By Eva Richardson | March 25, 2025 | The Logistic News
As the Biden administration weighs new trade measures targeting China’s shipbuilding and maritime sectors, a coalition of more than 30 leading logistics and trade associations—including the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA)—is sounding the alarm about potential widespread economic fallout.
In response to a set of proposed remedies from the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the group released a joint analysis last week forecasting serious consequences for U.S. exporters, importers, port operations, and the broader American supply chain.
“This is a moment of reckoning,” said one logistics executive familiar with the discussions. “We understand the strategic intention behind the proposals—but the unintended consequences could be economically devastating.”
A Ripple Effect Across Key Sectors
At the heart of the concern is the proposal to impose new duties, tariffs, and potential restrictions on Chinese-built ships and related maritime logistics services. While the goal is to bolster U.S. shipbuilding capacity, industry leaders argue the real-world effect would be a broad increase in transportation costs, supply bottlenecks, and reduced competitiveness for U.S. businesses across multiple sectors.
According to the coalition’s economic assessment:
-
Agricultural exporters would be among the hardest hit. With shipping costs rising, major U.S. crops could lose critical market share to Brazil, Canada, Australia, and Russia.
-
Energy and manufacturing sectors may see a downturn in exports due to weakened cost competitiveness.
-
U.S. ports—already navigating strained operations—would face reduced cargo volumes, translating to losses in output, jobs, and revenue.
-
Retailers, wholesalers, and downstream consumer services could encounter cost increases that filter down to U.S. consumers.
“Policymakers need to consider the whole chain,” said a senior analyst at a national freight policy institute. “We can’t strengthen one segment of maritime industry while collapsing the infrastructure that supports it.”
Maritime Industry Pushes Back
Prominent voices within the shipping industry have echoed those concerns. Edward Gonzalez, CEO of Seaboard Marine, warned that the proposed measures could end up hurting American carriers that rely on competitive vessel leasing and operational flexibility.
“If our intention is to protect national interests, we need to ensure we’re not inadvertently harming American-owned maritime businesses that depend on the very supply chains we’re trying to make more resilient,” Gonzalez said during a recent public hearing.
That sentiment is supported by several other U.S.-based carriers, which argue that the dominance of Chinese shipyards in the global market leaves few immediate alternatives for sourcing commercial vessels—especially amid current fleet capacity constraints and backlogs at global yards.
National Security vs. Economic Disruption
At the core of the USTR’s proposal is the belief that China’s shipbuilding industry poses a long-term national security risk due to state subsidies, overcapacity, and growing influence over global maritime routes.
But critics argue that any response must be surgical, not sweeping.
“We absolutely support the idea of rebuilding U.S. shipbuilding strength,” said an executive from a top U.S. port authority. “But we need parallel investment and long-term planning—not just reactive trade barriers that could backfire in the short term.”
The USTR hearings on the matter are currently underway, with stakeholders from agriculture, manufacturing, logistics, and maritime operations all providing testimony. Analysts expect a final decision from the administration in the coming weeks, though the timeline may shift depending on political pressure and input from Congress.
A Complex Decision Ahead
The question now is whether the administration can strike a balance—defending U.S. industrial interests without derailing the trade and transportation systems that underpin the national economy.
Industry leaders are urging Washington to expand the conversation to include infrastructure investment, training programs, and public-private shipbuilding partnerships that could help rebuild domestic capacity without triggering economic harm.
As the U.S. redefines its approach to global trade and supply chain resilience, the shipbuilding remedies represent a key inflection point—one that could either strengthen or destabilize critical logistics networks, depending on how the next steps are handled.
