Connect with us

Non classé

Ocean braces for wave of Iran-war surcharges – March 17, 2026 Update

Published

on

Ocean braces for wave of Iran-war surcharges – March 17, 2026 Update

Published: March 17, 2026

Blog

Weekly highlights

Ocean rates – Freightos Baltic Index

Asia-US West Coast prices (FBX01 Weekly) increased 1%.

Asia-US East Coast prices (FBX03 Weekly) increased 9%.

Asia-N. Europe prices (FBX11 Weekly) increased 10%.

Asia-Mediterranean prices (FBX13 Weekly) increased 15%.

Air rates – Freightos Air Index

China – N. America weekly prices decreased 6%.

China – N. Europe weekly prices increased 13%.

N. Europe – N. America weekly prices decreased 2%.

Analysis

Iran has kept up its attacks on vessels attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz this week. In recent days though, those strikes broadened to include even non-transiting vessels in the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman as well as a broader selection of ports in the region. Iran is allowing a small number of select vessels – from Iran and from countries like China, Pakistan and India – to transit, suggesting a verification process is now in place.

President Trump is lobbying the international community to help secure the passage via naval escorts, though there is broad skepticism that military protection would be effective or be able to move more than 10% of typical traffic. In any case, he is finding very few takers, and, from a container perspective, even if the plan moves forward, these resources would be deployed for oil and LNG tankers.

For the container market, operational disruptions continue to be limited to Gulf-bound or originating cargo, with some knock-on congestion elsewhere. As in previous disruptions like the Red Sea closure, carriers are now adjusting to the new reality and freight is finding its way.

After initially suspending bookings to the Persian Gulf, carriers like CMA CGM and Maersk are now accepting new bookings by diverting volumes to alternative accessible ports in the region – including ports in Oman, UAE, and Saudi Arabia – with containers moving on by landbridge. Carriers are also relying heavily on ports in India with new shuttle services ferrying containers to those accessible Mideast ports – though even some of these, like UAE’s Fujairah are now being directly targeted by Iran.

Congestion is already building at these alternative ports as well as in India, with reports that the Port of Colombo in Sri Lanka is declining to absorb Gulf-bound volumes because of pre-existing congestion.

For the rest of the container market, while operations are unaffected by the war, container rates are not likely to be spared.

Carriers have announced flat-rate global emergency fuel surcharges of several hundred dollars per FEU that will go into effect early next week. Ocean expert Lars Jensen observes that prolonged fuel fees like these would push rates up, but they would not represent unprecedented fuel pass throughs, and would be “expensive, but not destructive” to the market, possibly pushing rates back up to 2024 levels.

But while initially it seemed non-Gulf lanes would only be impacted by fuel surcharges, by mid-last week carriers announced a flurry of significant emergency surcharges, PSSs and GRIs across a range of lanes, including AsiaEurope and the transatlantic, some representing thousands of dollars in increases per container. Carriers like Maersk report facing additional costs not just in the price of oil, but in disruptions to fuel supply access, which may be a culprit in carriers looking to increase rates across lanes not directly impacted by the Strait of Hormuz closure.

As fuel surcharges and the other rate increases will not go into effect for a few more days, container rates have so far not risen too notably, and likely just reflect carrier hopes for a post-Lunar New Year bump. Transpacific rates increased 1% to about $2,000/FEU to the West Coast, and 9% to about $3,000/FEU to the East Coast last week, and have been about level so far this week. Asia – Europe prices climbed 10% to $2,900/FEU to N. Europe and 15% to $4,300/FEU to the Mediterranean and likewise have been stable since.

Even if rates do rise sharply on surcharges and GRIs next week, there is some skepticism that market dynamics will see these increases succeed fully. Similarly, there are reports that BCOs in the midst of annual ocean contract negotiations are pushing back against carrier fees associated with Iran war disruptions that do not directly impact these shippers’ volumes.

In some overlap between the trade war and the war in the Middle East, President Trump – who had said he would postpone his end of March summit with China if China refused to help secure the Strait of Hormuz – announced he has asked to delay the meeting for a month in order to focus on the war with Iran.

At the same time, US steps to restore IEEPA tariffs by other means continue – even as the IEEPA refund process gains steam – with China, Singapore and Thailand mentioned as subjects of Section 301 excess manufacturing capacity probes which reportedly will be completed before the Section 122 tariffs expire in July. And while it seems many US trading partners are pushing the US to stick to the agreed upon IEEPA tariff levels even if installed by other laws, they are at the same time objecting to the accusations of excess capacity abuses.

In air cargo, disruptions to a broad swath of the market continued this week as Iran persists in its attacks on regional airports which serve as hubs for major cargo players like Emirates Skycargo and Qatar Airways Cargo, and as a crucial global connection point, especially for Asia – Europe lanes.

While Qatari airspace remains closed, and Qatar Airways’ Mideast operations along with it, the UAE has gradually restored flight schedules after being closed completely during the first few days of the war and despite ongoing drone and missile attacks. Just this past week the airport in Dubai faced multiple attacks, some of which closed the airport for several hours.

With the drop in available capacity out of these Gulf hubs and the increase in Asia volumes looking for alternate routes to Europe, Freightos Air Index rates have spiked on many of these lanes. South Asia – Europe prices climbed to $4.72/kg as of today, 84% higher than just before the war began, with South East Asia – Europe rates up 26% to $4.23/kg and Europe – Middle East prices up 57% to $2.82/kg, with some of these increases likely partially due to fuel surcharges being rolled out by some carriers.

That being said, while rates had climbed sharply for the first week or so following the airspace closures, in the last few days prices have leveled off or even cooled slightly on many of these lanes. This shift may reflect some capacity recovery by Emirates, as well as Etihad, or the addition of direct Asia – Europe capacity by European airlines and carriers from the Far East.

But as Qatar Airways remains mostly grounded for services in and out of Doha, about 5% of global capacity is still absent from the market and is likely still an important factor to capacity and rate levels.

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.

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.

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 Ocean braces for wave of Iran-war surcharges – March 17, 2026 Update appeared first on Freightos.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Global Trade Management Is Becoming a Control System

Published

on

By

Global Trade Management Is Becoming A Control System

Global Trade Management platforms are no longer just compliance tools. They are becoming a control layer for cross border operations.

As trade complexity rises, organizations are moving toward integrated GTM platforms that unify compliance, execution, documentation, and risk management.

As trade complexity increases, fragmented systems break down. Compliance, logistics execution, documentation, and financial exposure cannot be managed in isolation. Organizations are moving toward integrated GTM platforms that unify these functions into a single operating model.

Modern GTM systems support:

Integrated compliance and customs automation

End to end visibility across international shipments

Documentation and trade finance workflows in one system

Continuous monitoring of regulatory and geopolitical risk

Integration across ERP, TMS, and WMS environments

The result is not just better compliance. It is better control.

Control over cost.
Control over risk.
Control over execution.

For supply chain leaders reassessing cross border strategy, the question is no longer whether GTM is required. The question is how to structure it as part of a broader technology architecture.

The Global Trade Management Solutions Executive Summary provides a clear starting point. It outlines the market, defines core capabilities, and benchmarks how leading platforms are evolving.

If you are evaluating GTM investments or modernizing trade operations, start here.

Download the Executive Summary:
👉 Download the Global Trade Management (GTM) Solutions Executive Summary

The post Global Trade Management Is Becoming a Control System appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Rivian’s Robotics Spinout Signals a Shift in Warehouse Automation Strategy

Published

on

By

Rivian’s Robotics Spinout Signals A Shift In Warehouse Automation Strategy

A robotics company spun out of Rivian has raised 500 million dollars at a 2 billion dollar valuation in a Series A round. The company, Mind Robotics, is focused on developing high dexterity robotic systems for warehouse and factory environments. Unlike Tesla or Nvidia, it is not pursuing humanoid robots. Instead, it is building systems designed specifically for industrial tasks.

This is a more practical direction than much of the current narrative around robotics.

An additional signal of intent is the composition of the founding team. Talent drawn from Physical Intelligence, Waymo, Zoox, and Google reflects deep experience in autonomy, perception, and real world system deployment. These are not experimental research backgrounds. They are operational engineering disciplines applied at scale.

A Different Design Philosophy

Humanoid robots have captured attention because they promise flexibility. In theory, a robot shaped like a human can operate in a world built for humans. In practice, that introduces complexity in mechanics, control systems, and cost.

Mind Robotics is taking the opposite approach. It is designing robots around the task, not the human form. That aligns with how automation has historically scaled in supply chain environments.

Warehouses are structured environments. Tasks such as picking, sorting, palletizing, and kitting are repeatable but variable at the edge. The challenge has been dexterity, not mobility. Mobile robots have largely solved movement. Precision handling remains the constraint.

High dexterity robotics addresses that constraint directly.

Why This Matters in the Current Environment

Supply chains continue to operate under structural pressure. Labor availability in warehousing remains inconsistent. Throughput expectations continue to rise. Cost control is still a priority across distribution and manufacturing networks.

At the same time, AI is moving beyond planning and visibility into execution. As noted in recent ARC research, AI is becoming an operational layer that enables real time optimization and decision making across systems .

Robotics is the physical extension of that layer.

When AI can identify what needs to be done and robotics can execute that action, the loop closes. That is the direction the market is moving.

The End of the Humanoid Assumption

There is a tendency to assume that the most advanced robotics will resemble humans. That assumption does not hold in supply chain operations.

Efficiency, reliability, and cost per task matter more than form. A robot does not need to look like a human to outperform one in a warehouse. In many cases, the human form is a constraint.

Purpose built systems offer several advantages:

Simpler mechanical design

Higher reliability in controlled environments

Faster integration into existing workflows

Lower cost per unit of work

These are the same factors that drove adoption of earlier automation technologies such as conveyors, sortation systems, and goods to person solutions.

Implications for Warehouse Operations

The investment in Mind Robotics signals a shift in where capital is being deployed and what problems are considered solvable.

First, dexterous manipulation is moving into the addressable domain. Tasks that required human judgment and fine motor control are becoming candidates for automation.

Second, robotics is becoming more tightly integrated with software systems. Warehouse execution systems, control towers, and AI agents will increasingly coordinate physical actions, not just provide recommendations.

Third, facility design assumptions will evolve. As robotic capabilities improve, warehouses can be designed around machine efficiency rather than human movement.

Finally, labor models will change. This is not a short term substitution. It is a structural transition in how work is performed across distribution networks.

A More Likely Path Forward

The near term evolution of robotics in the supply chain will not be defined by general purpose humanoid systems. It will be defined by targeted, high performance machines that solve specific operational problems.

Mind Robotics fits that pattern.

The broader implication is that automation will continue to expand task by task, function by function, rather than through a single breakthrough system. Each incremental gain compounds across the network.

For supply chain leaders, the focus should remain on where these systems can deliver measurable value today. High variability picking, returns processing, and light manufacturing are likely early candidates.

The combination of AI driven decision making and robotic execution is moving from concept to deployment. The companies that align their operations to that model will have a structural advantage in cost, service, and resilience.

The post Rivian’s Robotics Spinout Signals a Shift in Warehouse Automation Strategy appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Import Tariffs: Turning Up the Heat on Tariff Evasion

Published

on

By

Import Tariffs: Turning Up The Heat On Tariff Evasion

The U.S. trade compliance landscape is undergoing a calculated shift, forcing importers to reassess compliance practices, systems, and technology around imported goods and tariff exposure. In early 2025, the emphasis of trade enforcement policy transitioned strategically from national security and export controls (e.g., microchips, military technology, dual-use products) to an increased focus on economic security and import tariffs, with the current administration expanding enforcement capacity and coordination to bring intense scrutiny to tariff evasion and customs fraud.

The crackdown on tariff evasion is no surprise given that import tariffs have become a tremendous revenue source for the government: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collected a record-breaking $200 billion in tariff revenue in 2025. With such large sums at stake, the administration launched a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force (TFTF), allocating an additional $2 million in funding for the TFTF at the start of 2026.

This task force brings together the civil and criminal investigative arms of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Homeland Security, and CBP to “enhance efforts to prevent trade fraud that deprives the government of vital revenues, threatens critical domestic industries, undermines consumer confidence, and weakens national security.”

In the same vein, the DOJ expanded whistleblower incentives to encourage the trade community and general public to report suspected trade violations under the False Claim Act (FCA). The FCA imposes treble damages and penalties on those who knowingly and falsely claim money from the United States or knowingly fail to pay money owed to the United States.

This enforcement avenue is paying off: settlements and judgments under the FCA exceeded $6.8 billion in fiscal 2025 — the highest in a single year, with whistleblowers filing 1,297 qui tam lawsuits. In fact, whistleblowers are a force multiplier; depending on the size of the FCA settlement, tipsters’ monetary reward can run into the millions, reinforcing incentives to report tariff evasion.

How Fraudsters (Unsuccessfully) Evade Import Tariffs

With the cost of import tariffs potentially in the millions of dollars, companies are legitimately tasking their trade compliance teams to mitigate tariff exposure. However, some bad actors are pushing the legal boundaries to protect the bottom line.

From undervaluing imported items, misclassifying Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes, and creating illegitimate shell companies to misrepresenting country of origin and dodging anti-dumping and countervailing duties, fraudsters are getting creative with tariff evasion tactics.

Illegal transshipment is a particularly deceptive tactic, often used to disguise an import’s country of origin to avoid duties. For example, in addition to knowingly misclassifying HTS codes and failing to pay marking duties, a North Carolina-based distributor of tungsten carbide products agreed to a $54.4 million FCA settlement to resolve a qui tam complaint alleging that the company transshipped Chinese‑origin products through Taiwan, falsely declaring Taiwan as the country of origin to avoid Section 301 tariffs.

In another recent country-of-origin deception, MGI International, a global plastic resin distributor, agreed to pay $6.8 million to resolve an FCA liability. The company mispresented the country of origin on paperwork submitted to CBP to avoid paying duties totaling more than $4.5 million owed on products imported from China.

Notably, while CBP historically relied on administrative remedies (e.g., fines, liquidated damages), the DOJ raised the stakes in 2025, shifting tariff fraud into the civil and criminal arena. In this instance, MGI’s former chief operating officer pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to smuggle goods into the U.S. and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison — a high personal price to pay for attempting to evade import tariffs.

Best Practices to Balance Risk with Profits

As the DOJ scales tariff enforcement via the cross-agency TFTF, pairing civil tools with criminal pathways, companies must prioritize transparency, accuracy, and accountability in their compliance programs. Import tariffs errors can become an FCA exposure — not just a customs penalty — if authorities view duty underpayment as knowingly avoiding an obligation. The key is to separate defensible tariff mitigation strategies from tariff evasion risk.

When properly documented, there are tariff mitigation strategies that can legally reduce exposure:

Binding rulings on classification and origin (reduces ambiguity before entry)
Product engineering that changes classification (applicable only if the product truly changed)
Supplier diversification and lawful origin shifts (with real manufacturing change)
Foreign trade zones (FTZs) and duty drawback (when operationally feasible)
First sale (where legally available and properly structured)

In contrast, high-risk tactics tend to trigger investigations:

Declaring an origin that doesn’t match manufacturing reality, including “pass-through” routing
Reclassifying at scale without technical support, especially when elimination of duty is the outcome
Ignoring marking requirements or treating them as a downstream packaging issue

Next Steps

As tariff volatility and intensifying DOJ pressure push companies to revisit sourcing, classification, and landed cost models, compliance leaders need an import tariff framework that helps them understand their evolving exposure, optimize classification processes to ensure accuracy and auditability, and manage high-risk areas (e.g., Chinese imports) — all at scale.

First and foremost, building a single source of truth for classification and duty factors helps companies mitigate misclassification risk, one of the most common yet preventable failure points. In addition, importers should ensure country of origin links to inscrutable manufacturing steps and supplier attestations, especially for goods potentially affected by Section 301 or antidumping and countervailing duties.

And perhaps most importantly, by calibrating compliance process for auditability with an automated, scalable trade compliance solution, organizations can ensure the accuracy and defensibility to withstand intense scrutiny in today’s rapidly-evolving trade environment.

by Jackson Wood, Director of Industry Strategy at Descartes

The post Import Tariffs: Turning Up the Heat on Tariff Evasion appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending