Shippers Should Take Tariff Threats Seriously, Yet Remain Cautiously Optimistic

Recent tariff threats issued by the Trump administration against several European countries – and the subsequent decision not to follow through – have continued to generate concern and frustration among shippers.

For shippers that depend on stable transatlantic trade corridors, the recent threat of tariffs raised serious concerns about their ability to absorb additional costs. These concerns intensified after the Trump Administration signaled plans to impose new import tariffs on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, and the United Kingdom if the diplomatic dispute over Greenland remained unresolved.

Like other past tariff threats, this most recent threat rattled global financial markets, upset the logistics industry, and angered international leaders. Yet, it seems like a pattern has emerged, where the administration uses tariffs as a way to bring certain parties to the bargaining table in order to discuss issues the administration finds important.

“While this has proven to be an effective strategy for initiating conversations many would prefer to avoid, the unfortunate reality is that shippers are being caught in the crosshairs. As a result, many are hesitant to move cargo in what they perceive to be a volatile market,” said Anthony Fullbrook, president of OEC Group’s North American region. “Shippers should understand that tariffs are largely used as a negotiation tactic, and that the Trump administration is generally seeking to secure more favorable agreements in the best interests of the United States – not to disrupt commerce, which would run counter to the administration’s values.”

While some shippers appear to understand the Trump Administration’s broader strategy, the reality is that the unpredictable nature of recent tariff actions has led many to hesitate to move cargo. However, there may be some hope for shippers as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to soon issue a ruling on the legality of the Trump Administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs. If the Court rules against the administration, then the use of tariffs under IEEPA to compel other countries to makes deals with the United States would disappear, although it is likely that the administration would seek another mechanism to assess tariffs. Conversely, if the Court upholds the administration’s authority to impose reciprocal tariffs under IEEPA, shippers may still have reason for cautious optimism that any newly implemented tariffs will be, in all likelihood, temporary.

Historically, the Trump Administration has relied on tariff threats as leverage during negotiations, with initial positions often giving way to negotiated outcomes. This dynamic reflects what is often described as an “art of the deal” approach, in which negotiating partners’ resolve is tested before a mutually acceptable solution is reached. Shippers who recognize this pattern may be better positioned to balance risk management with operational stability.

“Every tariff threat from this administration should be taken seriously, yet history suggests that the most likely outcome is resolution through negotiation,” said Frank Costa, vice president of sales for OEC Group. “Ultimately, shippers need to stay informed about geopolitical developments and understand how they impact the logistics industry. Those who remain aware will be far better equipped to navigate the market than those who underestimate how global issues affect their businesses.”