By Eric Huang    Photo：CANVA

As May 2025 approaches, the global maritime shipping industry—especially transpacific container trade—stands at a complex crossroads. Influenced by a potent mix of geopolitical maneuvering, volatile freight rates, shifts in global alliances, and a reconfiguration of supply chains, the negotiation of new transpacific freight rate contracts is set to take place in a climate fraught with uncertainty. Chief among the current disruptors are the trade and tariff strategies reinstated and escalated by former U.S. President Donald Trump, whose return to office has brought renewed scrutiny—and cost—upon Chinese-built vessels through 301-related actions. These changes are rippling across a sector already destabilized by pandemic aftershocks, supply chain bottlenecks, and structural shifts in vessel ownership and capacity deployment.

In early 2025, the U.S. Trade Representative proposed a policy under Section 301 that would impose steep port fees—reportedly up to $1.5 million per vessel—on Chinese-built ships entering U.S. ports​. While framed as a retaliation against China’s shipbuilding subsidies and dominance, the ripple effects are far broader. According to CMA CGM, more than half of all container ships globally are Chinese-built, and the proposed policy threatens to raise operating costs for nearly every major carrier operating in U.S. ports.

The implications are significant:

• Cost Pass-through to Shippers: These fees, if implemented, will likely be passed down to BCOs (beneficial cargo owners), thereby inflating the base transport cost embedded in freight rate negotiations.
• Carrier Route Adjustments: Some carriers may reduce U.S. calls or redeploy vessels, especially those heavily reliant on Chinese yards, altering available capacity in the Pacific corridor.
• Accelerated Ship Scrapping or Leasing: Carriers may choose to phase out older Chinese-built tonnage faster or seek lease-based alternatives to mitigate tariff exposure.

The uncertainty around implementation, timing, and possible legal challenges is already cloudy negotiations. Most carriers are preparing multiple pricing scenarios in anticipation of USTR's final ruling in April, just ahead of the May contract window.

The container shipping market has historically relied on alliances such as THE Alliance, Ocean Alliance, and 2M to coordinate vessel sharing and capacity deployment. However, the dissolution of the 2M alliance between MSC and Maersk, effective by 2025, introduces fresh instability​. With Maersk pivoting toward supply chain integration and MSC doubling down on pure shipping, the competitive dynamics on the transpacific trade are shifting dramatically.

Key implications:

• Less Predictability in Capacity Planning: Without tight alliance coordination, individual lines may introduce more frequent or abrupt capacity shifts, leading to erratic spot rate fluctuations that spill over into long-term contracts.
• New Pricing Power Games: MSC’s standalone expansion, bolstered by aggressive vessel acquisitions, gives it greater ability to undercut rivals or seize short-term volume, undermining the stability of contracted rates.
• Bunker and Equipment Pooling Challenges: Disintegration of alliances complicates the sharing of backhaul capacity, feeder connections, and fuel cost management—factors that feed directly into the negotiated rate structure.

In light of these changes, shippers may diversify their volume across multiple carriers instead of relying on a single alliance partner, even at the cost of slightly higher rates, to hedge against service instability.

As highlighted in the research paper on freight rate volatility, the spillover effects from container freight rate shifts extend far beyond shipping lines​. They influence shipbuilding investment cycles, port throughput, capital markets, and even raw material pricing. After experiencing record-high rates during the pandemic, the container shipping market entered 2024 with significant overcapacity, leading to a consistent decline in spot rates, particularly on the transpacific corridor​.

Notably:

• Spot Rates Have Dropped Significantly: Drewry’s World Container Index recorded a 9% week-on-week drop in Asia–US West Coast spot rates and a 7% drop on East Coast routes in early 2025​.
• Capacity Withdrawal in the Pacific: To counteract falling rates, carriers have reduced services, with Pacific lane capacity down by nearly 3% between December 2024 and March 2025.
• Demand Uncertainty Compounds Volatility: With tariffs pending and consumer sentiment weak, importers are hesitant to commit volumes, preferring flexibility—even at higher per-unit cost.

Given these developments, the May 2025 contracts will likely be priced at a premium to spot rates, especially for fixed-rate contracts that guarantee capacity during peak months (Q3 and early Q4). Shippers seeking stability will pay more for predictability, while flexible contracts will hinge on floating BAF (bunker adjustment factor) and TSA-style mechanisms to adjust for volatility.

The macroeconomic environment remains a major driver of freight contract terms. While some firms express cautious optimism for improved predictability in the next 12 months​, high levels of uncertainty persist:

• Mid-market CFOs Are Especially Vulnerable: 65% report supplier renegotiations as a key strategy to cope with tariffs and input cost inflation​.
• China’s Export Dynamics Are Changing: Facing punitive U.S. trade measures, Chinese exporters are rerouting shipments to other destinations or using indirect hubs—affecting transpacific container flows and equipment repositioning strategies.
• Digital Transformation Accelerates: Automation, AI-based demand forecasting, and blockchain contracts are becoming part of contract negotiation and execution, particularly among low-uncertainty firms adopting next-gen risk tools.

Most forecasts suggest modest global trade growth for 2025, but with regional disparities. Trade with Southeast Asia and Latin America may expand as companies diversify sourcing, while traditional China–US lanes may see volume plateaus or modest declines, especially in high-tariff categories.

Shipping lines are adapting to both structural and strategic pressures through redeployment and targeted investment:

• Atlantic Capacity Surges: Some carriers are shifting vessels to the Atlantic corridor, with a notable 10.6% increase in capacity between December 2024 and March 2025​. This reallocation reduces available tonnage in the Pacific, supporting stronger contract rate floors.
• Far East to Europe Trades Remain Resilient: Although not directly tied to transpacific rates, the relative strength of Asia-Europe volumes may attract surplus vessels away from weaker Pacific routes, contributing to rate stabilization.
• Scrapping and Delays in Deliveries: Geopolitical disruptions (e.g., Red Sea transit risks) and higher port fees for Chinese-built ships may prompt early scrapping or delay newbuild deliveries, subtly tightening supply over time.

As a result, carriers are expected to press for higher general rate increases (GRIs) in contract negotiations, particularly for port pairs exposed to tariffs, congestion, or equipment imbalance.

Based on the above analysis, we can identify three core scenarios that may emerge during the May 2025 contract negotiations:

Scenario A: Risk Premium Pricing (Most Likely)

• Fixed rates 10–20% higher than April spot rates, especially on USWC routes.
• Volume-linked incentives offered to offset risk premium.
• Multi-year contracts (2025–26) with early renegotiation clauses become more popular.

Scenario B: Split Contracts with Floating Rate Indexing

• Shippers lock in base freight charges with floating surcharges tied to spot benchmarks like SCFI or Drewry indices.
• Useful for shippers with high tariff exposure or irregular volumes.

Scenario C: Tiered Agreements Based on Compliance

• Contracts may contain tariff pass-through clauses.
• Discounts for non-Chinese-built tonnage (or US-flagged vessels) may emerge as a differentiator.
• Volume-based rebates for early peak season commitment (Q3 2025) to counter tariff-induced frontloading.

The transpacific container shipping market in 2025 is poised for another year of disruption, but also recalibration. Tariff escalations, alliance fragmentation, and freight rate volatility are reshapingf how contracts are negotiated and executed. Shippers must weigh the trade-offs between cost certainty and operational flexibility, while carriers must manage both capacity discipline and regulatory complexity. May 2025’s contract season will be less about historical benchmarking and more about scenario-based planning. In a world where tariffs are not just trade tools but strategic weapons, maritime stakeholders must learn to navigate a new normal—one where agility, not just scale, defines success.

Appreciate if you could share TGL Blog among your friends who are interested in first-hand market information of supply chain and updated economic incidents.