Navigating the global shipping market today has become an exercise in balancing act. On one hand, Washington’s protectionist moves are reshaping trade routes; on the other, major ocean carriers continue to tighten the supply reins to prevent a price collapse. The world fleet is growing, true, but companies are canceling departures (blank sailings) at unprecedented rates, thus managing to keep freight rates artificially high.

The latest data from Sea-Intelligence clearly captures this strategy. In the first half of the year, the capacity removed from the market increased exponentially compared to fleet expansion when comparing the data with the same period in 2019.

On the Asia-US East Coast route, for example, against a 46% increase in scheduled capacity, the space actually canceled surged by 215%. A similar scenario unfolded on the Asia-Mediterranean route, where capacity grew by 56% but slot withdrawals jumped by 159%.

The imbalance continues on routes to Northern Europe (+20% capacity but +83% cuts) and to the US West Coast (+16% total space against a +62% cancellation rate).

In practice, carriers are increasing canceled capacity at rates up to 4.6 times higher than the injection of new vessels. Newly delivered tonnage is systematically frozen to exercise tight control over supply and keep transport prices high. Consequently, the market is left with a structural capacity withdrawal rate of between 10% and 14%.

Shipowners’ goal remains to curb the decline of spot rates, which in recent weeks have shown signs of yielding, averaging $4,374 per FEU (40-foot container). Drewry highlights widespread declines: on the Transpacific, Shanghai-Los Angeles dropped by 6% ($5,878/FEU) and Shanghai-New York by 4% ($7,598/FEU). The European front also shows a downward trend, with Shanghai-Genoa down 5% ($5,988) and Shanghai-Rotterdam down 1% ($4,824). Despite the downturn, these are still historically very high prices, defended precisely by the companies’ iron grip on control.

Complicating the logistical picture further is US customs policy.

The expiration of global tariffs introduced by the Trump administration under Section 122 represents another source of concern for those operating in the shipping world. Last Friday, the White House immediately erected a new customs wall by activating Section 301 tariffs of the Trade Act of 1974, thereby bypassing the Supreme Court’s recent block on emergency tariffs (IEEPA).

The new measure is based on a motion by the United States Trade Representative (USTR), stating that countries accounting for 99% of US imports failed to ban the import of goods produced using forced labor. For this reason, the new barrier has already been dubbed “FLIP” tariffs (Forced Labour Import Prohibition).

The new US tariff map penalizes 35 key markets — including China, Vietnam, Brazil, and Thailand — which will see their rate rise to 12.5%. Meanwhile, tariffs for another 17 countries remain frozen at 10%, while the European Union and Taiwan benefit from an advantageous position. While previous regulations required a 10% duty to be added to the base MFN (Most Favoured Nation) duty, today’s measure sets an overall maximum cap of 10%. For the Old Continent, the new thresholds are therefore lower than those agreed a year ago in Scotland, which stood at 15%.

The business world’s reaction has been extremely harsh. As reported by Lloyd’s List, Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, slammed Trump’s new measures, bluntly calling them “sham tariffs.” Importer consortia that had already won lawsuits against IEEPA and Section 122 tariffs filed new legal challenges on Friday.

For global logistics and supply chain directors, the scenario leaves no room for improvisation: American tariff uncertainty and geopolitical instability force an immediate recalibration of minimum safety stock in warehouses and a complete overhaul of budget allocation strategies for the coming months.