The Biden Administration’s move this week to increase tariffs on $18 billion of Chinese goods may help boost the American manufacturing sector by protecting it from competition by lower-priced imports, but it will harm the consumers who ultimately pay the price of all tariffs, several trade groups have said.
Tariffs are taxes charged on imports, and are collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection from American importers or brokers, who typically pass the extra cost along to their consumers and manufacturers in the form of higher prices on the affected goods.
The new directive stipulates that tariffs be paid on items such as batteries, electric vehicles, semiconductors, ship to shore cranes, solar cells, and steel and aluminum products. The intent of that policy is to discourage China from employing “unfair trade practices,” U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said in a briefing.
“For too long, the PRC has been playing by a different set of rules with unfair and anticompetitive economic practices. Those unfair practices include forced technology transfer, including cyber hacking and cyber theft; non-market policies, such as targeting industrial sectors for dominance, labor rights suppression, and weak environmental protection; and flooding markets worldwide with artificially cheap products that wipe out the competition,” Tai said. “The President’s action today is a part of his vision to rebuild our supply chains and our ability to make things in America to lower costs, outcompete the PRC, and encourage the elimination of practices that undercut American workers and businesses. We are doing that by investing in manufacturing and clean energy here at home and raising tariffs to protect these investments.”
However, the American Apparel & Footwear Association said the move would backfire by imposing cost increases on manufacturers and consumers, thus fanning the flames of inflation. "The decision to extend Section 301 tariffs on a wide range of apparel, footwear, accessories, and textiles — while not unexpected — is a real blow to American consumers and manufacturers alike. Tariffs are regressive taxes that are paid by U.S. importers and U.S. manufacturers and ultimately passed along to U.S. consumers. At a time when hardworking American families are struggling with inflation, continued tariffs on consumer necessities are entirely unwelcome," AAFA president and CEO Steve Lamar said in a release.
Another potential side effect of the policy could be harming the nation’s effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, since it imposes a 100% tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles, which could otherwise have helped to get more gas-burning cars off the road, according to Simon Geale, executive vice president of procurement at supply chain consulting firm Proxima. “The White House tariff hikes on a number of China-made imports into the US is the latest sign that the U.S. is ‘walking the walk’ when it comes to onshoring their supply chains and encouraging domestic industry. The 100% EV tariff is broadly symbolic, with recent calculations showing that only 1,700 Chinese EVs entered the United States in the first quarter of 2024, but it will potentially promote investment into the nascent EV industry in the States,” Geale said in an email. “Something that needs to be considered is the potential impact on net zero. China-made EV’s, clean energy technologies, computer chips, and minerals were bringing the cost of decarbonizing the US economy down, and a balance will need to be struck between bolstering domestic industries and continuing to progress net zero goals.”
A third criticism of the new policy is that the costs of the extended tariffs will ripple far beyond basic U.S. consumer price hikes. “The new tariffs are another hit to supply chains as they try to manage ongoing risks and build resiliency. Whenever tariffs are increased, regardless of the rational for doing so, the impact goes beyond cost increases to companies and consumers,” John Donigian, senior director of Supply Chain Strategy at Moody's, said in an email. For example, Donigian said that higher tariffs on Chinese goods could impact common strategies to offset their greater costs to American companies, such as reshoring supply chains, renegotiating contracts with suppliers, and increasing buffer stocks of inventory to cope with disruptions.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.