United States-bound June containerized freight shipments saw annual gains for the second straight month, following 12 months of declines, according to data recently issued by S&P Global Market Intelligence.
June imports, at 2.53 million TEU (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units), posted a 9.0% annual gain, despite the majority of sectors tracked by the firm seeing import declines or slowing growth, while trailing May’s 13.6% annual growth rate. Total second quarter imports rose 5.5% annually, and on a year-to-date basis through June, the firm reported that total imports, at 14.56 million TEU, eked out a 0.9% annual gain.
S&P Global Market Intelligence pointed to a 37.9% annual June gain in consumer discretionary goods, following a 44.1% annual May gain, as the primary growth driver for the month, with those shipments up against weaker annual comparisons, due to weaker 2025 post-tariff shipments, as well as pre-tariff front-loading in advance of Section 301 tariffs that are expected to be implemented in the third quarter.
For other sectors, it reported the following:
- Technology imports fell 4.9%, with AI accelerators crowding out conventional electronics;
- Materials imports grew 1.3%, with slower growth due to chemical sector disruptions related to the Middle East conflict, following a 2.4% May gain;
- Capital goods imports dropped 7.8% annually, steeper than May’s 3.8% decline, down for the 14th consecutive month, due to slowing growth in industrial products and a decline in building products; and
- Technology product imports dropped 4.9% annually, following a 0.7% May gain, with Consumer Electronics products off 13.2% annually
In an interview with LM, Chris Rogers, Head of Supply Chain Research, at S&P Global Market Intelligence, explained that June, in a sense, represents how both the second quarter and also the first half of 2026 went, in terms of import levels and activity. And he added that that amid the tariff-driven turbulence going back to the April 2025 “Liberation Day,” shippers now have a “playbook for uncertainty,” for how to approach and handle shifting situations, based on learning from past experiences.
“Tariffs have been and are happening, and shippers know to pull-forward where it makes sense to do so,” he said. “You want to try and identify where there’s risks that we need to control versus risks that we want to control. Every risk mitigation has a cost, and I think people have learned over the past two years that you need to do something, but you shouldn’t do too much. And that is why we are seeing pull-forward activity but perhaps not to the same extent as last year. We are also now, to a certain extent, talking about kind of July and August shipment levels in June—so not only do you have a lower-than-normal June, you are also effectively talking about July arriving a month early. While the annual growth percentage is pretty big, the numbers are understandable in that regard.”
What’s more, he explained that the high amount of pull-forward activity, in addition to general tariff dealings, and volatility caused by the Middle East conflict, collectively serve as the trade thesis of the second quarter.
To that end, Rogers said that the second quarter, over all, turned out much better than expected, with April relatively weak, May very strong, and June not as strong as May.
And with the White House’s temporary 10% Section 122 tariffs set to expire at the end of this week, S&P Global Market Intelligence noted that they may increase from 10% to 12.5% and potentially subsequently to more than 20%, with decisions expected soon on the White House’s Section 301 review related to manufacturing capacity. Which it added would “put a cap on tariff front-loading imports from more heavily tariff-affected countries.
“The bigger question is not if it is a 10% or 12.5% tariff, it is that potential for higher tariffs,” he said. “The lesson [from Brazil and Canada] is that the White House still has the appetite for much higher tariffs. And within that, it is willing to provide exemptions where they are needed, like food, for example. There is also a willingness to be highly differentiated by country. We had expected the White House’s Section 301 investigation on excess manufacturing to be announced already…and is more difficult to assess, because you need to have a detailed economic model of every country in the world.
That is clearly a much more difficult process to manage, in terms of setting those tariffs, but make no mistake, the Section 301 investigation on excess manufacturing capacity will be the main vehicle for both differentiating tariff rates and moving them to higher levels, particularly for the countries that the U.S. has a big trade deficit with, particularly China. One of the reasons it may be sitting back on this is because President Trump is scheduled to meet with President Xi on September 24.”
