one day to the next even though there is a 90-day extension.”

Analysis and Going Forward

The survey results paint a picture of businesses caught in an economic crossfire, with potential ripple effects that could reshape supply chains and trade relationships for years to come.

Long Term Structural Changes Ahead

“The survey shows that the trade war has already negatively impacted many US importers, and that expectations of new or expanded tariffs and the duties applied under the trade deals of the last few weeks has shippers bracing for possibly more severe challenges to business moving forward,” says Judah Levine, Freightos Head of Research. The data suggests we’re witnessing not just temporary disruption but potentially long-term structural changes to international sourcing and pricing strategies.

Impossible To Forecast or Plan

Adam Lewis, President of Clearit Customs points to the particularly hard hit SMBs have taken: “With still so much uncertainty in the trade environment, this survey makes one thing clear: Unfortunately, small and medium sized businesses are bearing the brunt of the trade war. Unlike larger corporations, they don’t have the same insulation or sophistication to absorb frequent tariff changes, currency swings, and rising costs. The unknowns have been the most damaging, making it nearly impossible to forecast, budget, or protect margins.”

Looking ahead, the trade landscape could continue to stabilize in coming months with more agreements reaching finalization. However, the combination of disrupted supply chains, weakened consumer sentiment, and eroded international relationships creates a challenging environment that will likely require businesses to maintain flexibility in sourcing, pricing, and inventory management for the foreseeable future.

Devorah Wolf

Content Marketing Lead

When freight gets complicated, Devorah Wolf, Freightos’ digital freight aficionado, swoops in to clarify the nitty-gritty of global trade with blogs, guides, videos, and newsletters for every shipper – from beginner to expert. She’s so excited about shipping that most of her clothing is imported. But in freight’s defense, that’s basically true about everyone.

Put the Data in Data-Backed Decision Making

Freightos Terminal helps tens of thousands of freight pros stay informed across all their ports and lanes

The post The 2025 Trade War Impact on Small Businesses: Rising Costs and an Uncertain Future appeared first on Freightos.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Federal Industrial Partnerships and Supply Chain Realignment Under the Trump Administration: Pharmaceuticals, Semiconductors, Critical Minerals, and Energy

Published

on

By

Federal Industrial Partnerships And Supply Chain Realignment Under The Trump Administration: Pharmaceuticals, Semiconductors, Critical Minerals, And Energy

In the months leading up to the 2026 midterm elections, the Trump administration has launched a broad initiative to negotiate agreements with companies across as many as thirty industries. According to reporting from Reuters and other outlets, these deals involve a range of mechanisms, including tariff relief, equity stakes, revenue guarantees, and regulatory adjustments.

The purpose of the initiative, according to administration officials, is to strengthen U.S. national and economic security by encouraging companies to expand production domestically, reduce reliance on China, and ensure the availability of critical products.

For logistics and supply chain leaders, this represents a significant change in the relationship between government and industry. Federal agencies are no longer simply regulators or supporters of infrastructure. They are becoming active participants in corporate strategy, investment, and supply chain design.

Structure of the Deals

The administration’s approach is not uniform. Each agreement varies depending on the sector and company involved. Examples include:

Pharmaceuticals: Eli Lilly was asked to expand insulin production, Pfizer was pressed to increase output of its cancer and cholesterol drugs, and AstraZeneca was encouraged to establish a new U.S. headquarters. In exchange, companies have been offered tariff relief or regulatory flexibility.
Semiconductors: A portion of grants provided under the CHIPS Act has been converted into equity stakes, including a reported 10 percent stake in Intel.
Critical Minerals: The Department of Defense took a 15 percent stake in MP Materials, secured a floor price for future government purchases, and facilitated a $500 million supply agreement between MP Materials and Apple for rare earth magnets.
Energy: The Department of Energy has asked companies such as Lithium Americas for equity stakes in exchange for federal loans supporting domestic mining and battery production.

The unifying theme is the use of federal leverage, such as tariffs, financing programs, or regulatory approvals, to secure commitments from private companies that align with stated national security objectives.

Agencies as Dealmakers

What distinguishes this initiative is the scale of inter-agency involvement. The White House has described the approach as “whole of government.”

The Department of Health and Human Services is leading negotiations in pharmaceuticals.
The Department of Commerce, under Secretary Howard Lutnick, has overseen transactions in steel, semiconductors, and industrial manufacturing.
The Department of Energy is linking financing programs to equity arrangements in energy and mining.
The Pentagon has led negotiations with defense contractors and suppliers of critical minerals.

Senior officials, including White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and supply chain coordinator David Copley, are directly involved in negotiations. The presence of Wall Street dealmakers, such as Michael Grimes (formerly of Morgan Stanley) and David Shapiro (formerly of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz), illustrates the administration’s transactional orientation.

Financing Mechanisms

The administration is using multiple sources of capital to finance these arrangements:

International Development Finance Corporation (DFC): Originally designed to support development projects abroad, the DFC has proposed expanding its budget authority from $60 billion to $250 billion. If approved by Congress, it would fund projects in infrastructure, energy, and critical supply chains within the U.S.
Investment Accelerator (Commerce Department): Seeded by $550 billion pledged by Japan as part of a bilateral trade agreement, this entity will direct capital into U.S. strategic sectors, serving as a replacement for an earlier proposal to establish a sovereign wealth fund.
Existing Programs: Agencies are repurposing funds from programs such as the CHIPS Act and Department of Energy loan guarantees, often converting grants into equity holdings.

Together, these mechanisms represent one of the largest coordinated federal interventions in U.S. industrial and supply chain development in recent decades.

Implications for Supply Chains

The administration’s policies carry several direct consequences for logistics and supply chain management.

1. Reshoring of Manufacturing

Many of the deals include explicit requirements for expanded U.S. production. This will increase demand for domestic transportation, warehousing, and distribution capacity. It also implies higher utilization of U.S. ports and intermodal corridors, as inputs shift from finished imports to raw materials and intermediate goods requiring processing inside the United States.

2. Critical Minerals and Energy Security

The focus on rare earths, lithium, and other inputs for advanced manufacturing indicates a restructuring of upstream supply chains. Logistics providers should expect increased flows from domestic mining regions, such as Nevada’s Thacker Pass lithium project, to processing and manufacturing centers. This represents a shift away from reliance on Asian supply hubs, particularly China.

3. Government as Stakeholder

Equity stakes and long-term purchase agreements create a different operating environment. Logistics providers serving these industries may find demand more stable due to government-backed contracts. However, these arrangements may also impose compliance requirements and reduce flexibility in adjusting supply networks.

4. Public-Private Coordination

Federal involvement in freight and industrial infrastructure financing could accelerate long-delayed projects. Rail expansion, port upgrades, and domestic warehouse capacity may benefit from this investment. Companies positioned to partner on these projects may see long-term opportunities.

Risks and Concerns

Several risks accompany this shift:

Policy Reversal: Executives have expressed concern that a future administration could unwind or renegotiate these deals. Supply chains built around government-backed agreements may face uncertainty if political priorities shift.
Equity Demands: Some companies are wary of ceding ownership stakes to the federal government. This creates hesitation in sectors where ownership control and investor confidence are sensitive.
Market Distortions: Critics argue that selecting which companies receive government support could disadvantage firms excluded from the arrangements, altering competitive dynamics within industries.
Implementation Capacity: The scale of proposed financing, particularly the expansion of the DFC, requires congressional approval and capable management. Delays or political opposition could slow execution.

Policy-to-Supply-Chain Impact Table

Policy Mechanism
Industry Example
Government Action
Supply Chain Impact

Tariff Relief
Pharmaceuticals (Pfizer, Eli Lilly)
Tariff exemptions in exchange for expanded U.S. production
Increases demand for domestic warehousing, distribution, and cold-chain logistics for added output

Equity Stakes
Intel (10% stake), MP Materials (15% stake)
Federal ownership through converted grants or Defense Production Act
Creates long-term stability in supply flows, but may add compliance requirements for logistics providers

Purchase Guarantees
MP Materials with Apple
Pentagon set floor prices, Apple committed to $500M supply contract
Locks in demand for rare earth shipments, increasing domestic transport flows from mining to manufacturing

Federal Loans Linked to Equity
Lithium Americas (DOE loan, 5–10% stake requested)
Loan support tied to partial government ownership
Supports new mining and battery projects, creating future logistics demand for raw materials and finished batteries

Investment Accelerator Funding
Commerce Department
$550B in financing, partly funded by Japan, allocated to U.S. manufacturing and freight infrastructure
Potential expansion of ports, intermodal rail, and distribution centers, reducing bottlenecks in supply chains

Expanded DFC Financing
Multiple critical industries
Proposed budget growth from $60B to $250B for U.S. supply chains and infrastructure
Large-scale capital for freight corridors, warehouses, and strategic materials, enabling reshoring of production

Case Examples

MP Materials

The rare earth mining company received federal backing through a 15 percent Pentagon stake, floor pricing commitments, and a supply agreement with Apple. This illustrates the administration’s template: equity participation, purchase guarantees, and private-sector co-investment.

Intel

The conversion of CHIPS Act funding into a 10 percent federal equity stake in Intel highlights the new approach to semiconductor supply chain security. By tying financial support to ownership, the government ensures both accountability and a direct role in strategic sectors.

Lithium Americas

A Department of Energy loan of $2.26 billion, paired with negotiations for a 5 to 10 percent federal equity stake, demonstrates how energy supply chains, particularly those tied to electric vehicles and batteries, are being secured through mixed financing and ownership arrangements.

Long-Term Outlook

The administration’s strategy marks a departure from the traditional U.S. model of private-sector–led industrial development. Instead, it resembles coordinated industrial policies pursued in other economies, though with American characteristics.

For supply chain professionals, this means that:

Government will play a larger role in shaping sourcing, production, and distribution decisions.
Access to federal financing and contracts will become a key factor in strategic planning.
Logistics infrastructure may receive substantial investment, creating new opportunities for providers.
Companies must assess political as well as market risks when designing long-term supply chains.

The Trump administration’s pre-midterm industrial deals reflect a significant realignment of government and industry roles in the United States. By leveraging tariffs, financing programs, and direct equity stakes, the federal government is reshaping supply chains across pharmaceuticals, energy, critical minerals, and freight.

The initiative is intended to secure domestic production, reduce reliance on China, and ensure access to strategic inputs. For logistics leaders, the result will be increased reshoring activity, new demand for domestic infrastructure, and closer integration of supply chains with federal priorities.

At the same time, risks remain. The durability of these arrangements depends on political continuity, effective implementation, and the willingness of companies to partner with government under new terms.

In this evolving environment, logistics and supply chain professionals will need to monitor policy developments as closely as they do market trends. Supply chains are no longer shaped solely by efficiency and cost considerations. They are now integral to the nation’s industrial strategy.

The post Federal Industrial Partnerships and Supply Chain Realignment Under the Trump Administration: Pharmaceuticals, Semiconductors, Critical Minerals, and Energy appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Supply Chain and Logistics News Sept 29 – Oct 2nd 2025

Published

on

By

Supply Chain And Logistics News Sept 29 – Oct 2nd 2025

This week in supply chain news, major companies are demonstrating a mix of strategic adaptations and responses to global pressures. ExxonMobil and Kinaxis are collaborating to develop a next-generation supply chain management solution specifically for the complex oil and gas industry, aiming to increase resilience and provide comprehensive visibility. In a push for network efficiency, FedEx has launched a new direct cargo flight between Dublin, Ireland, and Indianapolis, Indiana, bypassing congested coastal hubs to reduce transit times. The pharmaceutical sector is also focused on resilience, with Eli Lilly and Amgen announcing significant U.S. manufacturing investments to bring critical drug production back to North America. Conversely, General Mills is restructuring its supply chain by closing three manufacturing plants in Missouri as a cost-saving measure in response to changing consumer spending habits. Finally, the U.S. government is imposing new tariffs on imported wood products and furniture, effective October 14, 2025, in a move to address what it identifies as a threat to the domestic industry and supply chain security.

The News of the Week:

ExxonMobil and Kinaxis are Developing a Next-Generation Supply Chain Management Solution for Oil and Gas

The oil and gas industry supply chain is one of the most complex in the world. It involves myriad complex production assets both onshore and offshore, transporting highly volatile products around the globe through pipelines, tank farms, ports, ships, rail, and truck. The end product could be gasoline, petrochemicals, natural gas, hydrogen, or any of hundreds of products from asphalt to motor oil. Disruptions to the oil and gas supply chain can have serious consequences for end users. The industry needs more comprehensive supply chain solutions that increase resilience, provide complete visibility across all aspects of the supply chain, and enable swift responses to business challenges and opportunities. Kinaxis and Exxon are collaborating to digitalize various sectors of Exxon’s business. They aim to leverage Kinaxis’s Maestro software to enhance planning and decision-making processes. Through this collaboration, the two companies aim to share solutions tailored to the oil and gas industry, which currently lacks supply chain management solutions that cater to their specific needs.

FedEx Expands Global Air Network with New Dublin- Indianapolis Route

In an effort to shorten transit times and strengthen its international network, FedEx has launched a new direct cargo flight between Dublin, Ireland, and Indianapolis, Indiana. The new four-day-a-week service bypasses traditional, more congested coastal gateways, which is expected to reduce shipping times by a full day for goods moving between Ireland and the U.S. Midwest. This strategic expansion is a response to the growing trade between the two regions and demonstrates how major carriers are adapting their networks to create more direct and efficient routes to meet evolving customer demands.

Eli Lily and Amgen Announce Massive U.S. Manufacturing Investments

In a major push for domestic drug production, pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Amgen have announced huge investments in new U.S. manufacturing facilities. Eli Lilly is planning a new $6.5 billion factory in Houston, while Amgen is expanding its Puerto Rico plant with a $650 million investment. These moves are a direct response to the global supply chain vulnerabilities exposed in recent years and represent a significant effort to boost the resilience of the U.S. pharmaceutical supply chain. The investments aim to bring critical drug production back to North America, creating jobs and reducing reliance on overseas manufacturing.

General Mills is Closing Three Manufacturing Plants in Missouri

General Mills is closing three manufacturing plants in Missouri—a pizza crust facility in St. Charles and two pet food locations in Joplin—as part of a multiyear supply chain restructuring effort. The company expects to incur $82 million in restructuring charges, including asset write-offs and severance costs. This action is part of a broader trend among food and beverage companies to implement cost-saving measures in response to consumer spending pullbacks. The closures follow previous organizational actions by General Mills, such as job cuts and the closure of its innovation unit, and are intended to improve the company’s competitiveness.

US to Begin Furniture, Wood Import Tariffs on Oct. 14

New tariffs on imported wood products, including furniture, will take effect on October 14, 2025, following a Section 232 national security investigation. The initial duties will be 10% on softwood lumber and 25% on upholstered furniture, kitchen cabinets, and vanities. On January 1, the tariff rates are scheduled to increase to 30% for upholstered furniture and 50% for kitchen cabinets and vanities. The executive order provides for lower tariff caps for imports from specific trading partners, such as the U.K., Japan, and the European Union. These new tariffs are intended to address what the administration has identified as a threat to domestic industry and supply chain security.

Song of the week:

The post Supply Chain and Logistics News Sept 29 – Oct 2nd 2025 appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Call for Speakers: Ready to Drive Real Change in Intelligent Operations and Resilient Supply Chains – ARC Industry Forum 2025

Published

on

By

Call For Speakers: Ready To Drive Real Change In Intelligent Operations And Resilient Supply Chains – Arc Industry Forum 2025

Call for Speakers – ARC Industry Forum 2025

The ARC Industry Forum is the premier event where operations, supply chain, and technology leaders gather to shape the future of intelligent and resilient enterprises. In 2025, supply chains face unprecedented disruption, but also unmatched opportunity. We are seeking speakers—executives, practitioners, and innovators—who can share strategies, frameworks, and real-world experiences to inspire and guide their peers.

Sample Session Themes

To help illustrate the types of topics we feature, here are a few recent examples:

The New Frontier of Operations and Supply Chain: AI, Resilience, and Intelligence – Exploring how AI, analytics, automation, and connected intelligence converge to deliver agility and resilience.
Building Resilient Supply Chains in the Age of Shifting Geopolitics – Addressing the regulatory, tariff, and policy challenges facing global supply networks.
Unlocking the Power of Knowledge Transfer in Enterprise Systems – Showcasing best practices to fully leverage enterprise and knowledge management systems.

These examples are only a sample of the many tracks available. Additional sessions will cover digital transformation, sustainability, cybersecurity, workforce strategies, and other timely topics.

Submission Guidelines

We invite proposals that highlight real-world case studies, practical lessons, and strategic frameworks. Presentations should be vendor-neutral, educational, and tailored for an audience of senior executives and practitioners.

If you are interested in speaking, please submit:

A proposed session title and abstract (150–250 words)
Key takeaways for attendees
Speaker bio and organizational role

To submit a proposal, or simply for more information, contact us now

The post Call for Speakers: Ready to Drive Real Change in Intelligent Operations and Resilient Supply Chains – ARC Industry Forum 2025 appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending