Global Shipping Disruptions and Freight Market Updates
Courts Are Pushing for Refunds. Is Your Company Set Up to Receive One?
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 20, 2026, that International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, and the refund process is now moving through the courts. The CIT has ordered CBP to begin liquidating and reliquidating affected entries without IEEPA duties. The court is pushing this process forward quickly, holding conferences and requiring status reports to keep things on track. While the system to process refunds at scale is still being built inside CBP’s ACE platform, the framework is taking shape and progress is being made.
CBP has been transparent with the court about what it needs to make refunds happen. Their proposed process involves importers submitting entries through the ACE Portal, the system recalculating duties with interest, and Treasury issuing refunds electronically. CBP estimates the new refund capability will take approximately 45 days to develop. The court is actively overseeing every step, which means there is real accountability pushing this forward.
Here is the most important thing your company needs to do right now. Of the more than 330,000 importers who paid IEEPA duties, only about 21,000 are currently set up to receive electronic refunds. As of February 6, 2026, all CBP refunds are issued electronically only. If your company is not enrolled for ACH refunds through the ACE Portal, you will not receive your refund when payments are issued, regardless of how much you are owed.
We have been tracking this situation and sharing updates well before the Supreme Court issued its ruling, because we believe you deserve timely, accurate information so you can take action when it matters. For the full breakdown including court filing links, CBP guidance, and step by step enrollment instructions, visit our latest customer advisory. The single most important action you can take today is confirming your ACE Portal access and completing your ACH enrollment. We are monitoring every court filing and CBP update and will keep you informed every step of the way.
Middle East Shipping Disruptions Continue
On February 28, the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran, and the impact on global shipping has continued to build. The Strait of Hormuz, which carries roughly 20% of the world’s oil and gas trade, has seen commercial traffic come to a near standstill following security threats in the region. At the same time, renewed Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have again disrupted transit through the Suez Canal. As a result, many Asia–Europe shipments are currently routing around the Cape of Good Hope, adding approximately 10 to 14 days to transit times.
Fuel costs have climbed since the conflict began, and ocean carriers have begun introducing emergency surcharges to offset rising bunker fuel expenses and operational disruptions. Major carriers including Maersk, CMA CGM, MSC, Hapag-Lloyd, and ONE have announced additional charges that may apply across multiple trade lanes, not just shipments directly connected to the Middle East. Because these surcharges are evolving quickly, companies moving cargo on long-haul routes should review their landed cost projections and contract terms carefully.
The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has stated it is closely monitoring carrier pricing actions tied to the conflict, particularly any new surcharges associated with fuel costs or security risks. Under U.S. shipping regulations, most tariff changes affecting U.S. trades must be filed with the FMC and generally require a 30-day notice period before they can take effect. Carriers can apply for a shorter timeline by demonstrating good cause to the FMC. As a result, shippers are encouraged to review their carrier tariffs and service contracts to confirm that any newly applied charges comply with filing and notice requirements.
Operationally, several Gulf ports are seeing service suspensions or limitations as carriers reassess risk exposure in the region. Ports in the UAE, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and parts of Saudi Arabia and Oman have experienced disruptions in recent weeks. Some alternative routing options remain available through ports such as Jeddah, Salalah, and Khor Fakkan, and carriers are adjusting networks to maintain service where possible. However, transit times and routing patterns may continue to shift as conditions evolve.
In addition to fuel-related charges, carriers have also introduced war risk surcharges reflecting the increased cost of insuring vessels operating near the conflict zone. These premiums are typically applied separately from fuel adjustments, meaning shippers may see multiple new cost items appearing on invoices. At this stage there is no confirmed timeline for when normal routing patterns may resume, but the industry is adapting and monitoring developments closely. If you have questions about a shipment or would like help evaluating routing options, I am available at 833-782-7628 Ext. 1.
USTR Launches 60 Section 301 Investigations Over Global Forced Labor Enforcement
The Office of the United States Trade Representative announced on March 12, 2026, that it has initiated 60 separate investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 focusing on how foreign governments address the importation of goods produced with forced labor. The investigations will examine whether the failure of these economies to impose and effectively enforce bans on forced-labor goods constitutes an unreasonable or discriminatory practice that burdens or restricts U.S. commerce.
According to USTR, the investigations target 60 of the largest trading partners of the United States, including China, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico, Vietnam, Brazil, and the United Kingdom. The reviews will focus on whether governments have taken sufficient steps to prevent products made with forced labor from entering their domestic markets and global supply chains. Ambassador Jamieson Greer stated that American workers and businesses should not be forced to compete against producers benefiting from artificially low costs tied to forced labor practices.
Section 301 of the Trade Act provides the United States with authority to respond to foreign government policies that are considered unjustifiable, unreasonable, or discriminatory and that place a burden on U.S. commerce. Under Section 302(b) of the law, USTR may self-initiate investigations, which allows the agency to examine foreign practices even without a formal petition from industry. Once initiated, the process includes consultations with the governments involved, economic analysis, and input from advisory committees.
As part of the investigation process, USTR has requested consultations with the governments of the economies under review. Public participation will also play a role in the investigation. Written comments and requests to appear at a public hearing must be submitted by April 15, 2026, and a public hearing is scheduled to begin April 28, 2026, and may continue through May 1.
While these investigations do not immediately change tariff rates or trade policy, Section 301 proceedings have historically led to significant enforcement actions, including tariffs or other trade remedies. If your business sources goods from any of the 60 economies listed, it is worth keeping an eye on how these investigations develop. The results could affect compliance expectations and how trade enforcement is handled down the road.
For Additional details, click here to see the official USTR press release.
US Launches Trade Investigations Into 16 Economies Over Manufacturing Overcapacity
On March 11, 2026, the Office of the United States Trade Representative launched formal investigations into 16 economies under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The economies under investigation are China, the European Union, Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, South Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan, and India. The investigations will look at whether these economies maintain manufacturing practices that are unfair or discriminatory and that place a burden on US commerce.
The core concern behind these investigations is structural overcapacity which means these economies are producing significantly more goods than their domestic markets can absorb and exporting that surplus in ways that undercut US manufacturers. According to USTR, global manufacturing capacity utilization currently sits between 75% and 75.9%, below the roughly 80% level considered healthy. China alone accounted for nearly 70% of global goods trade surpluses in 2025, with its global surplus exceeding $1.2 trillion. The sectors flagged in the investigations span a wide range, including steel, aluminum, semiconductors, automobiles, chemicals, batteries, electronics, plastics, and solar modules, among others.
For businesses that import goods from any of the 16 economies listed, these investigations are worth paying attention to. Section 301 investigations have historically led to tariffs and other trade measures, as seen with the China tariffs that came out of a similar process in 2018. While no action has been taken yet, the initiation of an investigation is the first formal step in a process that can result in significant cost changes for imported goods. Companies sourcing from affected countries may want to review their supply chains now and consider whether alternative sourcing options are worth exploring.
The public comment period opens March 17, 2026, and written comments must be submitted by April 15, 2026, to be considered. A public hearing is scheduled to begin May 5, 2026, at the US International Trade Commission in Washington, DC. If you have questions about how these developments may affect your shipments or supply chain costs, reach out to our team at 833-782-7628 Ext. 1. For full details, review the official Federal Register notice here
War Disruptions Push Middle East Cargo Toward Indian Ports
Shipping disruptions tied to the conflict in the Middle East are forcing carriers to reroute large volumes of cargo that were originally headed for Gulf destinations. Large volumes of containers originating in Asia are being redirected to ports along India’s coastline as vessels avoid the Persian Gulf and surrounding conflict areas. These containers departed from ports across China and Southeast Asia in recent weeks but are unable to reach their intended Middle East destinations under current conditions.
Several major carriers are working with Indian port authorities to temporarily discharge and store diverted cargo at facilities including Nhava Sheva, Mundra, Pipavav, and Kandla, with some additional volumes potentially moving through ports on India’s eastern coast. These locations are being used as temporary holding points while carriers evaluate alternative routing options and wait for conditions in the Gulf region to stabilize. Terminal operators in India still have available yard space following recent capacity expansions, which is helping absorb some of the unexpected cargo flows.
Moving the stranded containers onward to final destinations is proving more complicated. Some carriers are exploring regional feeder connections through ports such as Sohar in Oman and Khor Fakkan or Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates, with the final leg completed by smaller vessels or inland transport where possible. However, the sudden shift in routing has also triggered sharp swings in freight pricing across parts of the India–Middle East corridor as available vessel space tightens.
At the same time, regulators in both India and China have begun raising concerns about rapidly rising freight rates and surcharges tied to the conflict. Regulators in both countries have urged carriers to keep pricing transparent and avoid excessive or retroactive charges. Shipping lines, however, argue that higher costs are being driven by operational disruptions, including vessels delayed in the region and large volumes of containers temporarily trapped near Gulf ports.
For now, most Indian ports are continuing to operate normally, although vessel bunching has been reported in some locations as diverted ships arrive outside their regular schedules. If additional rerouted cargo volumes reach the region within a short period, port and terminal operators warn that congestion risks could emerge. Until shipping routes through the Middle East stabilize, Indian ports are likely to remain an important relief valve for cargo caught in the disruption.
USITC Launches Study on Potential Revocation of China’s PNTR Status
The U.S. International Trade Commission has launched Investigation No. 332-609 to study the economic impact of revoking China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations status, also known as Most Favored Nation status. This investigation does not change any current tariff rates, and no policy action has been taken. It is a Section 332 fact finding investigation requested through appropriations report language. The Commission has been directed to evaluate what would happen if China were moved from Column 1 general duty rates to Column 2 rates under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.
Under current law, China receives Column 1 duty treatment, which reflects normal trade relations. Column 2 rates are substantially higher and apply only to a very limited number of countries that do not receive normal trade relations treatment. For many tariff classifications, Column 2 rates are significantly higher than Column 1 rates and, in some cases, multiple times higher, depending on the product. The USITC has been asked to provide detailed analysis on how such a shift would affect U.S. trade flows, domestic production, pricing, sourcing decisions, and overall economic impact over a six-year period.
The Commission will also examine an alternative scenario in which Congress revokes PNTR but phases in higher tariffs over five years for a subset of national security related products. This phased approach would model a gradual increase rather than an immediate shift to full Column 2 rates. The report will include industry level data and sector specific impact where practicable, including which industries could be directly and most affected by a change in duty treatment.
It is important to emphasize that this is research and economic modeling only. The USITC does not make policy recommendations in Section 332 investigations. The report is intended to provide objective data and analysis to Congress. Any actual revocation of PNTR status would require legislative action by Congress and would not occur automatically as a result of this investigation.
The final report is due August 21, 2026. While no tariff changes are in place today, the fact that Congress requested this analysis signals that movement away from MFN treatment is being seriously evaluated. Businesses that source from China should at minimum understand how a potential shift to Column 2 rates could affect landed cost structures, pricing strategies, and long-term supply chain planning.
For additional details, see the official USITC notice of investigation.
Diesel Price Spike and Tightening Capacity Push U.S. Trucking Rates Higher
U.S. trucking rates are beginning to show signs of strengthening after several years of soft freight demand. Spot market pricing has remained elevated in parts of the country, particularly along the East Coast and across the Midwest, following weather disruptions earlier this year. Now, rising diesel prices tied to the conflict in the Middle East are adding new pressure to transportation costs across domestic supply chains. The average price of diesel fuel jumped 96¢ in a single week, reaching nearly $4.90 per gallon nationwide, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. In some regions, including California, diesel prices are now above $6 per gallon. For shippers, the increase is already translating into higher fuel surcharges, which have risen roughly 15¢ to 20¢ per mile on many long-haul truck movements. These adjustments are expected to appear on invoices from carriers and brokers in the coming weeks.
At the same time, trucking capacity is beginning to tighten as higher operating costs, recent carrier exits, and increased regulatory enforcement reshape the market. Tender rejection rates are rising in several freight lanes, pushing more shipments into the spot market or further down routing guides when primary contract carriers decline loads. While the rate increases are not uniform across the country, most people in the industry expect that combination of higher fuel costs and tighter capacity to push trucking rates up further as contract season continues.
