News / Volatility drives US importers to continue to look for new suppliers

Photo: © Skypixel | Dreamstime.com

US containerised imports held broadly steady in June, but the underlying sourcing picture suggests importers are continuing to balance a return to Chinese suppliers with diversification into alternative manufacturing hubs. 

According to Descartes, total US containerised imports totalled 2.4m teu last month, down 1.2% from May’s seasonal peak but still 8.2% higher than June 2025. For the first six months of 2026, imports were effectively flat year on year, declining just 0.3%. 

The strongest shift came from China, where US exports were 814,474 teu in June, up 27.4% from a year earlier, accounting for 33.9% of all US containerised imports, compared with2025’s 28.8%. Month on month, however, volumes were virtually unchanged, slipping just 0.2% after May’s sharp rebound. 

Despite that recovery, US imports from China remain well below recent highs. Last month, volumes were still 20.4% lower than the July 2024 peak of more than 1m teu, suggesting buyers have not fully reversed sourcing changes made during recent trade disputes. 

Overall, US imports from the top ten origin countries increased 13.2% year on year, adding 199,050 teu. China accounted for the vast majority of that growth, contributing an additional 175,175 teu. 

Other Asian suppliers also posted year-on-year gains, with Hong Kong volumes increasing 44%, Thailand +13.1%, Indonesia +7.5%, and Vietnam +1.3%. At the same time, several traditional sourcing markets recorded declines, including Germany, at -12.5%, Taiwan -9.1%, Italy -4.2%, India -2.1%, and South Korea -1.8%. 

The month-on-month picture also reflected continued diversification. German US exports fell 13.2% from May, and Italy’s declined 4%, while two of the best-known “China +1” manufacturing locations strengthened – Indonesia recording an 11.6% monthly increase and Taiwan +7.7%. 

China’s export mix to the US remained broad-based: plastics at 15.7% and furniture and bedding at 14.7% were the largest categories; machinery and electrical machinery together represented 17.7%; consumer goods also remained significant, with toys and sporting goods accounting for 7.4%; and apparel, textiles, and footwear collectively contributing 9.3%. 

Descartes advised companies: “Re-evaluate sourcing and supplier concentration strategies to reduce reliance on high-risk or overexposed tradelanes. Increasing geopolitical fragmentation and trade policy volatility are reinforcing the need for diversified, flexible supply chain networks.” 

In the near term, importers should assess tariff exposure by HS code, country of origin, supplier, and sourcing lane and compare landed costs across alternative sourcing countries as tariff rates and exclusions change. 

“Track US–China, USMCA, US–EU, and US–India trade discussions for potential impacts on sourcing and freight demand”, urged Descartes, and added that companies should evaluate commodity-linked risks tied to energy, fertilizers, petrochemicals, aluminum, and other industrial inputs. 

NOTE: Maritime consultant John McCown has previously highlighted discrepancies within Descartes data and noted that it was “unclear” what process the Canadian company used to obtain information prior to official port or customs releasing their container volume counts.  

Descartes said its report was based on the initial compiled release of publicly available US CBP bill of lading data for all US ports, but noted this could be subject to modification later by CBP. 

This article is © The Loadstar. Reproduction, rewriting, or derivative use requires a license. Contact [email protected] for licensing enquiries.