Transpacific Imports: What 2026 Holds for Your Costs

There’s so much bad information in the transpacific market right now that planning is a nightmare if your business depends on a clear view of your supply chain.

Myth 1: Transpacific Shipping Costs Will Soon Return to Pre-Pandemic Norms

A lot of businesses are still banking on the idea that the insane shipping costs of 2021 and 2022 were a fluke. They’re waiting for a full return to the sub-$2,000 per 40-foot container rates we saw before 2020. That’s a huge miscalculation. While spot rates have come down from the peak, they’ve settled on a new, much higher floor. A recent report from the OECD’s International Transport Forum (ITF) projects that global container rates will stay structurally higher. Why? Because of rising operational costs, new regulations, and a clear strategy from carriers to protect their profit margins. For instance, the IMO 2020 low-sulfur fuel rules, and now the IMO 2023 greenhouse gas regulations, have permanently baked higher fuel and compliance costs into the system, costs which get passed directly to shippers. We’re looking at a new floor, not a temporary ceiling. Think about the carrier consolidation that’s happened. The top five carriers now control over 60% of the world’s container capacity, which gives them enormous pricing power. They’ve repeatedly shown they’re willing to manage capacity with blank sailings (canceling entire voyages) to keep rates from crashing, even when demand gets a little soft. This is a matter of strategic control, plain and simple. For example, looking ahead to a hypothetical first quarter in 2026, even if global trade volumes dip slightly, you can bet carriers will announce a wave of blank sailings on key transpacific routes to prop up rates. This kind of active capacity management is a permanent feature of the market now. Businesses have to start budgeting for rates that are at least 20% to 30% higher than 2019, for the long haul.

Myth 2: Supply Chain Diversification is Too Expensive and Complex for Most Businesses

The belief that only giant multinational corporations can afford to move production out of China is outdated. China is still a manufacturing juggernaut, of course, but being all-in on one country exposes you to huge geopolitical risk, rising labor costs, and tariff whiplash. The idea that diversifying is too expensive usually comes from looking at the numbers wrong. Your ‘true cost’ isn’t just the unit price, it’s the unit price plus the cost of delays, the cost of holding extra inventory, and the hit you take from tariffs. We’re seeing plenty of small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) pull off “China Plus One” or even “China Plus Two” strategies. Vietnam, Thailand, and Mexico are becoming real options for all sorts of industries. A mid-sized electronics client of ours recently moved 30% of its assembly from Shenzhen to a new place in Ho Chi Minh City. Yes, there was some initial setup cost, but the move drastically reduced their US tariff exposure and gave them a more stable labor pool, making their whole supply chain stronger against regional problems. With the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in place, Mexico is also looking better and better for nearshoring, especially if you need quick turnarounds for the North American market. A Kearney report found that 79% of US manufacturing execs have either brought production back or are planning to. They’re doing it to shorten their supply chains and cut their dependence on faraway factories. The upfront investment in new supply lines often pays for itself pretty quickly through lower risk and faster response times.

Myth 3: Technology Solutions Are a Silver Bullet for All Supply Chain Woes

The market is drowning in pitches for AI and blockchain platforms that promise to magically fix all your supply chain problems. And while these new technologies are powerful, thinking they are a complete fix ignores the human and process problems at the heart of global logistics. You can’t just plug in a new visibility platform and walk away. It takes a ton of work integrating data, changing how your teams operate, and training people. Think about the nightmare of trying to pull data from a dozen different freight forwarders, vendors, and customs brokers who all use their own incompatible systems. A visibility platform like Project44 or FourKites can give you great real-time tracking, but its value depends entirely on the data it gets. If your supplier in Asia is late updating shipment info or your broker is using some ancient system, the fanciest platform in the world will just show you a blank screen. We’ve seen companies spend a fortune on these tools only to find their teams aren’t trained to use them, which leaves them with expensive software and the same old blind spots. Technology just amplifies your existing processes. It won’t magically create good ones for you. The real return on investment comes when you pair good tech with solid internal data practices and strong partnerships with your logistics providers.

Myth 4: Port Congestion is a Thing of the Past

Everyone remembers the insane backlogs at ports like Los Angeles and Long Beach in 2021-2022, and there’s a feeling that the problem is solved. The historic lines of ships are gone, but the underlying weaknesses in infrastructure and labor that caused the mess are still there. Any decent-sized surge in imports or a localized disruption can bring the delays roaring back. For example, labor negotiations on the West Coast are quiet right now, but they always have the potential to trigger slowdowns. Plus, major gateways like the Port of Savannah and the Port of New York and New Jersey are constantly running at the edge of their capacity. They’ve made some investments in things like deeper channels and bigger rail yards, but these are often just incremental fixes. A single big event, a hurricane, a strike, a sudden spike in consumer spending, can still cause delays that ripple through transpacific schedules for weeks. The Suez Canal blockage in 2021 showed the whole world how one choke point can bring global trade to its knees. And while everyone focuses on the ocean part, inland logistics like truck driver shortages and rail backups are just as big a part of the problem. Port congestion is just less dramatic than it was. It’s absolutely not gone. It’s a constant risk you have to plan for.

Myth 5: All Freight Forwarders Offer the Same Value

Too many businesses think a freight forwarder is just an interchangeable booking agent, so they pick one based on the lowest quoted price. This completely misses the point. An expert forwarder is your problem-solver, strategic advisor, and crisis manager. A cheap rate often means you’re getting terrible communication, no one to call when a problem pops up, and limited access to space. A real freight forwarder works like part of your own logistics team. They have deep market knowledge, personal relationships with carriers, and know how to get things through complex customs rules. When the Red Sea disruptions hit hard in late 2023 and early 2024, the forwarders with diverse carrier contacts and strong operations teams were the ones re-routing cargo and finding alternate capacity. The cheap guys were just stuck. The good ones understood the details of vessel sharing agreements and could see the cascading delays coming. Their real value is providing proactive solutions when things inevitably go wrong, not just booking space on a ship. When you choose a forwarder, you should be looking at their communication, their global network, their tech tools (like a decent tracking portal), and their history of managing problems. A good forwarder is a strategic partner, not a commodity you shop on price. The transpacific is a complicated field that changes constantly, and you have to adapt. To get through the next disruption, you need to build a more resilient supply chain by diversifying your sourcing, using technology smartly, and working with real partners.