West coast gateway ports hold ground
The nation’s two busiest container ports posted double-digit declines in January cargo volumes, but industry leaders say the dip reflects comparison against historic highs rather than structural weakness—even as Supreme Court intervention and rapid-fire tariff policy shifts inject fresh uncertainty into trans-Pacific trade lanes.
The Port of Long Beach moved 847,765 TEUs last month, down 11 percent year-over-year but still marking the facility’s second-busiest January on record. Sister port Los Angeles handled 812,000 TEUs, a 12 percent decline from the prior year’s elevated volumes.
Both gateways are comparing against January 2025, when importers frontloaded cargo ahead of anticipated tariff increases. “We’re comparing to elevated cargo levels from last January when importers were scrambling to get cargo in ahead of tariffs,” said Gene Seroka, Executive Director of the Port of Los Angeles. “Inventories also remain slightly higher, reflecting that earlier surge and a more cautious pace of restocking.”
Long Beach achieved its record-setting performance despite moving through a year shaped by policy volatility. The port handled 9.9 million TEUs in 2025, when “uncertainty prompted shippers to move goods before tariffs and reciprocal tariffs were implemented last spring,” according to Port CEO Dr. Noel Hacegaba.
“We are leading the nation in trade, and providing a safe harbor in the sea of tariff and trade uncertainty for our customers and the goods movement industry,” Hacegaba said during a Supply Chain Insight virtual media briefing. “No matter what happens with cargo volume, the Port of Long Beach has the capacity, infrastructure and workforce to move goods quickly, efficiently and reliably.”
Florida speedboat incident in Cuban waters
A confrontation between Cuban Border Guard forces and a Florida-registered speedboat in Cuban territorial waters has left four people dead and six injured, escalating tensions between the United States and Cuba and drawing sharp reactions from Florida lawmakers.
According to a statement from Cuba’s Ministry of the Interior, authorities detected a speedboat bearing Florida registration FL7726SH on Wednesday morning, roughly one nautical mile northeast of the El Pino channel near Cayo Falcones, in Villa Clara province. Cuban officials said a Border Guard vessel with five service members approached the boat for identification when, they allege, the occupants of the speedboat opened fire, wounding the Cuban vessel’s commander.
Cuban authorities said four people aboard the foreign vessel were killed and six injured during the confrontation. The injured were evacuated for medical treatment, and an investigation is ongoing, the ministry said.
Maritime visibility: sanctions, seizures, and the limits
The enforcement problem has changed. Detection is no longer the constraint. Attribution is.
In December 2025, a combined U.S. Coast Guard and Marine special operations team launched from the USS Gerald R. Ford to board the VLCC M/T Skipper off the coast of Venezuela, seizing 1.85 million barrels of crude. Ten days later, the M/T Centuries was taken in similar fashion, carrying another 1.8 million barrels. A third vessel, the Bella 1, fled across the North Atlantic before being seized with UK military assistance in early January 2026.
These were not routine port state inspections. They were kinetic operations backed by carrier strike groups and foreign military coordination. And they required something far more demanding than a satellite ping or an AIS alert. They required evidence.
This is the new reality of maritime sanctions enforcement: governments are willing to use military force, but only when the intelligence package meets an evidentiary threshold. The question facing the industry is no longer whether sanctioned vessels can be found. It is whether what you find can be proven.
Port import gains from supreme court tariff ruling may prove fleeting: Moody’s
The Supreme Court’s decision striking down sweeping tariffs imposed under emergency powers may provide a temporary lift to U.S. port volumes—but the bump could fade quickly as trade policy uncertainty persists, according to a new analysis from Moody’s Ratings.
The February 20 ruling invalidated tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), potentially triggering refunds on more than $90 billion in collected duties. Moody’s said removing those tariffs should lower landed costs on a wide range of consumer and intermediate goods, supporting import volumes and restocking activity—a credit positive for gateway ports.
But the relief may prove fleeting.
Within hours of the decision, President Trump announced a 10 percent global tariff for 150 days under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The new tariff began collection Tuesday. Confusion emerged after the rate remained at 10 percent despite earlier comments suggesting it could rise to 15 percent.
“We expect the Trump administration to pursue these routes to preserve tariffs and achieve its trade agenda, potentially increasing the cost of goods once again,” Moody’s said.
The agency cautioned that any sustained import surge will depend on how quickly and broadly new tariffs are imposed—and whether refunds on previously collected duties materialize.
Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Moody’s Supply Chain Industry Practice Lead, said the shifting landscape is straining commercial relationships. “The immediate impacts of the Supreme Court’s tariff decision and the new global levy have introduced new pressures on customer–supplier relationships,” he said. “Ongoing uncertainty around tariff rates, duration, and exemptions makes long-term planning challenging.”
Maintaining continuity may require temporary cost-sharing arrangements and shorter-term contracts, he added, warning supply chain leaders to prepare executives for higher component and material costs this year.