New Articles

THESE COMPANIES KEEP CROSS-BORDER CARGO MOVING, EVEN WITH USMCA UP IN THE AIR

USMCA

THESE COMPANIES KEEP CROSS-BORDER CARGO MOVING, EVEN WITH USMCA UP IN THE AIR

Our trilateral trade bloc is in a sort of limbo, stuck between the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that went into effect on Jan. 1, 1994, and the floundering United States Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA), which the countries’ leaders signed on Nov. 30, 2018, but has only been ratified in Mexico.

According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has pushed for more ease of free trade among the three nations for years, about $1.7 billion worth of goods and services flow between the U.S. and Mexico borders every day. That’s about 2 percent of the GDP in America, where, according to the United Nations’ International Trade Center, Mexico and Canada are the two largest trading partners for U.S. manufacturers and shippers after China.

Despite these uncertain times, there are North American cross-border traders that continue to thrive. Consider the collection that follows. 

AVERITT EXPRESS

One of the nation’s leading freight transportation and supply chain management providers, Averitt is celebrating 50 years of service. The company cites customized, cross-border transportation solutions among its many, many specialties. Five years ago, Averitt slashed less-than-truckload (LTL) service times from the U.S. Midwest to Ontario, Canada, in recognition of the province’s rise as a manufacturing hub. Averitt’s strategically placed border service centers in Laredo, El Paso, Harlingen and Del Rio provide easy access to all points throughout Mexico, by rail, truck or expedited air. 

BNSF RAILWAY

One of North America’s leading freight transportation companies, BNSF boasts a.32,500 route-mile network covering 28 U.S. states and three Canadian provinces. The railway utilizes multiple strategies to make international shipments easier for customers. These include market experience, customs clearance know-how and participation in special North American rail service alliances. The BNSF network also includes five U.S.-Mexico gateways (San Diego, El Paso, Eagle Pass, Laredo and Brownsville) and operations in Fort Worth, Texas, and Mexico City, Guadalajara and Monterrey, Mexico. Service options include carload, transload and intermodal (Mexi-Modal) that allow for shipments of all major commodities into and out of Mexico.  

CG RAILWAY

Picture in your head a railroad line extending from the American South to southern Mexico. You can imagine the track snaking along the contour of the Gulf of Mexico, extending west from Alabama through Mississippi and Louisiana before reaching Texas and turning due south through the border and beyond. What you did not picture was a shift from rail at Alabama’s Port of Mobile to an ocean ferry making a direct route over water to Puerto Coatzacoalcos in Veracruz, Mexico. That’s what CG Railway (CGR) has been doing since 2000: providing a faster, more cost-effective route between the eastern U.S. and Canada to central and southern Mexico. CGR offers C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism) certification, bilingual customer support, proactive port security, reduced mileage and wear and tear on equipment and direct interchanges with the CSX, Norfolk Southern, Canadian National and Kansas City Southern railroads, the Alabama & Gulf Coast Railway and Terminal Railway Alabama State Docks and their Mexican counterparts. 

CN NORTH AMERICA

Canadian National is based in Montreal, Quebec, and the Class I freight railway’s network is the largest in that country by physical size and revenue. Established in 1919 and formerly government-owned, Canada’s only transcontinental railway spans from the Atlantic coast in Nova Scotia to the Pacific coast in British Columbia, across about 20,400 route miles of track. But you’d be mistaken to think CN, as it has more commonly known since 1960, is strictly a Great White North concern. The railway also serves the U.S. South and Midwest and, having gone private in 1995, it now counts as its single largest shareholder Bill Gates. Through the ’90s and 2000s, CN North America has acquired multiple lines passing through several U.S. states.

CROWLEY

The private, Jacksonville, Florida-based corporation is the largest operator of tugboats and barges in the world. Crowley American Transport provides ocean liner cargo services between the U.S., Canada, Mexico, South America and the Caribbean. Its American Marine Transport unit delivers local, over-the-road, and commercial trucking services in the continental U.S. Crowley Marine Services provides worldwide contract and specialized marine transportation services, including petroleum product transportation and sales, tanker escort and ship assist, contract barge transportation and ocean towing, logistics and support services, marine salvage and emergency response services, spill-response services on the West Coast and all-terrain transportation services.

CSX TRANSPORTATION

The subsidiary of CSX Corp., a Fortune 500 company headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, CSX Transportation is a Class I freight railroad operating in the eastern United States and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec. The railroad operates around 21,000 route miles of track. While its lines blanket the east coasts of Canada and the U.S., you don’t have to be located on railroad track for CSX to help you, as it has access to 70 ports and nationwide transloading and warehousing services.

DB SCHENKER 

The global logistics and supply chain management giant has 93 branches in every U.S. state, Mexico and Canada. Schenker of Canada Ltd. provides logistics services, airfreight, custom brokerage, custom consulting, sports events, land transport and courier services. DB Schenker Mexico celebrated its 40th anniversary in 2017, having begun down there with a single location and 40 associates and now boasting of 500 employees in its corporate office in Mexico City as well as in Guadalajara, Monterrey, Queretaro, Puebla, Cancun, Ciudad Juarez and various other branches. DB Schenker Mexico offers air freight, ocean freight, land freight, customs brokerage, over-dimensioned projects, warehousing and contract logistics.

KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN

The KCS North American rail holdings and strategic alliances are primary components of a NAFTA railway system linking the commercial and industrial centers of the U.S., Mexico and Canada. “KCS is just one interchange away from every major market in North America,” boasts the railroad. KC Southern de Mexico offers unique rail access to the Port of Lazaro Cardenas on Mexico’s Pacific coast, which is an ideal spot to avoid congestion in U.S. West Coast ports. KCS also has access to Gulf of Mexico ports, including Altamira, Tampico and Veracruz in Mexico and Brownsville, New Orleans, Corpus Christi, Houston, Gulfport, Lake Charles, Mobile and Port Arthur in the U.S. 

LIVINGSTON INTERNATIONAL

Billed as North America’s No. 1 company focused on customs brokerage and compliance, Livingston International also offers international trade consulting and freight forwarding across the continent and around the globe. Headquartered in Chicago, Livingston operates along the U.S.-Canada border, with regional air/sea hubs in Los Angeles, New York and Norfolk. Livingston employs more than 3,200 employees at more than 125 key border points, seaports, airports and other strategic locations in North America, Europe and the Far East. Livingston is a customs brokerage leader in Canada, and the company also promises to move goods seamlessly into Mexico.

LOGISTICS PLUS

Whether it is working as a 3PL or 4PL partner, the Erie, Pennsylvania-based company specializes in total logistics management, LTL and truckload transportation, rail and intermodal services, project cargo and project management, import/export services, air and ocean freight forwarding, warehousing and distribution, global trade compliance services and logistics and technology solutions. Logistics Plus serves small and large businesses throughout the Greater Toronto Area, with an office in the zone that has access to the Port of Toronto and expertise in shipping in and out of Canada though the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. Bilingual logistics experts help customers with intra-Mexico, cross-border, or international shipping using air, ocean, ground or rail transportation. 

LYNDEN

Seattle-based Lynden not only delivers to, from and within Canada, the company does business there. Its long-established Canadian presence allows it to provide complete coverage for any transportation need. They can help with warehousing and distribution or 3PL in Canada, where Lynden boasts of knowing “the ins and outs of customs brokerage, duties and taxes, imports and exports.” From its offices in Edmonton and Calgary, Alberta, and Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Lynden offers scheduled less-than-truckload (LTL) and truckload (TL) service to points in Alaska and the Lower 48.

LYNNCO

The Tulsa, Oklahoma-based company optimizes customers’ supply chains coast-to-coast in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. LynnCo manages businesses and determines how and when ground, international air/ocean, spot/capacity, procurement and expedited services are the best options. For instance, LynnCo helped a U.S. manufacturer determine if shifting units to Mexico was profitable. The answer was no after factoring in the risks of moving, poor facilities, added shipping costs and product quality. 

POLARIS TRANSPORTATION GROUP

Billing itself as “an American company headquartered in Toronto,” Polaris has a quarter century of experience in scheduled LTL service between the U.S. and Canada. The company knows both countries’ customs rules and participates in every border security program, including C-TPAT, PIP (Partners in Protection), CSA (Customs Self- Assessment) and FAST (Free and Secure Trade). The company’s scheduled service connects Ontario and Quebec markets with the U.S. through a combination of its fleet and facilities along with those of its long-established partner carriers.

PUROLATOR INTERNATIONAL

The U.S. subsidiary of Canada’s leading provider of integrated freight and parcel delivery services, Jericho, New York-based Purolator International seamlessly transports shipments between the U.S. and Canada and manages the respective countries’ customs processes with aplomb. They pick up/drop off at every point in the U.S. and boast of a distribution network that extends to every Canadian province and territory. What truly takes Purolator International over the top is a commitment to continue improving, as evidenced by a recent $1 billion growth investment that includes two new hubs that will allow for faster fulfillment for both courier and e-commerce shipments from the U.S. throughout Canada, where consumers also will be seeing more access points, including upgraded retail pickup locations.

R+L GLOBAL

“Shipping to Mexico is facil,” according to Ocala, Florida-based R+L Global Logistics. Its qualified network of premium carriers in Mexico provide secure door-to-door Less than Truckload (LTL) and Full Truckload (FTL) services. They cover the entire Mexican territory and move cargo across all major U.S./Mexico border gateways. They also move intra-Mexico shipments. 

SCHNEIDER

The Green Bay, Wisconsin-based giant specializes in regional trucking, long-haul, bulk, intermodal, supply chain management, brokerage, warehousing, port logistics and transloading. Decades of cross-border freight experience means customer cargo moves without question or delay. Once goods move across the border, Schneider has the assets and personnel in place to deliver it safely and securely. “Here’s the simple fact: No one makes shipping to Canada and Mexico easier or more efficient than Schneider,” the company boasts. “By road or by rail, your freight is in the best hands possible.”

SENKO 

The Japanese logistics giant has offices in the U.S., where their own trucks and warehouses work with a network of vendors. The 3PL/4PL supply chain solutions provider uses its own IT technology developed in Japan to help arrange liquid tank transportation, flatbed, drayage, refrigerated, dry, expedited shipping and freight broker services. Senko Logistics Mexico is the company unit south of the border.

SUNSET TRANSPORTATION

The St. Louis-based company has offices and agents across the country, and customers whose shipments are moved around the globe. Sunset arranges freight for a wide range of industries, from wholesale food distribution to specialized construction equipment. “Cross-border solutions” include customs clearance for land, rail, air and ocean, LTL, TL, intermodal, rail, air, expedited and specialized freight, contracted lane and spot market, C-TPAT compliance, multimodal programs, a Laredo, Texas, warehouse and distribution facility and 24/7 bilingual, bicultural support.

SURGERE 

Headquartered in North Canton, Ohio, Surgere is a leader in linking OEMs, tier suppliers and logistics providers through an automotive data system that provides visibility on returnable containers at every stage of their movement between supplier and vehicle maker. The supply chain innovators, whose clients include Nissan and CEVA Logistics, recently opened Technologias Avanzadas Surgere de Mexico in Aguascalientes, Mexico, which has more than 1,300 suppliers and automotive plants within 200 kilometers of the location. “Central Mexico is the automotive hub for Latin America—making it a natural progression—and a welcomed challenge for us,” explained David Hampton, Surgere’s vice president for International Operations, in announcing the move. Surgere hopes to have the Mexico office fully staffed before the end of this year.

TQL

Cincinnati, Ohio-based Total Quality Logistics (TQL) was founded in 1997 and is now the second-largest freight brokerage firm in the nation, with more than 5,500 employees in 57 offices across the county. Known for combining industry-leading technology and unmatched customer service, TQL boasts of providing competitive pricing, continuous communication and “a commitment to do it right every time.” They move more than 1.6 million loads across the U.S., Canada and Mexico annually through a broad portfolio of logistics services and a network of more than 75,000 carriers.

USA TRUCK

The Van Buren, Arkansas-based company provides customized truckload, dedicated contract carriage, intermodal and third-party logistics freight management services throughout North America. USA Truck has nearly two decades of experience servicing Mexico, which has allowed the company to expand its presence south of the border and partner with many Mexican carriers. USA Truck’s Capacity Solutions coordinates transportation into and out of Mexico with a vast carrier network, and they service most major Mexican markets and consistently maintain C-TPAT certification. USA Truck also has a select fleet of third-party carriers providing service into the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, Canada.

UTXL

Launched in 1997 by four founders with more than 100 years of combined asset-based trucking experience, UTXL started with this goal: to be the safest, most reliable and cost effective niche capacity resource to customers in support of their core carrier programs. UTXL has served thousands of shippers across the U.S., Canada and Mexico, including some of the largest shippers in the world. One of their mottos is: “Any point in the U.S., Canada or Mexico … any length of haul.”

WERNER ENTERPRISES

“We keep America moving” is the motto of this Omaha, Nebraska-based company that has one of the largest transportation services to and from Mexico and is a premiere long-haul carrier to and from Canada and throughout North America. Werner has offices in Mexico and Canada as well as experienced and knowledgeable staff engineer solutions. PAR documentation allows for quicker access through customs into Canada, and their network of alliance carriers can manage entire supply chains within Canada and Mexico regardless of equipment needs.

WW SOLUTIONS

The unit of Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics participates in Mexico’s automotive industry not only as a carrier and logistics provider. WW Solutions specializes in processing solutions at ports and at OEM plants, providing services that include pre-delivery inspections, accessory fittings, repairs, storage, washing, vehicle preparation, quality control, inventory management and the procurement of technical services.

YRC FREIGHT

Yellow Transportation (founded in 1924 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma) merged with Roadway (founded in 1930 in Akron, Ohio) to create YRC Freight, which is the largest subsidiary of YRC Worldwide Inc. based in Overland Park, Kansas. A leading transporter of industrial, commercial and retail goods, YRC Freight offers solutions for businesses across North America and is the only carrier with on-site, bilingual representatives at border crossing points in Mexico to expedite customs clearance.

C-TPAT

C-TPAT DRIVES SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY AND TRADE COMPLIANCE

In today’s ever-chaining business environment, organizations are faced with ongoing security challenges. It’s crucial for shippers to understand any potential risks to their supply chains and establish security plans to avoid disruption. One significant way for shippers to proactively protect their operations is by becoming a member of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program.

Established in 2001, as a direct result of the September 11 terror attacks, the C-TPAT program is part of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) multi-layered cargo enforcement strategy. Through this voluntary program, the CBP works with the importers, shippers, carriers, brokers and logistics providers to implement best practices for ensuring a safe, secure and expeditious supply chain. Today, there are more than 11,400 certified C-TPAT partners in the program, and these companies account for more than 52 percent of the products imported into the U.S.

C-TPAT Member Benefits

In addition to promoting supply chain security, participating in the C-TPAT program can yield significant benefits for shippers and transportation providers, including:

Fewer customs inspections – C-TPAT certification offers companies the opportunity to decrease customs inspections and documentation reviews. According to the CBP, C-TPAT members are 3.5 times less likely to incur a security or compliance examination. 

Faster border crossings – Members have access to special Free and Secure Trade (FAST) lanes at border crossings, and can move to the front of the line during inspections. This can significantly expedite border crossings at many Canada/Mexico land border ports.

Quick response time – Following a national emergency, companies participating in the C-TPAT program are eligible to resume business first. 

Enhanced reputation – Participating in a national security program reflects a company’s ongoing commitment to safety. Some companies will only do business with importers that are C-TPAT certified–giving members a competitive edge. 

Cost avoidance – By decreasing potential supply chain disruptions, C-TPAT members can avoid costs associated with delayed shipments. Additionally, organizations penalized in any way is eligible to receive up to a 50 percent reduction on the imposed fine. 

Joining C-TPAT

While almost every organization that is involved in the import and export business can enroll in the C-TPAT program, eligibility requirements vary by business type. But to achieve certification, all companies are required to:

-Conduct a risk assessment

-Implement a supply chain security management system that complies with C-TPAT requirements

-Submit a detailed application

 -Meet with CBP representatives to verify security measures

In addition to obtaining their own certification, organizations can support the C-TPAT program by working with third-party logistics (3PL) providers that are also C-TPAT certified. C-TPAT-certified 3PLs act as an additional layer of protection against supply chain attacks, because they operate as an extension of the company’s established security procedures, essentially building a stronger company brand. 

A 3PL with active participation in the Mexican and Canadian markets also brings a portfolio of carriers and companies that are approved by C-TPAT, or that comply with minimum requirements for C-TPAT partners, essentially giving shippers a competitive advantage. 

Addressing Evolving Supply Chain Risks


As supply chain risk continues to evolve, so too do the C-TPAT requirements. In May, the CBP announced that it has added Minimum-Security Criteria (MSC) requirements to the C-TPAT guidelines to help further mitigate risks. Some of the areas that were incorporated and updated in the program’s new criteria included:

-Issues related to cyber security

-Protection of the supply chain from agricultural contaminants and pests

-Prevention of money laundering and terrorism financing

-The proper use and management of security technology, such as intrusion alarms and security camera systems

-Members are expected to implement the new criteria throughout the remainder of 2019, and validation of the new MSC will begin in early 2020.

Support Supply Chain Safety

With security risks threatening supply chains around the globe, it is important for companies to support initiatives that aim to tackle and prevent supply chain risks. By obtaining C-the certification, businesses have the unique opportunity to take an active role in supporting national security while improving their own supply chain operations. 

While there are no costs associated with joining the C-TPAT program, companies often have to invest in improving their practices to meet the minimum-security requirements and effectively maintain a compliant program. However, this investment goes a long way in helping companies mitigate risk, avoid supply chain disruptions and drive greater efficiencies for cross-border transport.  

______________________________________________________________

Linda Bravo is the Corporate Customs Broker at Transplace, where Sergio Flores is the Safety and Security Coordinator. Transplace is a 3PL provider offering logistics technology and transportation management services to manufacturers, retailers, chemical and consumer packaged goods companies. Learn more at Transplace.com.

syrup

U.S. Market for Flavoring Syrup And Concentrate Peaked at $12B in 2018 and Is Likely to See Steady Growth

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. Flavoring Syrup And Concentrate Market. Analysis And Forecast to 2025’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the flavoring syrup and concentrate market in the U.S. amounted to $12B in 2018, rising by 5.5% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The market value increased at an average annual rate of +5.1% from 2013 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when the market value increased by 17% against the previous year. Flavoring syrup and concentrate consumption peaked in 2018 and is likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

Production of Flavoring Syrups And Concentrates in the U.S.

In value terms, flavoring syrup and concentrate production stood at $11.8B in 2018. The total output value increased at an average annual rate of +4.4% from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when production volume increased by 16% y-o-y. Over the period under review, flavoring syrup and concentrate production attained its peak figure level in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Exports from the U.S.

Flavoring syrup and concentrate exports from the U.S. amounted to 11K tonnes in 2018, dropping by -15.5% against the previous year. Overall, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports continue to indicate a dramatic shrinkage. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2015 when exports decreased by -0.2% year-to-year. Over the period under review, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports attained their maximum at 49K tonnes in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports amounted to $98M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports continue to indicate a drastic deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when exports increased by 1% against the previous year. Over the period under review, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports reached their maximum at $237M in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports by Country

Guatemala (2.1K tonnes) was the main destination for flavoring syrup and concentrate exports from the U.S., accounting for a 20% share of total exports. Moreover, flavoring syrup and concentrate exports to Guatemala exceeded the volume sent to the second major destination, Brazil (832 tonnes), threefold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Japan (644 tonnes), with a 5.9% share.

From 2013 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume to Guatemala amounted to +13.4%. Exports to the other major destinations recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: Brazil (-21.1% per year) and Japan (-32.9% per year).

In value terms, the largest markets for flavoring syrup and concentrate exported from the U.S. were South Korea ($14M), the Netherlands ($11M) and Guatemala ($9.8M), together comprising 35% of total exports.

South Korea experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, among the main countries of destination over the last five-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average flavoring syrup and concentrate export price amounted to $8,975 per tonne, picking up by 20% against the previous year. In general, the flavoring syrup and concentrate export price continues to indicate a prominent increase. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 an increase of 63% y-o-y. The export price peaked in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was South Korea ($27,871 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Israel ($3,031 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to the Netherlands (+56.1% per year), while the prices for the other major destinations experienced more modest paces of growth.

Companies Mentioned in the Report

The Coca-Cola Company, Sensient Technologies Corporation, Flavor & Fragrance Specialties, David Michael & Co., Flotek Industries, Sodastream Usa, Tampico Beverages, Agrana Fruit Us, Bi Nutraceuticals, Monin, Virginia Dare Extract Co., Illes Food Ingredients, Mane, Delavau, Dr Pepper/Seven Up, R. Torre & Company, Wiley Organics, American Fruits and Flavors, Mastertaste, Allen Flavors, Felbro Food Products, Delano Growers Grape Products, Eagle Beverage and Accessory Products, Sensient Flavors, Jus-Made, Caribbean Refrescos, Cesi Chemical

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

corn exports

U.S. Wet Corn Exports Rose for the Third Consecutive Year

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. Wet Corn Market. Analysis And Forecast to 2025’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the wet corn market in the U.S. amounted to $8.7B in 2018, dropping by -8.3% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). Over the period under review, wet corn consumption continues to indicate a drastic deduction. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2016 with a decrease of -1.8% against the previous year. Wet corn consumption peaked at $15.3B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Wet Corn Production in the U.S.

In value terms, wet corn production stood at $9.6B in 2018. In general, wet corn production continues to indicate an abrupt shrinkage. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2016 when production volume decreased by -1.1% year-to-year. Wet corn production peaked at $16.7B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, production remained at a lower figure.

Exports from the U.S.

In 2018, the amount of wet corn exported from the U.S. stood at 2.1M tonnes, falling by -15.1% against the previous year. Over the period under review, wet corn exports continue to indicate a perceptible decline. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2016 when exports increased by 5.2% year-to-year. Over the period under review, wet corn exports reached their peak figure at 2.6M tonnes in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, wet corn exports stood at $922M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, wet corn exports continue to indicate a deep shrinkage. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 with an increase of 1.8% y-o-y. Over the period under review, wet corn exports attained their peak figure at $1.6B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

Ireland (493K tonnes), Israel (265K tonnes) and Colombia (147K tonnes) were the main destinations of wet corn exports from the U.S., with a combined 43% share of total exports. Chile, Egypt, the UK, Indonesia, Turkey, Morocco, New Zealand, Portugal and China lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 39%.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main countries of destination, was attained by New Zealand (+86.2% per year), while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Chile ($96M), Ireland ($92M) and Colombia ($78M) were the largest markets for wet corn exported from the U.S. worldwide, together accounting for 29% of total exports. Egypt, Indonesia, China, Israel, the UK, New Zealand, Turkey, Morocco and Portugal lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 34%.

New Zealand recorded the highest growth rate of exports, among the main countries of destination over the last five-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The average wet corn export price stood at $435 per tonne in 2018, going down by -11.2% against the previous year. In general, the wet corn export price continues to indicate a deep descent. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2015 when the average export price increased by 1.7% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the average export prices for wet corn attained their peak figure at $629 per tonne in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was China ($1,055 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Portugal ($153 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to China, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced a decline.

Imports into the U.S.

In 2018, approx. 467K tonnes of wet corn were imported into the U.S.; increasing by 5.5% against the previous year. Overall, the total imports indicated a strong expansion from 2013 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +9.5% over the last five years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, wet corn imports increased by +57.5% against 2013 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2015 with an increase of 16% year-to-year. Imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, wet corn imports totaled $506M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +7.7% over the period from 2013 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when imports increased by 12% y-o-y. In that year, wet corn imports reached their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

Thailand (128K tonnes), Germany (70K tonnes) and the Netherlands (41K tonnes) were the main suppliers of wet corn imports to the U.S., with a combined 51% share of total imports. These countries were followed by Pakistan, Denmark, France, China, Belgium, Taiwan, Chinese, Poland, Viet Nam and Brazil, which together accounted for a further 34%.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main suppliers, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest wet corn suppliers to the U.S. were Germany ($84M), Thailand ($82M) and the Netherlands ($46M), together comprising 42% of total imports. France, Belgium, Pakistan, China, Denmark, Taiwan, Chinese, Viet Nam, Brazil and Poland lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 40%.

Viet Nam recorded the highest growth rate of imports, among the main suppliers over the last five-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average wet corn import price amounted to $1,083 per tonne, rising by 6.6% against the previous year. In general, the wet corn import price, however, continues to indicate a mild downturn. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2018 when the average import price increased by 6.6% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the average import prices for wet corn reached their maximum at $1,194 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major supplying countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Belgium ($2,141 per tonne), while the price for Thailand ($641 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Taiwan, Chinese, while the prices for the other major suppliers experienced more modest paces of growth.

Companies Mentioned in the Report

Archer-Daniels-Midland Company, Ingredion Incorporated, Roquette America, Inc., Penford Corporation, Penford Products Co., Briess Industries, Inc., Rahr Malting Co., Malteurop North America Inc., Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas LLC, Malt Products Corporation, Enjoy Life Natural Brands, Semo Milling, Great Western Malting Co, Western Polymer Corporation, Gro Alliance, Philadelphia Beer Works Inc, Unilever Bestfoods North America, Anderson Custom Processing, Tate & Lyle Americas, Great Western Malting, La Aceitera Inc, Holdings In Zone Inc, Staley Holdings, Cornproducts/Mcp Sweeteners, High Sea Sugar

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Vietnam

Why Washington Shouldn’t see Vietnam as the Next China

In a recent Senate Finance Committee report, U.S. Trade Czar Robert Lighthizer opined that Vietnam must take action to curb its growing trade surplus with the U.S., including removing barriers to market access for U.S. companies.

While it is true that Vietnam’s trade surplus has grown significantly in 2019, much of it is the result of the trade war between the U.S. and China that has prompted importers to source from Vietnam as an alternative to China.

Rather than attempt to stunt Vietnam’s trade surplus through tariffs or other trade actions, Washington should be establishing alliances with countries in Southeast Asia as part of its quest to ensure balanced trade and market stability.

Lighthizer’scomments were in response to queries from the Committee and echoed previous statements made by White House administration officials who have identified Vietnam as one of several countries to watch with respect to trade activity. And while there hasn’t been a direct threat of imposing tariffs on Vietnamese imports, the recent implementation of a 400% duty on Vietnamese steel imports and the recent rhetoric in Washington regarding transshipment has many businesses nervous that their new safe haven may be the President’s next target for trade action.

Troublesome to United State Trade Representative (USTR) is that the surplus thus far in 2019 is already more than 30% higher than it was at this time last year, making Vietnam the leading nation in terms of percentage increase of import value in 2019.

Hastening trade imbalance

Washington has been at least somewhat complicit in hastening Vietnam’s growing trade surplus. Since the U.S. began imposing tariffs on China-origin goods, many U.S. companies (and some Chinese companies) have been looking to shift production to neighboring markets in Asia. A recent poll of U.S. companies by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in China showed that more than 40% of American companies with production in China were looking to move to a neighboring country if they hadn’t already done so. These include the likes of Dell, HP, Steve Madden, Brooks and others. Even non-U.S. companies, like Japan’s Nintendo and China’s own electronics giant TCL are looking to shift production out of China and into Vietnam.

Vietnam was an obvious choice for many of these manufacturers looking to circumvent Washington’s onerous tariffs. For years, Vietnam has been investing heavily in improving its roadway and port infrastructure, as well as augmenting its pool of high-skilled laborers so that it can attract large hi-tech giants. The advancements were well-timed to coincide with increasing wages and regulatory restrictions in China that were driving up costs and forcing foreign producers to look elsewhere for low-cost manufacturing alternatives. This was taking place well before the current administration in Washington began cracking down on China’s questionable trade practices.

To be fair, Washington does have some cause for complaint. It’s one of Asia’s worst kept secrets that Vietnam, Malaysia and Thailand have become convenient transshipment hubs for Chinese companies looking to circumvent quotas and, more recently, tariffs by making minor tweaks in neighboring countries to products almost wholly manufactured in China and sending them along to the U.S. as “Vietnamese” or “Malaysian” exports. In the end, there is little monetary gain for Vietnam and much opportunity for reputational damage. Hanoi’s incentive for playing along is purely political; it wants to placate China, its much larger neighbor and regional hegemon.

Hanoi has already said it will crackdown on Chinese transshipments labeled as being of Vietnamese origin. Nikkei Asian Review is reporting the Vietnamese government is considering new rules that would require 30% of a good’s price to be comprised of Vietnamese manufacturing for it to be considered as being of Vietnamese origin. Whether or not this will pacify the USTR remains to be seen.

Yet while Chinese transshipments may have been a catalyst to Vietnam’s soaring trade surplus, the ongoing U.S-China trade war has unquestionably accelerated the development of a trend that was only in its infancy a few short years ago.

If Washington is looking to penalize Vietnam for a trade surplus born out of Washington’s trade war with Beijing, where will the cycle of tariffs end?

Options for low-cost sourcing plentiful

Let’s assume Washington succeeds in quelling the growth of Vietnam’s trade surplus by imposing tariffs in the same manner it has with China, the EU and other entities. The likely outcome will be that U.S. companies then look to Thailand, Myanmar, Bangladesh or Cambodia (as many have already) to replace or supplement their production in China.

Let’s assume that Washington then imposes similar tariffs on imports from those countries. The likely outcome will be that U.S. companies then shift their attention to India, Mexico or any other country that offer lower cost labor and limited regulatory burden. And on and on it goes.

Washington wants to see production repatriated back to the United States, but only six percent of American companies moving production out of China are looking at reshoring their manufacturing facilities. One of the key reasons is that the facilities currently in China are intended to support regional exports and reshoring production to the U.S. would result in unnecessary transport costs and time in transit. In other cases, the cost of moving production to the U.S. could be too onerous to allow companies to compete globally.

A battle worth waging – along with friends and allies

This is not to suggest Washington’s war on China’s unsavory trade practices is unjust or futile. On the contrary, China’s history of misappropriating intellectual property through technology transfer, cybersecurity incidents and other trade violations requires America to act. But tariffs only punish American companies that will continue to shift their production as necessary to reduce their landed costs.

Instead of reprimanding and punishing countries like Vietnam with tariffs in response to growing trade surpluses, Washington should be working with them to forge alliances that will ensure China is forced to play by the rules.

If the U.S. truly wants to stave off bad actors such as China from continuing to abuse the global trade’s rule-based system, it will need the support of friends and allies in the eastern and western hemispheres. Acting alone and imposing unilateral restrictions only throws Washington into a battle of wills for which collateral damage is certain, but the outcome remains unknown.

_________________________________________________________________

Cora Di Pietro is vice president of Global Trade Consulting at trade-services firm Livingston International. She is a frequent speaker and lecturer at industry and academic events and is an active member of numerous industry groups and associations. She can be reached at cdipietro@livingstonintl.com.

grapefruit

Grapefruit Market in Asia – Japan Halved Grapefruit Imports Over the Last Decade

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Asia – Grapefruits (Inc. Pomelos) – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the grapefruit market in Asia amounted to $6.4B in 2018, picking up by 6.1% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). In general, grapefruit consumption continues to indicate strong growth. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2015 when the market value increased by 18% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the grapefruit market reached its maximum level in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Consumption By Country in Asia

China (4.8M tonnes) remains the largest grapefruit consuming country in Asia, comprising approx. 72% of total consumption. Moreover, grapefruit consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest consumer, Viet Nam (611K tonnes), eightfold. India (377K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total consumption with a 5.6% share.

In China, grapefruit consumption increased at an average annual rate of +7.5% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Viet Nam (+5.5% per year) and India (+7.1% per year).

In value terms, China ($4.5B) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Viet Nam ($707M). It was followed by Thailand.

The countries with the highest levels of grapefruit per capita consumption in 2018 were Viet Nam (6,331 kg per 1000 persons), China (3,340 kg per 1000 persons) and Thailand (3,267 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of grapefruit per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by China, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Market Forecast 2019-2025 in Asia

Driven by increasing demand for grapefruit in Asia, the market is expected to continue an upward consumption trend over the next seven years. Market performance is forecast to decelerate, expanding with an anticipated CAGR of +3.7% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 8.7M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production in Asia

The grapefruit production stood at 7M tonnes in 2018, growing by 6.4% against the previous year. The total output indicated a remarkable increase from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +5.6% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, grapefruit production increased by +81.9% against 2007 indices. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2015 when production volume increased by 12% y-o-y. Over the period under review, grapefruit production reached its maximum volume in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term. The general positive trend in terms of grapefruit output was largely conditioned by a resilient increase of the harvested area and temperate growth in yield figures.

In value terms, grapefruit production stood at $6.9B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Overall, grapefruit production continues to indicate a strong increase. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2015 when production volume increased by 18% against the previous year. The level of grapefruit production peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Production By Country in Asia

The country with the largest volume of grapefruit production was China (5M tonnes), accounting for 71% of total production. Moreover, grapefruit production in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest producer, Viet Nam (598K tonnes), eightfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by India (377K tonnes), with a 5.4% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume in China amounted to +7.5%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Viet Nam (+5.3% per year) and India (+7.1% per year).

Harvested Area in Asia

In 2018, the total area harvested in terms of grapefruits production in Asia stood at 220K ha, going up by 3.7% against the previous year. The harvested area increased at an average annual rate of +2.8% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 with an increase of 18% year-to-year. The level of grapefruit harvested area peaked at 226K ha in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, harvested area stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Yield in Asia

The average grapefruit yield amounted to 32 tonne per ha in 2018, jumping by 2.6% against the previous year. The yield figure increased at an average annual rate of +2.7% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when yield increased by 9.6% against the previous year. The level of grapefruit yield peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Exports in Asia

In 2018, the amount of grapefruits exported in Asia amounted to 525K tonnes, jumping by 21% against the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +5.6% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2008 when exports increased by 23% year-to-year. Over the period under review, grapefruit exports reached their maximum in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

In value terms, grapefruit exports totaled $449M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total exports indicated a strong expansion from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +5.6% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, grapefruit exports increased by +15.7% against 2014 indices. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2008 with an increase of 21% y-o-y. Over the period under review, grapefruit exports reached their maximum in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Exports by Country

In 2018, China (211K tonnes) and Turkey (182K tonnes) were the major exporters of grapefruits in Asia, together recording near 75% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Israel (88K tonnes), achieving a 17% share of total exports. China, Hong Kong SAR (16K tonnes) and Cyprus (8.3K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by China, Hong Kong SAR, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest grapefruit markets in Asia were China ($200M), Turkey ($119M) and Israel ($87M), with a combined 91% share of total exports. These countries were followed by China, Hong Kong SAR and Cyprus, which together accounted for a further 4%.

Among the main exporting countries, China, Hong Kong SAR recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, over the last eleven years, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The grapefruit export price in Asia stood at $855 per tonne in 2018, waning by -3.7% against the previous year. Over the last eleven years, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.2%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when the export price increased by 10% y-o-y. In that year, the export prices for grapefruits attained their peak level of $888 per tonne, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Israel ($995 per tonne), while Cyprus ($585 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports in Asia

In 2018, the amount of grapefruits imported in Asia totaled 272K tonnes, surging by 24% against the previous year. In general, grapefruit imports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when imports increased by 24% y-o-y. Over the period under review, grapefruit imports reached their maximum at 280K tonnes in 2010; however, from 2011 to 2018, imports failed to regain their momentum.

In value terms, grapefruit imports amounted to $232M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, grapefruit imports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2014 when imports increased by 15% y-o-y. The level of imports peaked at $236M in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Japan (85K tonnes), distantly followed by China (45K tonnes), Saudi Arabia (34K tonnes), South Korea (23K tonnes), China, Hong Kong SAR (23K tonnes) and Viet Nam (15K tonnes) were the largest importers of grapefruits, together comprising 83% of total imports. Iraq (11K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Viet Nam (+115.4% per year), while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Japan ($64M), China ($60M) and South Korea ($32M) were the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 67% share of total imports. China, Hong Kong SAR, Saudi Arabia, Viet Nam and Iraq lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 21%.

Viet Nam (+99.6% per year) experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the last eleven-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The grapefruit import price in Asia stood at $853 per tonne in 2018, dropping by -8.6% against the previous year. Overall, the grapefruit import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when the import price increased by 12% against the previous year. In that year, the import prices for grapefruits reached their peak level of $933 per tonne, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was South Korea ($1,420 per tonne), while Iraq ($323 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

fabric

U.S. Broadwoven Fabric Imports Bounced Back in 2018 Due to Rising Supply from India

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. Broadwoven Fabric Market. Analysis And Forecast to 2025’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the broadwoven fabric market in the U.S. amounted to $3.6B in 2018, remaining constant against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). Over the period under review, broadwoven fabric consumption continues to indicate a measured drop. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2014 with an increase of 3.7% y-o-y. In that year, the broadwoven fabric market attained its peak level of $4.3B. From 2015 to 2018, the growth of the broadwoven fabric market remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Broadwoven Fabric Production in the U.S.

In value terms, broadwoven fabric production amounted to $3.5B in 2018. In general, broadwoven fabric production continues to indicate a measured downturn. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 3.9% against the previous year. In that year, broadwoven fabric production reached its peak level of $4.1B. From 2015 to 2018, broadwoven fabric production growth failed to regain its momentum.

Exports from the U.S.

In 2018, the amount of broadwoven fabric exported from the U.S. stood at 251 tonnes, shrinking by -56.1% against the previous year. Over the period under review, broadwoven fabric exports continue to indicate a drastic contraction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 191% year-to-year. In that year, broadwoven fabric exports reached their peak of 571 tonnes, and then declined slightly in the following year.

In value terms, broadwoven fabric exports amounted to $2.8M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, broadwoven fabric exports continue to indicate a drastic shrinkage. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 with an increase of 100% year-to-year. In that year, broadwoven fabric exports attained their peak of $5.2M, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Exports by Country

Viet Nam (212 tonnes) was the main destination for broadwoven fabric exports from the U.S., accounting for a 85% share of total exports. Moreover, broadwoven fabric exports to Viet Nam exceeded the volume sent to the second major destination, China (13 tonnes), more than tenfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Chile (5 tonnes), with a 2% share.

From 2013 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume to Viet Nam totaled +255.8%. Exports to the other major destinations recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: China (+17.8% per year) and Chile (+186.0% per year).

In value terms, Viet Nam ($2.1M) remains the key foreign market for broadwoven fabric exports from the U.S., comprising 74% of total broadwoven fabric exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by China ($238K), with a 8.6% share of total exports. It was followed by Colombia, with a 3.5% share.

From 2013 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of value to Viet Nam totaled +157.6%. Exports to the other major destinations recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: China (+20.4% per year) and Colombia (+63.4% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The average broadwoven fabric export price stood at $11 per kg in 2018, surging by 21% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the broadwoven fabric export price, however, continues to indicate a moderate shrinkage. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when the average export price increased by 21% against the previous year. The export price peaked at $13 per kg in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Colombia ($22 per kg), while the average price for exports to Chile ($7.5 per kg) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to China, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced a decline.

Imports into the U.S.

Broadwoven fabric imports into the U.S. amounted to 9.2K tonnes in 2018, surging by 2.9% against the previous year. Overall, broadwoven fabric imports, however, continue to indicate a drastic reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when imports increased by 7.1% year-to-year. In that year, broadwoven fabric imports attained their peak of 13K tonnes. From 2016 to 2018, the growth of broadwoven fabric imports failed to regain its momentum.

In value terms, broadwoven fabric imports totaled $69M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, broadwoven fabric imports, however, continue to indicate a deep contraction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2018 when imports increased by 3.7% y-o-y. Over the period under review, broadwoven fabric imports attained their peak figure at $97M in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

China (3.3K tonnes), Pakistan (2.6K tonnes) and India (2.6K tonnes) were the main suppliers of broadwoven fabric imports to the U.S., together accounting for 93% of total imports.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main suppliers, was attained by India, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest broadwoven fabric suppliers to the U.S. were China ($22M), Italy ($17M) and India ($12M), together comprising 73% of total imports.

In terms of the main suppliers, Italy recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, over the last five-year period, while the other leaders experienced a decline.

Import Prices by Country

The average broadwoven fabric import price stood at $7,535 per tonne in 2018, remaining constant against the previous year. Over the period under review, the broadwoven fabric import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when the average import price increased by 17% y-o-y. The import price peaked at $8,246 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major supplying countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Italy ($61,521 per tonne), while the price for Pakistan ($4,146 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by China, while the prices for the other major suppliers experienced a decline.

Companies Mentioned in the Report

Milliken & Company, Tk Holdings, BGF Industries, BP Amoco Chemical Company, Glen Raven, Albany International, Polartec, Astenjohnson, National Presto Industries, Culp, Burlington Industries, Xerium Technologies, Propex Operating Company, Westpoint Home, Jay Franco & Sons, Cone Denim, The Hallwood Group Incorporated, Galey & Lord, Hyosung Usa, R B Pamplin, Westpoint International, Collins & Aikman Products Co., Nvh, Nouveau Verre Holdings, Itg Holdings

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

wool

Global Woven Woolen Fabric Market 2019 – Italy is Far Ahead of China in Export Value, but Their Volumes are Getting Closer

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

Exports 2009-2018

In 2018, the global exports of woven woolen fabrics amounted to 90M square meters, falling by -3.8% against the previous year. In general, woolen fabric exports continue to indicate a slight decline. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 when exports increased by 21% y-o-y. The global exports peaked at 132M square meters in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, woolen fabric exports stood at $3.5B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, woolen fabric exports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 when exports increased by 16% against the previous year. In that year, global woolen fabric exports reached their peak of $4.2B. From 2012 to 2018, the growth of global woolen fabric exports failed to regain its momentum.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Italy (30M square meters) and China (21M square meters) represented the key exporters of woven woolen fabrics across the globe, together mixing up 57% of total exports. It was distantly followed by the UK (5,267K square meters), achieving a 5.9% share of total exports. Germany (3,841K square meters), Japan (3,302K square meters), South Korea (3,249K square meters), the Czech Republic (2,641K square meters), Turkey (1,662K square meters), Denmark (1,447K square meters) and Lithuania (1,369K square meters) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2009 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by Lithuania, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Italy ($1.6B) remains the largest woolen fabric supplier worldwide, comprising 44% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by China ($414M), with a 12% share of global exports. It was followed by the UK, with a 7.4% share.

In Italy, woolen fabric exports increased at an average annual rate of +1.6% over the period from 2009-2018. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: China (-0.0% per year) and the UK (+7.2% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The average woolen fabric export price stood at $39 per square meter in 2018, rising by 16% against the previous year. Over the period from 2009 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.8%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when the average export price increased by 16% against the previous year. In that year, the average export prices for woven woolen fabrics attained their peak level and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Japan ($58 per square meter), while South Korea ($18 per square meter) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports 2009-2018

In 2018, the amount of woven woolen fabrics imported worldwide stood at 91M square meters, going down by -3.1% against the previous year. In general, woolen fabric imports continue to indicate a mild setback. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 9.7% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global woolen fabric imports attained their maximum at 119M square meters in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, imports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, woolen fabric imports stood at $3.3B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Overall, woolen fabric imports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 when imports increased by 15% against the previous year. In that year, global woolen fabric imports reached their peak of $4.1B. From 2012 to 2018, the growth of global woolen fabric imports remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Imports by Country

In 2018, China (8,571K square meters), Viet Nam (7,399K square meters), Italy (4,978K square meters), Germany (4,593K square meters), Romania (4,076K square meters), Japan (3,780K square meters), Turkey (3,532K square meters), Morocco (3,115K square meters), Spain (3,056K square meters), the U.S. (3,029K square meters), the UK (2,379K square meters) and Bulgaria (2,278K square meters) were the major importers of woven woolen fabrics in the world, making up 56% of total import.

From 2009 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, China ($377M), Germany ($201M) and Japan ($193M) were the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, together comprising 23% of global imports. These countries were followed by Viet Nam, Italy, Romania, the U.S., Turkey, Bulgaria, Spain, Morocco and the UK, which together accounted for a further 33%.

Viet Nam experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the last nine years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average woolen fabric import price stood at $37 per square meter in 2018, picking up by 6.6% against the previous year. Over the period from 2009 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.7%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 an increase of 13% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the average import prices for woven woolen fabrics reached their maximum at $37 per square meter in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Japan ($51 per square meter), while Morocco ($25 per square meter) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

coconut

Global Coconut Market 2019 – Thailand’s Imports Continue to Grow Robustly, While Domestic Production Declines

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

In 2018, the global coconut market size increased by 3.5% to $35.6B. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price).

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut consumption in 2018 were Indonesia (19M tonnes), the Philippines (14M tonnes) and India (12M tonnes), with a combined 72% share of global consumption. Sri Lanka, Brazil, Viet Nam, Papua New Guinea, Mexico and Thailand lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 16%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, India ($10B), the Philippines ($6.7B) and Indonesia ($4.5B) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, with a combined 60% share of the global market. These countries were followed by Sri Lanka, Brazil, Papua New Guinea, Thailand, Viet Nam and Mexico, which together accounted for a further 20%.

The countries with the highest levels of coconut per capita consumption in 2018 were Papua New Guinea (140 kg per person), the Philippines (131 kg per person) and Sri Lanka (124 kg per person).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced mixed trends in the per capita consumption figures.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 61M tonnes of coconuts were produced worldwide; leveling off at the previous year. Overall, coconut production continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2012 with an increase of 5.3% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global coconut production attained its peak figure volume at 62M tonnes in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum. The general negative trend in terms of coconut output was largely conditioned by a relatively flat trend pattern of the harvested area and a relatively flat trend pattern in yield figures.

In value terms, coconut production stood at $36.3B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Overall, the total output indicated a mild expansion from 2007 to 2018: its value decreased at an average annual rate of -0.1% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, coconut production increased by +35.7% against 2016 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2009 when production volume increased by 50% y-o-y. In that year, global coconut production reached its peak level of $49.4B. From 2010 to 2018, global coconut production growth remained at a lower figure.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut production in 2018 were Indonesia (19M tonnes), the Philippines (14M tonnes) and India (12M tonnes), together accounting for 73% of global production. These countries were followed by Sri Lanka, Brazil, Viet Nam, Papua New Guinea and Mexico, which together accounted for a further 15%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Harvested Area 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 12M ha of coconuts were harvested worldwide; standing approx. at the previous year. In general, the coconut harvested area continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 2.5% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the harvested area dedicated to coconut production attained its peak figure in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Yield 2007-2018

In 2018, the global average yield of coconuts amounted to 4.9 tonne per ha, approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, the coconut yield continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2012 with an increase of 4.3% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the average coconut yield attained its maximum level at 5.4 tonne per ha in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, yield stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports stood at 555K tonnes in 2018, surging by 49% against the previous year. Overall, the total exports indicated resilient growth from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +7.3% over the last eleven years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 with an increase of 49% against the previous year. In that year, global coconut exports reached their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, coconut exports totaled $269M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Overall, the total exports indicated a buoyant increase from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +7.3% over the last eleven years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, coconut exports increased by +107.2% against 2012 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 33% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global coconut exports reached their maximum in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Exports by Country

Indonesia was the largest exporter of coconuts in the world, with the volume of exports amounting to 290K tonnes, which was near 52% of total exports in 2018. Thailand (70K tonnes) took the second position in the ranking, followed by Viet Nam (57K tonnes). All these countries together held near 23% share of total exports. The following exporters – Cote d’Ivoire (23K tonnes), Malaysia (19K tonnes), the Netherlands (16K tonnes), Mexico (14K tonnes), Guyana (12K tonnes) and India (11K tonnes) – together made up 17% of total exports.

Exports from Indonesia increased at an average annual rate of +12.8% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Guyana (+97.7%), Viet Nam (+43.2%), Malaysia (+18.9%), India (+11.3%), the Netherlands (+6.8%), Thailand (+6.4%), Cote d’Ivoire (+4.2%) and Mexico (+3.9%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Guyana emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +97.7% from 2007-2018. While the share of Indonesia (+38 p.p.), Viet Nam (+10 p.p.), Thailand (+6.2 p.p.), Malaysia (+2.9 p.p.) and Guyana (+2.1 p.p.) increased significantly, the shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest coconut markets worldwide were Thailand ($70M), Indonesia ($65M) and Viet Nam ($22M), with a combined 58% share of global exports. Cote d’Ivoire, the Netherlands, India, Mexico, Guyana and Malaysia lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 23%.

Among the main exporting countries, Guyana (+104.1% per year) recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, over the last eleven years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average coconut export price amounted to $483 per tonne, declining by -12.6% against the previous year. Overall, the coconut export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 an increase of 19% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the average export prices for coconuts reached their peak figure at $553 per tonne in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was India ($1,127 per tonne), while Indonesia ($223 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.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 671K tonnes of coconuts were imported worldwide; surging by 26% against the previous year. In general, coconut imports continue to indicate a resilient increase. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016 when imports increased by 48% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global coconut imports reached their peak figure in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, coconut imports totaled $334M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, coconut imports continue to indicate a remarkable expansion. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 43% y-o-y. The global imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

Thailand (210K tonnes) and Malaysia (199K tonnes) were the largest importers of coconuts in 2018, reaching approx. 31% and 30% of total imports, respectively. China (60K tonnes) ranks next in terms of the total imports with a 9% share, followed by the U.S. (5.7%). The United Arab Emirates (27K tonnes), the Netherlands (19K tonnes) and Singapore (11K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

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

In value terms, Thailand ($77M) constitutes the largest market for imported coconuts worldwide, comprising 23% of global imports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by the U.S. ($34M), with a 10% share of global imports. It was followed by China, with a 8.9% share.

In Thailand, coconut imports increased at an average annual rate of +30.9% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: the U.S. (+12.0% per year) and China (+8.2% per year).

Import Prices by Country

The average coconut import price stood at $498 per tonne in 2018, falling by -5.9% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the coconut import price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when the average import price increased by 23% year-to-year. In that year, the average import prices for coconuts reached their peak level of $631 per tonne. From 2016 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average import prices for coconuts remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was the U.S. ($880 per tonne), while Malaysia ($147 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

tariff

8 Strategies to Navigate Trade and Tariff Volatility

A steady drumbeat of tariffs, changing trade policy and an overall environment of uncertainty are leading many manufacturers to take a “wait and see” approach to investment and expansion. Companies are reassessing spending plans, finding it challenging to adjust how they do business on the fly in response to unsettled trade policies.

Manufacturers have seen the effects in the cost of raw materials, which has led customers with long-term pricing agreements to push back. Some are finding they need to negotiate changes to contract terms, while others are faced with locating new supply sources. However, these are difficult changes to make, and companies are unsure whether to push forward as uncertainty over tariff amounts, origin, timing and related retaliation persists.

As a result, manufacturers are hesitant to commit to large investments or expansion plans unless they can be certain they’ll see a long-term payoff. Whether manufacturers need to change their supply chain strategy, find alternative sourcing or re-source materials, they don’t feel confident implementing these initiatives without more evidence of stability in trade policy.

While the next round of tariffs may be out of manufacturers’ control, they can be proactive in preparing for changing trade policies by considering these steps to weather the storm:

Renegotiate rates with suppliers
Even if a manufacturer’s products aren’t direct tariff targets, they may include affected materials like steel and aluminum, resulting in higher cost of goods and materials. Now is the time to renegotiate terms with suppliers and try to lock them into long-term deals with favorable pricing. It may be easier said than done in many cases, particularly in cases where suppliers are using the assessment of new tariffs as an opportunity to raise prices. It’s critical manufacturers incorporate key protection clauses to avoid major price spikes that would be damaging to their business model when entering into an amended, extended or new supply contract.

Evaluate profit margins
With tariffs increasing the costs of goods and materials, it’s imperative for manufacturers to examine which costs they can absorb and which they’ll need to pass on to customers. This process involves understanding where a manufacturer might offset material cost increases with other efficiencies or cost rationalization, and the level of cost increase customers will tolerate. In customer contracts that have price escalation clauses or limitations, manufacturers may need to attempt to renegotiate clauses that prevent recovery of tariffs paid.

Consider free-trade zone opportunities
Too often, manufacturers overlook available opportunities provided by free-trade zones. The free-trade zone option allows companies to develop a product, then export it to a U.S. customs territory or foreign destination, potentially bypassing any tariffs on the product if it has been transformed.

Establish a dedicated trade and customs compliance group
Consider forming a trade compliance group with clear governance. Charge this group with developing strong “what-if” capabilities to understand the impact of various tariff and trade scenarios, including inventory and supply chain strategies, sourcing alternatives and modeling multiple data sources.

Take advantage of exclusion processes
When granted, exclusions apply retroactively to the date a tariff became effective. The Commerce Department reviews exclusion requests for Section 232 Steel and Aluminum tariffs, while the United States Trade Representative (USTR) provides a mechanism to request exclusions for Section 301 (China) tariffs. The Commerce Department has shown a willingness to provide exemptions in certain cases, particularly since March when the tariffs of 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminum went into effect, making it all the more important for manufacturers to evaluate opportunities for exclusions.

Assess imported product classifications
Each product’s classification dictates whether or not it is included in the tariff order. Whether there is an accidental misclassification, an intentional misclassification by the overseas seller or a product that falls within a gray area, an audit of the classifications of imported goods will help manufacturers elude surprises and potential liabilities – and could even result in the avoidance of higher tariffs.

Import sooner versus later
Manufacturers with source material subject to the 10 percent tariff may want to procure more before the tariff leaps to 25 percent.

Seek out alternative sources of supply
Manufacturers should explore alternate supply sources to shield their business from the disruption caused by tariffs. They should be prepared to onboard new supply partners quickly – a process that might include partner profiles, legacy systems, custom coding and new systems to securely exchange order, invoicing, shipping and payment data.

Time will tell the extent to which new tariffs and trade policy will impact the manufacturing industry. Regardless of today’s uncertainty, manufacturers should take steps now to prepare and protect their business interests amid the shifting trade environment.