New Articles

From Exports to Delivery: Simplifying PPE Shipping

PPE

From Exports to Delivery: Simplifying PPE Shipping

From small businesses to large corporations, many are navigating the complex world of importing personal protective equipment (PPE) for employees, family members, and customers as businesses reopen across the globe.

Whether you have navigated these waters before or are new to importing PPE, COVID-19 has changed the game. In response to the changing environment, our team of experts at C.H. Robinson put together information on four key subjects that will help your PPE supply chain run smoother during a time when simplicity is what you need most.

Exporting PPE from China

Over the past several months, China has been the main source for PPE. So, it’s important you’re up to date on the latest regulations to avoid your freight being held up.

China has recently implemented three key policies that relate to PPE exporting.

-Policy 5 requires all medical supplies to meet quality standards of the importing countries, this policy also separated out the process for medical-grade and non-medical-use devices.

-Policy 53 increases CIQ inspection on all PPE products, labels, packaging, and documentation.

-Policy 12 created a white and blacklist of manufacturers and suppliers.

While China’s new policies offer tighter control on PPE being exported, they also have created a dedicated HS-code for PPE products to simplify export declarations.

For a closer look at how China’s regulations impact PPE shipping, check out our recent PPE exporting video featuring our director of product development, Vincent Wong.

U.S. and Canada customs best practices

The next key subject to address is importing PPE into the United States and/or Canada. It’s important you understand various government agency requirements and determine which ones apply depending on whether the PPE is for general or medical use. From there, other factors like labeling, packaging, and marketing of the product can influence these regulations as well.

Importing PPE into the United States

Depending on the PPE commodity you are importing, there can be multiple U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requirements to navigate. And due to the nature of the shipping industry, these regulations can change quickly—especially for medical grade equipment.

Importing PPE into Canada

While importing into Canada has some similarities—like changing regulations—there are some clear differences to be aware of as well. It’s important to note that while intended use, labeling, packaging, and advertising can be used to determine medical vs. general use in Canada, this is ultimately determined by the Canadian inspectors.

Whether you are importing PPE into the U.S. or Canada, make certain to watch our video on customs best practices with Ben Bidwell, director of North America customs and compliance, in order to better understand requirements, expectations and regulations for PPE.

Metered freight solutions

In this environment, we’re seeing companies turn to air freight to move their personal protective equipment quickly. However, when the demand for passenger travel plummeted in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, a dramatic reduction in cargo capacity followed. As you might imagine, this has drastically changed normal market conditions for air shipping.

While delivering all your PPE as fast as possible via air might seem like your only option, solutions like freight metering, which utilizes both air and ocean, can also meet your needs while providing cost-savings.

Ask yourself:

-How much of our PPE do we really need to fly?

-How much of that is safety stock?

-What’s the end user consumption rate?

-What’s the output rate at the factory?

Answers to these questions and cross-functional conversations that include purchasers, factory contacts, logistics providers, and end users can reveal that only a portion of your purchase order (PO) should fly and a balance of it should ship as ocean freight.

The key to metering your freight is to choose air freight for just enough of your order to match your end-users’ consumption rate. As ocean freight catches up, it can significantly reduce your freight spend.

Looking for more benefits of a metered air and ocean shipping solution for critical PPE orders? Watch our metered freight solutions video, featuring Bogen Chi, director of air freight.

FCL and LCL expedited ocean shipping

Lastly, we understand your need to continue moving your PPE cargo as quickly and cost-effectively as possible. Utilizing expedited less than container load (LCL) or full container load (FCL) shipping could be the differentiator you need. In fact, depending on your PPE’s delivery city, C.H. Robinson’s expedited LCL services can cut traditional LCL transit time by 4 to 14 days and keep your costs nearly 80% lower than air freight services.

Watch our expedited ocean shipping video with Ali Ashraf and Greg Scott to explore if this smart transportation solution is right for your supply chain.

In conclusion

Personal protective equipment has become an extremely important and in-demand commodity as we face COVID-19. So, whether you’re looking to import PPE for the first time or as part of your normal procurement process, C.H. Robinson’s experts can help you build a more resilient supply chain when shipping PPE around the globe. As the market continues to change, our global suite of service offerings and market expertise remains available to help your PPE supply chain. We’re here to help today so you can have a better PPE process tomorrow.

hydrogen peroxide

Global Hydrogen Peroxide Market – India ($55M), Germany ($54M), and the U.S. ($48M) are the Most Promising Overseas Markets

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Hydrogen Peroxide – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global hydrogen peroxide market revenue amounted to $3.2B in 2018, going up by 8% against the previous year. The market value increased at an average annual rate of +2.5% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations over the period under review. The global hydrogen peroxide consumption peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Imports 2007-2018

In value terms, hydrogen peroxide imports totaled $823M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +2.7% from 2007 to 2018.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Germany (153K tonnes), followed by Italy (100K tonnes), the U.S. (91K tonnes), India (88K tonnes) and Russia (87K tonnes) represented the major importers of hydrogen peroxide, together comprising 30% of total imports. The following importers – France (70K tonnes), the Netherlands (65K tonnes), Austria (62K tonnes), Taiwan (61K tonnes), Chile (47K tonnes), Mexico (47K tonnes) and Belgium (45K tonnes) – together made up 23% of total imports.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Italy, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, India ($55M), Germany ($54M) and the U.S. ($48M) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 19% share of global imports.

Import Prices by Country

The average hydrogen peroxide import price stood at $483 per tonne in 2018, picking up by 4.2% against the previous year. In general, the hydrogen peroxide import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 when the average import price increased by 5.7% year-to-year. In that year, the average import prices for hydrogen peroxide reached their peak level of $535 per tonne. From 2009 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average import prices for hydrogen peroxide remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was India ($619 per tonne), while Austria ($315 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by India, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

trade protectionism

Trade Protectionism Won’t Help Fight COVID-19

Countries around the world are limiting international trade and turning inward, seeking to produce nearly everything — especially medical supplies — themselves.

The Trump administration, for instance, is considering a “Buy American” executive order that would require federal agencies to purchase domestically made masks, ventilators, and medicines. And over two dozen countries — including France, Germany, South Korea, and Taiwan — have banned domestic companies from exporting medical supplies.

The scramble for self-sufficiency in medical supplies and medicines needed to fight the coronavirus is make-believe. It is neither feasible nor desirable, and will only deepen the pain felt amidst this pandemic.

Governments around the world have responded to COVID-19 by imposing export restrictions on things like ventilators and masks. In mid-April, Syria became the 76th country to follow suit. The import side of things isn’t much better. The World Trade Organization (WTO) reports that tariffs remain stubbornly high on protective medical gear, averaging 11.5 percent across the 164 members of the Geneva-based institution, and peaking at just under 30 percent.

This is no way to fight a pandemic.

It’s not that COVID-19 caused this bout of trade protectionism. It’s just that COVID-19 offers up a useful narrative to promote trade protectionism.

The Trump administration, for instance, has been touting its “Buy American” executive order as a move to spur local manufacturing. Canada has also considered going it alone in ventilators and masks, but recently acknowledged it can’t possibly achieve self-sufficiency in medicines. No one can.

The way many governments see it, the only thing standing in the way of greater self-reliance in medical equipment and medicines is the will to pay for it. The story is that ventilators might be more expensive if made domestically, but that’s the cost of going it alone. It’s only a matter of getting Bauer and Brooks Brothers, for example, to make personal protective equipment, rather than hockey gear and clothing.

But there’s a reason Bauer makes skates instead of surgical masks. It’s better at it, and skates are a much more lucrative business. Bauer didn’t misread the market. It’s heartwarming to hear that Bauer is stepping in to help out, but the company knows that making surgical masks in the US is five times more expensive than making them in China. That’s why 95 percent of the surgical masks in the US are imported.

The absurdity of self-sufficiency in medicines is even more glaring. The US is a major exporter of medicines, but the raw chemicals used to make them are imported. Nearly three-quarters of the facilities that manufacture America’s “active pharmaceutical ingredients” are overseas. To reorient supply chains to produce these ingredients domestically would take up to 10 years and cost $2 billion for each new facility.  Consumers would pay at least 30 percent more at the pharmacy.

The last plug for self-sufficiency in medical equipment and medicines is that it’s not a good idea to depend on adversaries to keep us healthy. We don’t. What’s striking about medicines, medical equipment, and personal protective products is that market share is highly concentrated among allies. For example, Germany, the US, and Switzerland supply 35 percent of medical products sold worldwide. True, China leads the top ten list of personal protective products, at 17 percent market share, but the other nine, including the US at number three, are all longstanding allies. To be sure, the untold story of China is that it depends on Germany and the United States for nearly 40 percent of its medical products.

This past week, the WTO and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) called for an end to the folly of trade restrictions during this pandemic. The communique should have — but obviously couldn’t — call out governments around the world for maintaining, on average, a 17 percent tariff on soap. That tariffs on face masks average nearly 10 percent is baffling. That 20 countries in the WTO have no legal ceiling on the tariffs they impose on medicines is unforgivable.

Self-sufficiency in medical supplies and medicines is a political sop. It’s a narrative that can’t deliver anything but misery. If governments want to fight COVID-19, they should spend more time looking at how they’re denying themselves access to medical necessities, and less time on how to deny others the tools to save lives.

______________________________________________________________________

Marc L. Busch is the Karl F. Landegger professor of international business diplomacy at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a nonresident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council.

needles

Global Needles And Catheters Market 2020 – Key Insights

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Needles, Catheters, Cannulae For Medicine – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global needles and catheters market size reached $32.4B in 2018, picking up by 7.3% against the previous year. The market value increased at an average annual rate of +4.8% from 2009 to 2018. Over the period under review, the global needles and catheters market reached its peak figure level in 2018 and is likely to see steady growth in the near future.

Global Trade of Needles And Catheters 2009-2018

In value terms, needles and catheters exports totaled $32B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, the total exports indicated a remarkable increase from 2009 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +2.4% over the last decade. Based on 2018 figures, needles and catheters exports increased by +28.1% against 2016 indices. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2012 when exports increased by 18% y-o-y.

Exports by Country

In value terms, the U.S. ($7.1B), the Netherlands ($4.4B) and Ireland ($3.9B) constituted the countries with the highest levels of exports in 2018, together comprising 48% of global exports. These countries were followed by Mexico, Germany, Belgium, Costa Rica, China, Malaysia, the UK, Hungary and Poland, which together accounted for a further 36%.

Hungary experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to the value of exports, among the main exporting countries over the period under review, while exports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports by Country

The largest needles and catheters importing markets worldwide were the U.S. ($5.4B), the Netherlands ($3.4B) and Germany ($2.3B), with a combined 39% share of global imports. These countries were followed by Japan, China, Belgium, France, the UK, Italy, Mexico, Spain and South Korea, which together accounted for a further 33%.

In terms of the main importing countries, China experienced the highest growth rate of the value of imports, over the period under review, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average needles and catheters import price amounted to $54,311 per tonne, jumping by 2.8% against the previous year. Over the period from 2009 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.0%. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016 when the average import price increased by 67% against the previous year. The global import price peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was the Netherlands ($149,780 per tonne), while South Korea ($33,777 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2009 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by the Netherlands, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform