I’m not looking at what was proposed, but honestly, Trump’s tariffs might exceed the effect of a carbon tax on shipping emissions, in terms of making shipping more-costly than would have otherwise been the case. Doesn’t mean they reflect them exactly, mind — distance isn’t a factor with tariffs, and it is with any fee — but…
kagis
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/imports-seen-well-below-average-for-rest-of-2025
U.S. imports seen well below average for rest of 2025
NRF says frontloading, tariffs to squeeze container volumes.
The fact that some of that is frontloading is fair, and that doesn’t produce a longer-term reduction in shippings. Like, companies moved as much product as they could into warehouses prior to tariff enforcement going into force, to limit their impact. But over time, stocks in those warehouses are going to become exhausted, US tariffs at borders will start being passed on, and you’ll have higher prices and less purchasing of products with a higher price elasticity of demand.
Monthly import volumes through major U.S container ports are expected to slip below the 2 million TEU mark through the remainder of the year, according to Global Port Tracker data report released today by the National Retail Federation and Hackett Associates.
“This year’s peak season has come and gone, largely due to retailers frontloading imports ahead of reciprocal tariffs taking effect,” NRF Vice President for Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold said in a release. “New sectoral tariffs continue to be announced, but most retailers are well-stocked for the holiday season and doing as much as they can to shield their customers from the costs of tariffs for as long as they can.”
The trade group said October is forecast at 1.97 million TEUs, down 12.3% y/y, and November at 1.75 million TEUs, down 19.2%. December volume is forecast at 1.72 million TEUs, a decline of 19.4% and the slowest month since 1.62 million TEUs in March 2023.
The U.S. had threatened to retaliate if nations support it. Trump urged countries to vote “No” at the International Maritime Organization headquarters in London, posting on his social media platform Truth Social on Thursday that “the United States will not stand for this global green new scam tax on shipping.” The IMO is the United Nations agency that regulates international shipping. Saudi Arabia called for a vote to adjourn the meeting for a year. More than half of the countries agreed.
No surprise there.
Shipping emissions have grown over the past decade to about 3% of the global total as trade has grown and vessels use immense amounts of fossil fuels to transport cargo over long distances. In April, IMO member states agreed on the contents of the regulatory framework, with the aim of adopting the “Net-Zero Framework” at this London meeting.
I’m curious about cruise ships.
“What matters now is that countries rise up and come back to the IMO with a louder and more confident yes vote that cannot be silenced,” said Anaïs Rios, shipping policy officer for Seas At Risk. “The planet and the future of shipping does not have time to waste.
I don’t see why they’re whinging, knowing fully well the goods consumers will be paying anything due, either in health or money.
