Non classé

Foreign Trade Zones in Today’s Trade Policy Environment

Published

3 semaines ago

11 décembre 2025

Foreign Trade Zones In Today’s Trade Policy Environment

In 1934, when Congress passed the Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) Act and established the FTZ program, the U.S. economy faced a policy environment similar to today’s: high (and prevalent) tariffs and heightened concern for protecting domestic industries and encouraging domestic investment. Then, as now, policymakers sought mechanisms to help U.S.-based companies stay competitive in the face of escalating costs by offsetting the burden of high tariffs.

For decades, FTZs have been used actively and on trend with overall U.S. import and export statistics, providing importers, exporters, and manufacturers with a toolkit to manage customs duties, streamline operations and bolster cash flow. Today, however, recent tariff actions on steel and aluminum that for most countries doubled to 50% under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as well as sweeping International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) reciprocal tariffs imposed on nearly all commodities from all countries, have upended global trade and shifted the FTZ landscape significantly.

As trade tensions push import duties to record highs, companies big and small are looking for ways to insulate themselves against tariff volatility and stabilize cash flow against economic uncertainty. While FTZs are resonating as a strategy to mitigate or avoid absorbing higher tariffs into operating costs, the program is not a silver bullet. Instead, FTZ participation in 2025 demands a more nuanced cost-benefit analysis that weighs the traditional advantages of FTZs compared to the current benefits against changing trade policy.

Traditional FTZ Benefits

Licensed by the U.S. FTZ Board, FTZs are secure, designated sites traditionally located within 60 miles or a 90-minute drive from a U.S. port of entry (although FTZ sites now are often located at further points as well), in which domestic and foreign merchandise (i.e., inventory) receives the same treatment by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as if it were outside the commerce of the United States. FTZs enable companies to defer, reduce or eliminate duties, depending on where goods end up (e.g., distributed domestically or exported to avoid applicable duties and taxes).

Historically, one of the most important FTZ benefits was inverted tariff relief for manufacturers. Through the Boggs Amendment of 1950 and regulatory clarifications in the 1980s, U.S. manufacturers could import higher-duty inputs, process them domestically, and release finished products into the commerce of the U.S. at lower duty rates of the finished products. This helped manufacturers reduce overall tariff costs, enhance profitability and get on more even footing with offshore manufacturers.

Put another way, it gave U.S.-based businesses federal approval to rationalize what historically was “irrational tariff treatment” in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S. (HTSUS). Irrational tariff treatment is when imported parts and materials are assessed at higher duty rates than the finished goods they are incorporated into. Without the ability to invert duty rates, companies would be financially incentivized, from a customs duty treatment perspective, to import finished goods rather than produce them domestically.

Beyond inverted tariffs, FTZs offer additional benefits:

Export relief: Goods brought in and stored or manufactured in an FTZ can be exported in bond without incurring quota charges or U.S. duties, insulating businesses from the adverse effects of tariff hikes. Plus, merchandise exported from FTZs to international customers and subsequently returned can be admitted to an FTZ for storage, repair and export again without being subject to duties.

Cash-flow benefits: The timing of when duties are paid makes a significant difference to cash flow. By deferring the payment of duties until goods leave an FTZ, companies improve working capital. By bringing the duty cost closer to when goods are sold to the customer, companies can shorten the cash cycle and optimize cash flow. Depending on how fast a business turns its inventory, this can be a critical part of a company’s ability to maintain its U.S. operations.

Weekly customs entry and Merchandise Processing Fee (MPF) savings: MPF is paid per customs entry (.3464% against the value reported on the entry) but has a maximum amount today of $651.50 with routine incremental increases each year. However, FTZs permit qualified companies to consolidate an entire week’s worth of shipments out of the FTZ into a single weekly customs entry, thereby creating the opportunity to possibly save broker entry fees and significantly reduce annual MPF spend. Filing consolidated weekly entries is especially appealing for high-volume importers but comes with its own set of complexities in the current trade policy environment.

State and local tax savings: In states that assess ad valorem tax on inventory, such as Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Puerto Rico, inventory held in FTZs may be preempted from such taxes through the federal FTZ law. Likewise, some states have codified state-level tax benefits, such as Arizona’s reduction of up to 75% for real and personal property held in FTZs. These tax exemptions and reductions—above and beyond the traditional duty benefits of the program—create additional financial incentives and help further reduce operational costs for FTZ users.

A Changing Trade Landscape

For decades, these advantages attracted a diverse mix of manufacturers and distributors into the program. In 2018, however, key tariff developments began to disrupt the global trade landscape. In January 2018, the U.S. imposed safeguard tariffs on solar panels and washing machines from all sources (except Canada) under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974. In March 2018, Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum took effect, with temporary exemptions for Canada, Mexico, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, South Korea and the EU. By June, however, exemptions had expired for Canada, Mexico and the EU, and Section 232 tariffs were imposed.

In April 2018, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) released a list of 1,333 China-origin imports for proposed 25% Section 301 duties, as part of a broader and new trading strategy with the East Asian nation. Within days, China imposed retaliatory tariffs of its own on U.S. exports. By June, the USTR proposed a new list of products from China, worth $50 billion in trade, to be subject to Section 301 duties of 25%. These initial trade remedy actions in 2018 were just the beginning of what is now an almost eight-year-long, increasingly complicated but fundamental change in U.S. trade policy.

Interestingly, with the first six months of 2018 also came a pivotal shift in how FTZs function today: a change to mandating the election of Privileged Foreign (PF) status for imported merchandise at the time of admission to an FTZ, which locks in an item’s classification and duty rate on that date. For decades, imported raw materials, components and finished goods were largely admitted into FTZs in Non-privileged Foreign (NPF) status, which requires classification on the item’s condition as removed from the FTZ at the duty rate in effect on the date of entry. For FTZ manufacturers authorized by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NPF status elected for imported parts and components is what drove inverted tariff benefit (i.e., the ability to apply the finished good duty rate to the value of the parts/components consumed in the finished good). With 2018’s new tariff actions, the Administration through the U.S. Trade Representative and the U.S. Department of Commerce began requiring FTZ imports to be admitted in PF status. PF status “locks in” the normal, or Most Favored Nation (MFN), duties and any remedy tariff rates on goods at the time of their admission into an FTZ, which means the imported component’s duty and tariff rates apply even if the finished good made in the FTZ carries a lower duty rate.

What does this mean in practical terms? It means the inverted tariff benefit for FTZ manufacturers was essentially eliminated in April of this year when the PF status admission stipulation began applying to nearly all imported commodities from all countries of origin via IEEPA reciprocal tariffs. Now, existing FTZ manufacturers as well as manufacturers considering the program must recalculate the savings opportunities from FTZ usage. For some manufacturers, the program may continue to make sense or drive even more benefit, while for others the program may no longer make sense. Paradoxically, tariffs intended to protect U.S. jobs are simultaneously hampering some FTZ manufacturers from promoting domestic production, the original intent of the program. If the same finished product is made in another country, under IEEPA reciprocal tariffs, it still offers a lower overall tariff rate when imported than the imported parts and components used to make the finished product in the U.S. If the goal of current trade policy, however, is to reshore and nearshore manufacturing, don’t FTZ manufacturers still need the inverted tariff benefit to rationalize what is otherwise still an irrational HTSUS?

FTZ Advantages Today

What are the main advantages for FTZ users today then? For many importers, it’s cash flow: by delaying duty payments, companies can preserve capital. This benefit, however, depends heavily on inventory turnover. Large retailers cross-docking goods through distribution centers may realize little advantage as goods enter U.S. commerce within days, triggering prompt duty payments. By contrast, businesses holding inventory for weeks or months can extract more meaningful benefit from duty deferral, such as industrial distributors, seasonal retailers, or exporters awaiting foreign buyers.

In the absence of inverted tariffs, the importance of export relief has grown. Manufacturers that ship even a portion of their production abroad can typically eliminate duties altogether on exported goods. For many businesses that traditionally relied on inverted tariffs, this now represents one of the few clear savings opportunities. Additionally, some manufacturers that previously had little reason to consider FTZs are now compelled to join the program precisely to avoid duties on outbound shipments.

While tariff relief is the focus for many, ancillary benefits remain material. Although now more administratively complex, weekly entry/MPF savings continue to appeal to some while the compliance requirements may outweigh the fee savings for others. Inventory and real/personal property tax abatements are still available in states such as Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arizona and Puerto Rico, but these benefits are not guaranteed. They require negotiation with local impacted tax recipients and cannot be assumed across the board. Companies that install imported production equipment in their FTZ production facilities can also achieve duty/tariff deferral benefits on the machinery until it begins being using in production.

Looking Ahead: Uncertainty and Opportunity

The FTZ program is at a crossroads. Its historical role as an engine for tariff rationalization for U.S. manufacturers has been curtailed, but its potential as a platform for cash flow management, export relief and targeted ancillary tax savings is legitimate. In addition, pending litigation, including possible Supreme Court rulings, could dramatically reshape the tariff landscape overnight. A rollback of tariffs could potentially restore inverted tariff benefits for many industries and commodities, while new tariff exemption frameworks could offer parallel relief.

For importers and manufacturers, the shift in trade policy has forced more sophisticated supply chain analyses. Establishing and operating an FTZ requires significant time and investment in an extremely complex trade compliance environment. Understanding if setting up and operating an FTZ makes sense in the context of this complexity is not a simple exercise. For tax and finance professionals, determining whether FTZ participation will yield measurable benefit requires a more granular assessment of inventory turn rates and export volumes. Companies must model turnover rates, tariff exposures, and compliance costs in detail to decide whether an FTZ is advantageous for the organization’s unique product mix, trade patterns, and risk tolerance.

Parting Thoughts

For businesses, agility is critical. Companies must reassess FTZ participation regularly, model cash flow implications under various scenarios, and assess measures for ancillary benefits, including engaging with local authorities on property and inventory tax opportunities where appropriate.

For policymakers grappling with the challenge of reconciling tariff policy with industrial strategy, FTZs may represent an underused tool. In an era when tariff policies are used both as protectionist levers and geopolitical instruments, FTZs provide a stable, regulated framework for balancing trade governance with competitiveness.

FTZs are not loopholes. They are highly regulated, overseen by U.S. CBP and the Department of Commerce, and subject to annual reviews and public interest considerations for manufacturers. In many ways, they are better suited to provide equitable tariff mitigation than ad hoc exemption processes. A 2019 econometric study conducted by The Trade Partnership titled The U.S. Foreign-Trade Zones Program: Economic Benefits to American Communities quantified that—all else being equal—employment, wages, and value-added activity are higher in areas with FTZs than similar areas without FTZs, and that a company’s access to FTZ benefits has substantial positive ripple effects throughout its U.S. supply chain.

And so, as they were conceived, FTZs are an effective mechanism for encouraging domestic manufacturing and facilitating global competitiveness.

By Rebecca Williams, Managing Director, Rockefeller Group Foreign Trade Zone Services and Eric Dalby, VP Support, Professional Services at Descartes

The post Foreign Trade Zones in Today’s Trade Policy Environment appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Non classé

Ocean rates tick up to close the year as air peak fades – December 30, 2025 Update

Published

1 jour ago

30 décembre 2025

Home

Ocean rates tick up to close the year as air peak fades – December 30, 2025 Update

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Published: December 30, 2025

Blog

Weekly highlights

Ocean rates – Freightos Baltic Index

Asia-US West Coast prices (FBX01 Weekly) increased 1% to $2,145/FEU.

Asia-US East Coast prices (FBX03 Weekly) increased 10% to $3,364/FEU.

Asia-N. Europe prices (FBX11 Weekly) increased 1% to $2,742/FEU.

Asia-Mediterranean prices (FBX13 Weekly) increased 4% to $4,004/FEU.

Air rates – Freightos Air Index

China – N. America weekly prices decreased 16% to $6.26/kg.

China – N. Europe weekly prices decreased 5% to $3.52/kg.

N. Europe – N. America weekly prices decreased 14% to $2.16/kg.

Analysis

Ocean rates on the major East-West lanes trended up to close the year. Asia – Europe prices increased 1% last week to $2,742/FEU but are 12% higher than mid-month and are up to levels last seen at the tail end of peak season. Asia – Mediterranean rates climbed 4% to reach the $4,000/FEU mark for the first time since early July, with prices 20% higher than during the first half of the month.

Current rate levels are supported by an early start to pre-Lunar New Year demand on these lanes as shippers face longer lead times due to Red Sea diversions. As such, prices are likely to stay elevated or continue climbing as we get closer to the holiday.

Join 60,000+ Supply Chain Experts Who Never Miss an Issue!

Start your week with the industry insights others miss.

« * » indicates required fields

Phone

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Email*

Consent*

I agree to receive logistics, freight tech, and commercial emails.

Periodic GRIs since October have generally been less successful in keeping rates elevated for very long on transpacific lanes than they’ve been for Asia – Europe trades. Price hikes since mid-December have pushed West Coast rates up 9% to $2,145/FEU and raised prices to the East Coast 15% to $3,364/FEU. But rates will be under upward pressure when transpacific pre-LNY demand picks up, and prices increased to start both 2024 and 2025. The holiday begins later than usual – February 17th – this year, which could mean another rate slide in the near term before demand increases. But if volumes do start to rise to start the new year, rate levels should keep climbing too.

Despite transpacific ocean import contractions and an overall dip in US ocean imports due to the trade war this year, ex-Asia volume strength to Europe, Africa and LATAM – as China diversified trading partners – saw global volumes grow 4% through early Q4.

S&P projects US ocean imports will fall again, by 2%, in 2026, making 2025-2026 – after the 2008-2009 financial crisis years and the 2022 – 2023 unwind from the pandemic – the third instance of consecutive years of US container import contraction over the last two decades. Like this year, observers like BIMCO expect global volumes will continue to grow nonetheless.

Freightos Air Index shows air cargo rates fading post peak season. China-US prices fell 16% to about $6.25/kg, its lowest level since early November. South East Asia – US rates fell 19% to $4.60/kg and transatlantic prices dropped 14% to $2.16/kg. China – Europe prices slid 5% to $3.52/kg and SEA – Europe rates decreased more than 20% to $3.12/kg.

IATA estimates that – after sharp, e-commerce-driven, 11% growth in 2024 – 2025 global air volumes will be 3.1% stronger than last year. IATA also expects this year’s resilience to stretch into 2026 in the form of 2.6% annual growth. Opinions differ as to whether cargo capacity growth will outpace volume growth next year or not, making rate projections for next year difficult as well.

Best wishes for a happy new year

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Freightos Terminal: Real-time pricing dashboards to benchmark rates and track market trends.

Procure: Streamlined procurement and cost savings with digital rate management and automated workflows.

Rate, Book, & Manage: Real-time rate comparison, instant booking, and easy tracking at every shipment stage.

Book a Demo

Learn More

Judah Levine

Head of Research, Freightos Group

Judah is an experienced market research manager, using data-driven analytics to deliver market-based insights. Judah produces the Freightos Group’s FBX Weekly Freight Update and other research on what’s happening in the industry from shipper behaviors to the latest in logistics technology and digitization.

Weekly Freight Updates

LNY pickup for Asia -Europe; More carriers testing the Red Sea – December 23, 2025 Update

Weekly Freight Updates

Asia – Europe rates staying elevated on some early pre-LNY start – December 16, 2025 Update

Weekly Freight Updates

More ocean GRIs; transpac air rates surge on final peak push – December 9, 2025 Update

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

Book a Demo

The post Ocean rates tick up to close the year as air peak fades – December 30, 2025 Update appeared first on Freightos.

Non classé

Securing the Chain: The Executive Roadmap to Cyber Resilience

Published

2 jours ago

29 décembre 2025

Securing The Chain: The Executive Roadmap To Cyber Resilience

Call to Action: Download the full guide to gain in-depth insights and practical frameworks that will help you lead the transformation towards a resilient supply chain.

Part 10

Over the past nine sections, we have explored the threats, architectures, governance models, data protections, human factors, response strategies, and partnerships required to secure today’s global supply chains.

But executives don’t just need analysis. They need a roadmap, a structured, actionable framework for building resilience step by step.

This final section offers that roadmap. It is designed for boards, CEOs, CSCOs, and CISOs who must align strategy, investment, and execution to ensure their organizations not only withstand cyber shocks but turn resilience into a competitive differentiator.

1. Principles of the Roadmap

The roadmap is built on five guiding principles:

Resilience, not just security. Assume breaches will happen, plan for rapid recovery.
Ecosystem mindset. Protect not just your company, but the partners who form your chain.
Continuous adaptation. Threats evolve; resilience must be a living system.
Shared responsibility. Cyber resilience spans IT, OT, procurement, logistics, legal, HR, and the C-suite.
Value creation. Resilience isn’t a cost center; it drives trust, revenue protection, and investor confidence.

2. The Five Phases of the Executive Roadmap

Phase 1: Assess

Risk Mapping: Identify critical assets (ERP, WMS, TMS, OT systems) and map interdependencies.
Threat Assessment: Analyze the most relevant attack vectors for your sector.
Gap Analysis: Benchmark against frameworks (NIST, ISO 27001, CMMC).
Supplier Review: Audit third- and fourth-party cyber practices.
Board Engagement: Ensure cyber risks are regularly reviewed in board meetings.

Deliverable: Enterprise-wide cyber risk baseline.

Phase 2: Build

Zero Trust Implementation: Segmentation, IAM, MFA, privileged access controls.
Secure-by-Design Systems: Embed cyber requirements into procurement contracts.
Data Safeguards: Encryption, immutable backups, data provenance protocols.
Governance Models: Establish a cyber risk committee reporting to the board.
Training Programs: Launch cyber awareness across all roles, from forklift drivers to executives.

Deliverable: Core cyber resilience infrastructure.

Phase 3: Pilot

Incident Playbooks: Develop and distribute role-specific response protocols.
Tabletop Exercises: Rehearse ransomware, insider threats, and third-party breaches.
Red Team/Blue Team Drills: Test defenses and refine response.
Supplier Pilots: Run joint simulations with top-tier vendors.
Executive War Games: Pressure-test leadership decision-making in crisis.

Deliverable: Validated, tested resilience processes.

Phase 4: Scale

Supplier Scorecards: Implement cyber rating systems across the supplier base.
Ecosystem Platforms: Deploy secure data exchange and federated identity systems.
Industry Participation: Join ISACs/ISAOs for real-time threat intelligence.
Collaborative Defense: Explore joint SOCs, mutual aid agreements, and sector-wide initiatives.
Global Alignment: Standardize resilience practices across regions.

Deliverable: Resilient, interconnected ecosystem defense posture.

Phase 5: Sustain

Continuous Monitoring: AI-driven threat detection across IT and OT.
Board-Level Dashboards: Track cyber resilience metrics alongside financial KPIs.
Regulatory Compliance: Stay ahead of evolving rules (SEC, NIS2, CMMC).
Cultural Reinforcement: Keep cyber resilience visible in strategy, values, and incentives.
Post-Incident Evolution: Use every incident (internal or external) as a learning cycle.

Deliverable: Enduring resilience as an organizational capability.

3. Metrics That Matter

Executives need quantifiable indicators to measure progress. Suggested metrics include:

Mean Time to Detect (MTTD)
Mean Time to Respond (MTTR).
% of suppliers with validated cyber programs.
% of workforce trained in cyber hygiene.
Backup success rate and recovery time alignment with RTO/RPO.
Board meeting frequency with cyber on the agenda.
Number of red team simulations conducted annually.

4. Embedding Resilience into Strategy

Cyber resilience should not be siloed. It must align with corporate goals:

Growth: Customers prefer resilient partners who won’t fail them in crisis.
Innovation: New technologies (AI, IoT, blockchain) must be secured from inception.
Sustainability: ESG frameworks increasingly include digital risk disclosure.
M&A: Cyber due diligence is now as important as financial due diligence.

Executives must position resilience as a strategic enabler, not a defensive drag.

5. Case Study: Retailer Ecosystem Roadmap

A global retailer implemented the roadmap in five phases:

Assess: Mapped digital dependencies across 1,200 suppliers.
Build: Deployed Zero Trust and encryption across warehouses.
Pilot: Conducted ransomware tabletop exercise with top logistics partner.
Scale: Rolled out supplier cyber scorecards to 400 vendors.
Sustain: Embedded cyber metrics into board dashboards.

Outcome: Faster detection, reduced downtime risk, and improved investor confidence.

6. The Board’s Role

Boards must:

Set tone at the top by prioritizing cyber as strategic.
Allocate capital for resilience initiatives.
Hold management accountable for resilience metrics.
Engage external experts to validate programs.

Cyber resilience is now a governance obligation.

7. The Executive Mandate

For CEOs, CSCOs, and CISOs, the roadmap crystallizes into three imperatives:

Lead visibly. Cyber resilience requires executive sponsorship.
Invest smartly. Prioritize resilience initiatives with highest impact.
Collaborate broadly. Partner with suppliers, customers, regulators, and even competitors.

The message to the organization must be clear: cyber resilience is business resilience.

8. Turning Resilience into Advantage

Resilient companies do more than survive, they thrive:

Customer loyalty: Buyers stick with reliable suppliers.
Investor appeal: Stronger governance attracts capital.
Competitive edge: Cyber maturity becomes a differentiator in bids and partnerships.
Market credibility: Companies seen as resilient can set industry standards.

Executive Takeaways from Part 10

Cyber resilience requires a structured, phased roadmap.
Five phases: Assess, Build, Pilot, Scale, Sustain.
Metrics (MTTD, MTTR, supplier compliance, board oversight) drive accountability.
Resilience must be embedded in growth, innovation, and ESG strategy.
Boards have a fiduciary duty to govern resilience.
Executives must champion resilience visibly and collaboratively.
Cyber resilience is a strategic advantage, not just a defense mechanism.

Conclusion

Cyber resilience in supply chains is no longer optional. It is the currency of trust in a digitized, interconnected world.

This roadmap provides executives with a clear path: Assess, Build, Pilot, Scale, Sustain.
By following these steps, organizations will not only protect themselves but strengthen the entire ecosystem.

Resilient supply chains don’t just survive cyber storms. They emerge stronger, and lead the market forward.

The post Securing the Chain: The Executive Roadmap to Cyber Resilience appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Non classé

The State of Transportation Systems: TMS Lessons from 2025

Published

2 jours ago

29 décembre 2025

The State Of Transportation Systems: Tms Lessons From 2025

Transportation management underwent steady but meaningful change in 2025. While dramatic innovation was limited, organizations made progress in modernization, connectivity, and decision support. The theme of the year was not transformation. It was alignment—aligning TMS capabilities with the realities of volatile markets, cost pressure, emissions requirements, and customer expectations for more reliable service.

As companies look toward 2026, the lessons of 2025 offer a clearer picture of how TMS platforms are evolving, where value is being created, and what operational constraints continue to limit performance.

Modernization Accelerated and Became More Practical

Organizations continued to migrate from legacy, on-premise systems toward cloud-native platforms. But 2025 marked a shift: modernization was not pursued for its own sake. Instead, companies moved strategically, often focusing modernization efforts on the most constrained, high-visibility transportation processes.

The winning modernization projects delivered:

Cleaner API connectivity for rates, tenders, and tracking

Modular configurations that avoided monolithic system redesign

Reduced onboarding time for carriers and brokers

Better data freshness across execution and visibility systems

Instead of implementing everything at once, most enterprises adopted incremental modernization—starting with visibility integration, rate automation, or fleet scheduling—and expanding gradually.

In 2026, modernization efforts will continue to focus on practical outcomes like reducing manual load, accelerating tender cycles, and improving ETA reliability rather than chasing sweeping transformations.

Continuous Insights Replaced Periodic Reporting

One of the most notable changes was the widespread adoption of continuous, event-driven transportation monitoring. Companies moved away from static weekly performance reviews toward ongoing visibility into network conditions.

The shift was driven by:

the rise of real-time visibility platforms

better quality location data

improved ETA prediction

more reliable carrier status updates

API-fed telemetry replacing batch uploads

Rather than planning once and reacting later, transportation teams used near-real-time insights to:

reroute shipments

adjust pickup windows

realign labor at docks

escalate exceptions before they reached the customer

This “continuous planning” model reduced the latency between data, interpretation, and action.

In 2026, continuous insights will become standard. Static reporting will remain important for strategic planning, but day-to-day operations will revolve around dynamic decision cycles supported by live data.

AI Provided Targeted, Not Transformational, Wins

AI added value in transportation, but only in narrow, well-defined workflows. The strongest results came from AI’s ability to help evaluate alternates and reduce manual decision time.

Routing and Contingency Recommendations

AI helped planners identify viable alternates during:

weather disruptions

port congestion

driver shortages

regional bottlenecks

sudden capacity changes

These recommendations did not replace planning expertise. They accelerated it. AI functioned as a scenario generator—offering options that humans could refine.

Load Matching and Asset Utilization

AI improved load matching for private and dedicated fleets by analyzing:

empty miles

driver hours

backhaul opportunities

dock availability

These gains helped companies squeeze more productivity from constrained assets.

Exception Prioritization

AI helped reduce noise in exception handling by:

filtering out low-impact alerts

grouping related exceptions

identifying root causes

recommending the best corrective action

In 2026, AI will integrate more deeply into TMS workflows, but its role will remain decision support—not autonomy.

API Integration Emerged as a Competitive Advantage

EDI still dominates transportation, but it showed clear limitations in 2025. Delays in status updates, inconsistent message quality, and slow onboarding pushed companies toward API-first connectivity.

Carriers with strong APIs gained share in:

live tracking

instant rate shopping

automated tender acceptance

more granular status updates

lane-specific performance scoring

Shippers discovered that API-enabled carriers delivered faster, more accurate insights and fewer manual interventions.

In 2026, the shift will continue. EDI will remain for large carriers and structured freight networks, but APIs will power high-volume, time-sensitive, and cross-border operations.

Carbon-Aware Planning Began Its Move Into Execution

Sustainability efforts shifted from reporting to operational decision-making. Transportation teams began using emissions as a planning variable.

Companies applied emissions scoring to:

mode selection

carrier procurement

consolidation decisions

routing choices

lane prioritization

Some organizations used TMS enhancements to compare emissions intensity between alternates during routing decisions.

Early adopters discovered that carbon efficiency often aligned with cost and reliability. Efficient lanes tended to be:

better utilized

more predictable

more consistent in transit times

In 2026, carbon-aware routing will expand as regulators tighten expectations and customer requirements evolve.

Planning Cycles Compressed Under Persistent Volatility

Transportation volatility—capacity swings, geopolitical shifts, weather disruptions, and rising energy costs—forced companies to shorten planning cycles.

Teams moved from:

quarterly → monthly carrier scorecards

weekly → daily lane performance checks

static → rolling forecasts

annual → quarterly bid refreshes for variable lanes

This shift required better tools, better data, and better coordination across planning, procurement, and execution.

In 2026, planning cadence will continue to compress as continuous planning becomes the norm.

Visibility Data Became More Actionable

Visibility tools matured in 2025. The strongest improvements included:

more accurate ETAs

simplified exception categories

more reliable location data

better integrations with telematics providers

higher consistency in stop-level information

Companies used this improved data to:

reduce detention

schedule labor more accurately

improve dock turn times

respond earlier to late pickups or missed connections

In 2026, visibility platforms will integrate deeper with TMS systems so planners can adjust execution directly from the exception screen.

Key Constraints That Persisted

Despite progress, several structural issues remained unresolved:

carrier fragmentation

inconsistent small-carrier data quality

limited multimodal synchronization

slow customs processes in certain regions

capacity uncertainty tied to extreme weather

energy price volatility

Technology softened these constraints but did not eliminate them.

What 2026 Will Require

Companies that want to improve transportation performance in 2026 will need to:

strengthen integration discipline

adopt real-time carrier connectivity

incorporate emissions and energy variables

improve scenario modeling

refine carrier scorecards

build continuous planning behaviors

embed AI into exception and routing workflows

The organizations that succeed will treat the TMS as an active operations platform, not a passive system of record.

Final Takeaway

TMS evolution in 2025 was steady and practical. The systems that delivered the most value improved connectivity, reduced latency, and made planning more responsive. In 2026, transportation management will center on real-time coordination, AI-assisted decisions, and cleaner integration across the entire planning-to-execution spectrum. The companies that modernize incrementally, rather than overhaul everything at once, will see the strongest and most reliable gains.

The post The State of Transportation Systems: TMS Lessons from 2025 appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.